I just read this story. A newborn preemie was not allowed medical attention in Britian because by 'law' he was not deemed an infant, but rather a fetus. The mother was not given drugs to stop her premature labor.
I'd like to know what you think.
My husband has indicated that most of the money he sees spent in healthcare is on the very young and very old (near death). Sometimes he feels his life-saving and drastic interventions are not worth it. From a beaurocratic standpoint in an office on a hill, perhaps that means we could offer more people care if we dropped these services.
In my opinion, however, good medicine happens in a bedside, in a hospital, in a clinic. When decisions and treatments are made in an office based upon financial impact to the system, the patient loses. It is not for government or an insurance company to decide who gets care and when, rather the PATIENT and the PHYSICIAN. End of story. We live in an age when medical miracles happen. I think the physician can give a patient his best advice as to whether or not a treatment is fruitless, but in the end, it is about saving lives or trying our best to do it..
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I think that is even worse than abortion because in this case, you are killing a baby that is alive! How rediculous
heart wrenching!!!
Jacob and i have had similar discussions about the cost of care--he is at the newborn end of the spectrum. It is a tough problem: spend a lot on these preemies and you will have to spend a lot of money on some of them for the rest of their lives, technology begetting the need for more technology. Inevitably the multi-million dollar babies are insured by us through government programs.
What is a life worth? And what role does education of parents play in a decision to continue care or not? And tied up in this is the question of is it people vs dr's or do dr's really have their patient's best interests at heart? And if they do, do the patients trust that they do? I think every case should be taken case by case and the dr's & patient's assessment trusted but I do think it reasonable to offer some general guidelines.
The other thing Jacob finds is that, usually, when there are grave premature issues, the parents are not educated in the long-term ramifications of aggressive intervention, not realizing that their child may require significant care for the rest of their lives.
Tough decisions that can only be made one at a time, i say. Interesting to think about.
I agree with Lisa's points and that they are definitely something to consider. What are the costs vs. qulity of life and expenses of future care. However I think at the crux of this discussion is the idea that, in this case, the government is making these decisions, not the actual team of doctors treating the patient. What are the odds of a baby even being born breathing at 21.5 weeks? Not good I'm guessing. But when one is, why is it the governments job to decide if he gets to live or die? In the UK it's because the government is in charge of the health care, paying for it and then making the rules. Is that really what we want in this country? Do we think Medicare has been a hugely successful undertaking? What about the VA hospitals? Really? Do we really want the decisions taken out of the hands of doctors? If you ask me (and you kind of did), there are many other options for reforming the system. Living in CA one of the HUGE drains on our economy is providing millions of dollars worth of health care to illegal (oh, I mean un-documented) persons living here. Let's start there. Also, when we're hearing about the many people who don't have health insurance, let's ask the question, "how many of those people are uninsured by choice?" Do they bother telling you that the number of insured people is MUCH, MUCH higher than those who aren't? Trust me, I know how expensive health care is. We have a great PPO plan with a, probably higher than average, premium. (Darn that kidney transplant!!!) But there are plans out there that have decent coverage for a pretty decent premium each month. Instead of paying for a flat screen tv and cable, instead of a super fancy car with a $900/mo car payment, instead of that trip to Hawaii...GET HEALTH INSURANCE. Or choose not to, but then don't complain when you have to pay for an unexpected health crisis.
Now sure there are exceptions. Of course there are exceptions and we already have a system in place to cover those exceptions. I'm sure we could improve that system. But do I think the the government "czars," who don't have any experience treating patients, should be in charge of my health care...to be in charge of deciding who gets to live or die...most definitely not.
Sorry for the looooong comment. Umm...obviously I have very strong opinions about this subject. I don't want "Obama Care" telling me I can't have another kidney transplant when I'm 60 because I've lived a long and happy life and the next possible 20+ years of my life aren't worth saving.
Love you C!!! Thanks for the discussion on your blog!!
Post a Comment