Canada Has Death Panels

Apparently the Canadian health system does in fact have some sort of death panels.

They are groups of government-appointed adjudicators that sometimes can actually make decisions in place of courts, and can over ride family wishes and doctor 'decisions'.

Very controversial.

This article describes a case that involved the 'panel' *and* the courts.

With American ObamaCare looming, people need to be aware of *ALL* the possibilities.

Some people claim ObamaCare has *hidden* points & authorities that might be considered *Life Shortening*.

Article and author from Canada;

Last week Canada’s Supreme Court ruled that doctors could not unilaterally ignore a Toronto family’s decision to keep their near-dead husband and father on life support. In the same breath, however, the court also confirmed that, under the laws of Ontario, Canada’s most populous province, a group of government-appointed adjudicators could yet overrule the family’s choice. That tribunal, not the family or the doctors, has the ultimate power to pull the plug.

In other words: Canada has death panels.

I use that term advisedly. Former Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin made it famous in the summer of 2009, when Congress was fighting over whether to pass Obamacare. As Republicans and Democrats continue to spar over health care, we should pause to wonder why millions of Canadians have come to accept the functional equivalent of an idea that almost sank health care reform even though, in this country, it was imaginary.

Canadians --- please enlighten us about this

Canada Has Death Panels

reply to post by xuenchen

Wow and the author, Adam Goldenberg, is an advocate:

When humanity demands haste, and justice demands expert knowledge, Ontario’s death panels offer a solution—whatever Sarah Palin says.

As many have said, especially in the context of Obamacare, medical decisions should take place between a family and their doctor.

I believe that the same type of panels exist in the UK, known as "health care rationing". Seems to be a very similar model for State run health care. Would not surprise me if Obamacare is the same way. How long was the Bill, 2500 pages? Guess we'll have to wait a while to find out.

People were trying to warn us about this but they were attacked as "conspiracy theorists".

Shame that America will not be allowed to choose a different path.

Can they blame this on Republicans too or is that a no go?

I always like how stuff like this is written in a way they think makes them look like they absolutely have your best interest in mind. The shocker is....People buy it. They eat it up like candy and nuts for some reason.

I have come to the conclusion that there are two types of people. Those who want others to make important decisions for them and those who want to make their own decisions in every aspect of their life. In some cases it is easier to have those decisions made for you, but nobody ever said life was going to be easy.

It's more than a shame that folks are so blind they have to learn the hard way. The bad thing about that is the rest of us get to experience it too even though we knew better to begin with.

Its a interesting dilemma.
The board can overrule the decision of the family if they want. Such as in the case of say, a husband suggesting to pull the plug on his wife that has a chance at recovery. (omg, suddenly its a life panel )

But also, if someone wants to keep their braindead family member on life support forever at the tax payers expense, they theoretically could, unless the panel steps in and decides enough is enough (would have to be 100% certain no recovery).

I think something like that needs to be in place, and actually kinda surprised there isn't something like that already in place, affordable care or not.

reply to post by xuenchen

There is a term for this,utilitarian bio-ethics.I think in the future we will see a lot of this branch of eugenics-and not confined to the elderly or braindead.

Kangaruex4Ewe
It's more than a shame that folks are so blind they have to learn the hard way. The bad thing about that is the rest of us get to experience it too even though we knew better to begin with.

The board is instructed by law to focus on the patient’s best interests, not the health care system’s, or the government’s bottom line. Still, the law recognizes that, though it is usually in the patient’s best interests to be kept alive, it is not always so. As Rasouli’s doctors told the Supreme Court, prolonging his life would entail the risk of infection, bedsores, and organ failure. When recovery is out of the question, in other words, there may be fates worse than death.

ok, so you may then suggest...but a doctor wouldn't do that, they would opt for pulling the plug recommendation also, right?
wrong

The incentives in the American health care system point in the opposite direction. In the United States, keeping an all-but-dead patient alive on life support in a hospital bed generates income for the hospital, for as long as its bills get paid.

sometimes when the doc is simply fishing for dollars in our economic model, someone with authority needs to step in and do the right thing.

reply to post by SaturnFX



I can not argue that sometimes someone else may need to step in and make the decision. I can't argue that at all. There are legitimate cases where that would be an absolute necessity. In those cases someone can appeal to the court and they often do. There doesn't need to be a panel of "chosen people" that can make that decision anytime they see fit. Sometimes someone else may see fit to take over where everyone else does not. Having a select few make the decision when nobody else sees the need for them to do so is what people are worried about. We are not stuck with no options now when the need arises. We do have measures in place.

We do not need more people involved in more red tape in an area that is hard enough to deal with as it is.

reply to post by xuenchen


would you be talking about the,Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB),or the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute in obamacare

now they spin it this way and then spin it back. but it still a bunch of people sitting behind desks looking at what care i get, that's not me, my family or my doctor.

sounds familiar doesn't it, we already had that with the old insurance companies. but now it's official mandated by federal law.

hounddoghowlie
reply to post by xuenchen

 

would you be talking about the,Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB),or the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute in obamacare

now they spin it this way and then spin it back. but it still a bunch of people sitting behind desks looking at what care i get, that's not me, my family or my doctor.

sounds familiar doesn't it, we already had that with the old insurance companies. but now it's official mandated by federal law.

edit on 22-10-2013 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

Yep.

I think the *Death Panels* will somehow sneak in eventually.

For instance, one program that is up for debate is Medicare’s Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB. IPAB was created in 2010 following the implementation of President Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and is a fifteen-member Government agency tasked with reducing Medicare costs while retaining quality of care.

The debate over IPAB has been fierce, and both Republicans and a number of prominent Democrats have come out against the panel. However, despite this, President Obama, in making his requests for the 2014 budget, has proposed that the Independent Payment Advisory Board’s authority only be increased.

Medicare's Independent Payment Advisory Board

Americans first became familiar with the task force in November 2009, when it made the controversial decision to recommend that women ages 40-49 shouldn't get routine mammograms. More recently, it rebuffed routine prostate-cancer screening and the use of tests that detect the viruses that can cause cervical cancer.

The task force relishes setting a very high bar. Like the Food and Drug Administration in approving new drugs, it usually requires a randomized, prospective trial to "prove" that a diagnostic test or other intervention improves clinical outcomes and therefore deserves a high grade of "A" or "B."

Meet the ObamaCare Mandate Committee

reply to post by xuenchen


here is a pretty good article on it.

Oba maCare ‘death panel’ faces growing opposition from Democrats

hounddoghowlie
reply to post by xuenchen

 

here is a pretty good article on it.

Oba maCare ‘death panel’ faces growing opposition from Democrats

Let's hope the 'concern' is genuine and not just for 'show'.

They have their ways of making it look like they're against something and then sneak something else in later.

reply to post by xuenchen


yea they are not all in your face like that piss ant harry reid.
did you see where he said that obamacare is just a step towards a one payer system.

xuenchen
Canadians --- please enlighten us about this

If the patient is unable to communicate, and if there
are no next of kin/ family to state their wishes, then doctors
need to get permission from Ontario’s Consent and Capacity Board.
Either way the doctors need to get permission.
OP's headline story is but exaggerated/sensationalized.

Canadian doctors can’t end life support without consent, Supreme Court rules
more detailed info here :
www.carp.ca...

___________________________

We are the quintessential technocracy designed to create the idealistic sheeple. On the surface everything seems AMAZING! Like life seems so cozy and civil. But when you really drill down you find the hidden tyranny.