Rationing-of-Care Debate Must
Include Those Most at Risk
Real Clear Politics,
by
Gunner Esiason
Original Article
Posted By: grace127,
4/2/2020 8:46:54 AM
I will admit my bias. Officially, I am in the “at risk” population for severe complications from COVID-19. I am also in the population that could be triaged away from critical care if our hospitals break under the pandemic’s stress.
I live with cystic fibrosis, an inherited condition that my fills my lungs with thick, sticky mucus. That thick, sticky mucus is the perfect medium for infectious pathogens to call home. Respiratory infections lead to clinical decline in CF patients because they flare our symptoms – cough, shortness of breath, and oxygen dependence – and lead to permanent lung damage. I have, unfortunately, suffered through my fair share.
Reply 1 - Posted by:
KatieJo 4/2/2020 9:03:25 AM (No. 365948)
Terrifying stuff, this crisis is enabling the progressives to implement a lot of policies they otherwise would not have been able to. Rationing, when your life depends on it......predictable outcome of government control.
9 people like this.
Reply 2 - Posted by:
tsquare 4/2/2020 9:13:50 AM (No. 365959)
That we might choose to ration medical equipment is sad. Lots of ways to ration (anything). First come first serve. Limits on purchase (no more than two rolls of tp per purchase). Price. Most deserving (which of course means politicians first). Loudest (kathy griffin comes to mind). Low hope cases last. Insured first. In med, “ethics” will be replaced a lot of scream’n and preen’n...with competing court cases adjudicating our network of conflicting laws differently...such energy is better spent building equipment so that rationing is not needed.
1 person likes this.
Reply 3 - Posted by:
Clinger 4/2/2020 9:15:56 AM (No. 365961)
First in line should be the healthcare people putting themselves at risk to save the rest of us. That is merited on two levels, a reward for their courage and devotion and from a more pragmatic perspective, more of the rest of us will survive by keeping them alive and well.
10 people like this.
I'm getting tired of this conversation. Sorry to say that no one has a greater claim on life than anyone else, regardless of circumstances. Once upon a time it was "Women and children first"...that's a long gone concept, unless you're a blessed single mom. If one wants to be brutal, those with "underlying conditions" would be last in treatment line until the COVIDS-19 Titanic finally sinks. Oh, and if they could find a way, I'm sure the unborn would be at the very rear of the line.
More fuel to the hysteria bonfire.
5 people like this.
Reply 5 - Posted by:
jeffkinnh 4/2/2020 9:47:35 AM (No. 365998)
Death panels are back.
The reason they are is because dem states and cities have NOT prepared at reasonable levels for a pandemic. Note, I don't say sufficient levels because you can never be READY for a future pandemic of unknown type. "Experts" will always tell you there is more you can do. But it is becoming VERY clear that dems have not stockpiled to agreed to and planned levels and when new recommendations have been made have done almost nothing. The glaring examples are BO failing to restock masks after H1N1 and Cuomo blowing off recommendations for additional ventilators.
Right now, we are facing these choices sooner than we should because dems are incompetent and would rather spend money on "Green" efforts and other insanities instead of things the Country and her People really need.
The other problem that dems bring to the table is their culture of death. What would you expect from a party that champions the killing of millions of children, even after they are born? Did you think the elderly and chronically sick would be immune from being labeled too "inconvenient" to live?
It's one thing to have to face up to the reality that some people may die no matter what we do. If we had absolutely everything we needed for treatment of the Chinese virus victims, some will still die. That's true for many other diseases as well; cancer for instance. It's quite different to calculate ahead of time NOT to buy potentially needed ventilators because some of the people threatened aren't worth fighting for. That's the cold, cruel calculation New York and Cuomo made.
I accept there are limits on how prepared we can afford to be. We can't stockpile millions of ventilators. But we could stockpile 15,000, perhaps in a state/federal partnership. New York chose not to. If we accept the dem way of thinking, we are no longer America. We are not a hopeful, shining city on a hill. We are a country who cannot be bothered to take care of her own, let alone to lead and inspire the world.
6 people like this.
Reply 6 - Posted by:
planetgeo 4/2/2020 10:17:19 AM (No. 366026)
When a nation fiercely protects "a woman's right to choose"...to kill her baby right up to and now even after birth, there is no one who is logically exempt from a death panel decision under certain circumstances which may arise. Like a pandemic.
Too old. Check.
Too many comorbidities. Check
Not part of an essential group. Check.
Not the right (or no) health insurance. Check.
Maybe someday:
Too deplorable. Check.
Not part of a preferred/protected group. Check.
4 people like this.
Reply 7 - Posted by:
EJKrausJr 4/2/2020 10:24:26 AM (No. 366033)
Sounds like early onset death panels to me. Just wait until Medicare for All becomes the law of the land
4 people like this.
Reply 8 - Posted by:
seamusm 4/2/2020 10:50:51 AM (No. 366056)
Half a century ago when critical care medicine and ICU's were just beginning we went through rationing of medical care. Hospitals had very few ventilators and doctors had to choose who would get such support - and who would not. I had a friend who told me of his experience on a ventilator in New York City as a teenager and what happened when the power went out during the blackout of 1965 . No one wants to ration care but when it is in scarce supply - we are forced to. Americans might be more supportive in theory of decisions based on 'flipping a coin' but at the end of the day don't we really believe that a young parent, a child, or someone previously healthy should be prioritized over the elderly or patients with advanced other diseases?
0 people like this.
Reply 9 - Posted by:
MattMusson 4/2/2020 10:51:12 AM (No. 366057)
Here in North Carolina - the State Statistics are indicating that the number of daily confirmed cases is starting to decline. Could this be the result of Social Distancing? Or, is the virus SEASONAL? Or, both?
Monday, the number of new cases dropped to just 12 a day.
3 people like this.
Reply 10 - Posted by:
Strike3 4/2/2020 10:57:09 AM (No. 366061)
Why not use the ultimate Obamacare solution and find a nice high cliff for Grandma?
2 people like this.
Reply 11 - Posted by:
FormerDem 4/2/2020 11:06:35 AM (No. 366076)
How much of the US advantage in medicine comes from leaving no one behind? I have heard the occupational therapy expertise grew out of the US determination that the wounded returning from wars be brought back all the way to social functioning and inclusion. All the way. It is because we leave no one behind that our medicine reaches so far. Let's leave no one behind. If there is an injured limb that is almost beyond repair, it is the souls and consciences of the left.
3 people like this.
Reply 12 - Posted by:
Chuzzles 4/2/2020 12:02:20 PM (No. 366144)
Boomer's son is doing very well for himself. Gunnar's dad did very well with this one. I always liked your dad Gunnar, and yeah you are in a high risk category, and I sure hope you stay healthy and safe. Thanks to the Leftists refusing to take care of business, like ensuring that hospitals have well stocked supply/equipment cabinets instead of spending the money on their pet/social projects, we are now running into shortages, and I have nothing but disgust and anger for those governors like Cuomo and Newsom who fiddled while the nation burned.
5 people like this.
Below, you will find ...
Most Recent Articles posted by "grace127"
and
Most Active Articles (last 48 hours)