Palin Is Right

[HankD]

Everyone who opposes increased medical support for the poor kills newborn children.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Newborn Hospital Deaths Highest for Those without Insurance
And those transferred between facilities also had higher mortality rates, study says
Saturday, August 15, 2009

http://health.usnews.com/articles/h...ospital-deaths-highest-for-those-without.html
WEDNESDAY, Dec. 17 (HealthDay News) -- Newborns, especially those lacking insurance, make up the bulk of children who die while in a hospital, new research shows.

The study, published in a recent issue of the Journal of Hospital Medicine, also found that children who were transferred between hospitals died in greater numbers than those who stayed in one hospital.

"As health-care providers and institutions expand their efforts to meet the needs of severely ill children and their families, they need to be aware of the higher mortality rates among the youngest children, those without insurance coverage and those who are transferred from one hospital to another," study co-author Dr. Matthew M. Davis, an associate professor of general pediatrics and internal medicine at the Child Health Evaluation and Research Unit of the University of Michigan Medical School, said in a news release issued by the school. "These children and families may require support services and end-of-life care beyond what is typically available in many hospitals."
The research, which looked at data between 1992 and 2002, found that more than 40 percent of deaths among children occur while they are hospitalized. Almost 69 percent of these are newborns, a fact tempered by newborns also making up the majority of child hospitalizations, the authors noted.

The mortality rate of children without insurance was 0.58 percent in 2002, compared with 0.45 percent for children with Medicaid and 0.33 percent for those covered by private insurance.

Children who were transferred from another hospital, regardless of age, had vastly higher mortality rates than those stayed in one hospital. In 2002, the rate was 1.33 percent for transferred 1- to 5-year-old children, more than five times that of same-aged children who weren't transferred. Among newborns, the gap was greater with 4.75 percent mortality for transfers versus 0.36 percent for non-transfers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

People without insurance might be examined on an emergency basis at one hospital but are typically shuttled to the "general hospital for the indigent."

What makes you think that those deaths will not actually increase under the proposed eugenics health care bill? These "poor" babies (Those who escaped the abortuary) are of no "social value" and at the bottom of the investment machine. Though admitted , they may or may not get the proper treatment depending on the statistical model and the assessment of the eugenics panel.

Also there will be those on the other end of life spectrum who will be urged to "leave"(die) or just denied quality life-saving treatment so that others with a greater "investment" potential and of greater current worth to society can have their hospital bed.


HankD

 

[Revmitchell]

All money and effort should be made to save the lives of the 101 year old as we would a 40 year old. Anything else is pure evil.

 

[alatide]

Here is the full text of her statement:



http://www.examiner.com/x-12837-US-...n-evil-and-refers-to-death-panels-on-Facebook

(I don't have broadband, so I don't go to Facebook.)

Now who's twisting words? It's the Dems again.

There is no death panel. That is a radical right lie.

 

[Aaron]

There is no death panel. That is a radical right lie.

No matter how you slice it, rationing health care is dealing out death, weather it's decided by a board or panel or a czar (which is just a panel of one).

 

[alatide]

What makes you think that those deaths will not actually increase under the proposed eugenics health care bill? These "poor" babies (Those who escaped the abortuary) are of no "social value" and at the bottom of the investment machine. Though admitted , they may or may not get the proper treatment depending on the statistical model and the assessment of the eugenics panel.

Also there will be those on the other end of life spectrum who will be urged to "leave"(die) or just denied quality life-saving treatment so that others with a greater "investment" potential and of greater current worth to society can have their hospital bed.


HankD

Duuuh. They don't have health insurance now. They will under Obama's plan. With health insurance they won't be ferried around to find the cheapest hospital. The figures speak for themselves.

 

[alatide]

No matter how you slice it, rationing health care is dealing out death, weather it's decided by a board or panel or a czar (which is just a panel of one).

You're just kidding yourself if you think health care isn't rationed today. Have you ever known someone who died without health insurance? I have. He didn't get the kind of care "special people" get in our society.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

So why didn't you pay for his, like you are demanding from us ? Where is the example you set ?

 

[HankD]

Duuuh. They don't have health insurance now. They will under Obama's plan. With health insurance they won't be ferried around to find the cheapest hospital. The figures speak for themselves.

They don't need it. There is a legal mandate that no one can be turned away from a publicly funded ER. Almost every State has a Medicaid program. Can we do more and better? Absolutely.

Look, alatide, although I am a staunch pro-life, I am way over on the liberal side when it comes to entitlements of the poor and needy even for illegal aliens.

The good samaritan asked nothing of the man in the ditch. He didn't need to know if he was the proper religion or if he was "qualified" to receive his help. In fact, he even supplied more than enough to cover his needs.

Jesus made no qualifications for the feeding of the 5000. He didn't ask anyone if they were legal citizens, criminals, felons, etc. He asked nothing in return and even made the disciples clean up the mess.

James 2

15 If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food,
16 And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?​

1 John 3
17 But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?​

But after studying HR3200 and the writings of the president's advisors, I am convinced that this "heath care" reform package is in reality a rationing system approaching the science of eugenics and perhaps even meant to ultimately reach the goal eliminating from society those who are of little or no social value.​

I am old enough to remember when abortion was considered the unforgivable sin. No one ever dreamed in their wildest imagination (to quote a cliche) that the government would ever legalize the murder of the unborn.​

Now, not only do we slaughter the innocent and helpless in the womb, we have come full circle with euthanasia (murder of the elderly) disguised as "death with dignity" (Legal here in the State of Washington BTW).​

So, pardon me, but I'm very skeptical after seeing the legalized murder of abortion and euthanasia now become a common and acceptable event in my day. Add to that the content of the underlying documents of this bill and I have little doubt where this is going to end. Are we that blind?​

Yes, compassionate America (even as generous and charitable as we are) can do much much more for the poor and needy. I do and plan to do more.​

This package is not the answer. The real answer must come from the public (our answer is NO!) so that we don't get ensnared in a "fishy" government run program which takes 1000 plus pages to explain the summarized version, the details to come later after it's passed (dejavu, the "stimulus" package.​

Fool me once?​

HankD​

 

[Robert Snow]

No matter how you slice it, rationing health care is dealing out death, weather it's decided by a board or panel or a czar (which is just a panel of one).

Do insurance companies ration health care?

 

[OldRegular]

Duuuh. They don't have health insurance now. They will under Obama's plan. With health insurance they won't be ferried around to find the cheapest hospital. The figures speak for themselves.

Notwithstanding your pious remarks Michelle Obama and Axelrod were shuffling the poor from the University of Chicago emergency room to cheaper hospitals. Michelle and Barak are all heart!

 

[Aaron]

Do insurance companies ration health care?

No they don't. They just say what they will pay for and what they won't, and it's all mapped out in the contract that one willingly signs. There are still healthcare options and alternatives available.

Insurance is only one method to pay for certain services. It isn't a must-have.

With government-run healthcare, care will be withheld from those deemed not worth the investment (the very young, disabled, and very old).

But let's cut through the crap, here. Government intervention (largely promoted through the lobbying organization of the AMA) has caused the problems in health care in the U.S. (which is still the best in the world notwithstanding). The solution isn't to let government sieze total control, the solution is to loosen it's grip.

 

[Aaron]

You're just kidding yourself if you think health care isn't rationed today. Have you ever known someone who died without health insurance? I have. He didn't get the kind of care "special people" get in our society.

I don't believe you.

 

[Revmitchell]

I don't believe you.

Me neither

 

[Robert Snow]

No they don't. They just say what they will pay for and what they won't, and it's all mapped out in the contract that one willingly signs. There are still healthcare options and alternatives available.

Insurance is only one method to pay for certain services. It isn't a must-have.

With government-run healthcare, care will be withheld from those deemed not worth the investment (the very young, disabled, and very old).

But let's cut through the crap, here. Government intervention (largely promoted through the lobbying organization of the AMA) has caused the problems in health care in the U.S. (which is still the best in the world notwithstanding). The solution isn't to let government sieze total control, the solution is to loosen it's grip.

I don't know why I would expect the truth from you. If you don't think insurance companies ration care, you are fooling yourself, unless you have an insurance company that will authorize any service you request. You do know that lying is a sin, right?

 

[Revmitchell]

I don't know why I would expect the truth from you. If you don't think insurance companies ration care, you are fooling yourself, unless you have an insurance company that will authorize any service you request. You do know that lying is a sin, right?

Then refrain from it and false accusations. Making vague accusations like this do nothing to support your position. There is a huge difference between insurance willing to pay for care and the government inhibiting care because of an evil perception that it is for the greater good of all.

 

[Robert Snow]

Then refrain from it and false accusations. Making vague accusations like this do nothing to support your position. There is a huge difference between insurance willing to pay for care and the government inhibiting care because of an evil perception that it is for the greater good of all.

Will you insurance company pay for any procedure or not? If they won't then your point is moot.

 

[TCGreek]

I've come to the realization that all politicians are right. But it's a matter of perception. :thumbs:

 

[Aaron]

I don't know why I would expect the truth from you. If you don't think insurance companies ration care, you are fooling yourself, unless you have an insurance company that will authorize any service you request. You do know that lying is a sin, right?

The actual practice of private insurance vs government-run care is clearly delineated my post, which anyone at a third-grade reading level can comprehend.

But comprehension isn't the issue, it's socialists and their lies. You've lost the debate about government-rationed health care, and now you're trying to say it's been rationed the whole time. You know very well it's a lie, I've shown it to be a lie, but you will chant it until it can no longer further your agenda of oppression and genocide.

That's what I expect of you and the rest of the Gerbil Brigade*

*For Joseph Goebbels, the German Socialist propogandist.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Sarah seems to talk out of both sides of her mouth. Here is her proclamation on Health Care Decision Day in Alaska.......

Healthcare Decisions Day Print Now Printer Friendly

WHEREAS, Healthcare Decisions Day is designed to raise public awareness of the need to plan ahead for healthcare decisions, related to end of life care and medical decision-making whenever patients are unable to speak for themselves and to encourage the specific use of advance directives to communicate these important healthcare decisions. WHEREAS, in Alaska, Alaska Statute 13.52 provides the specifics of the advance directives law and offers a model form for patient use.

WHEREAS, it is estimated that only about 20 percent of people in Alaska have executed an advance directive. Moreover, it is estimated that less than 50 percent of severely or terminally ill patients have an advance directive.

WHEREAS, it is likely that a significant reason for these low percentages is that there is both a lack of knowledge and considerable confusion in the public about Advance Directives.

WHEREAS, one of the principal goals of Healthcare Decisions Day is to encourage hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, continuing care retirement communities, and hospices to participate in a statewide effort to provide clear and consistent information to the public about advance directives, as well as to encourage medical professionals and lawyers to volunteer their time and efforts to improve public knowledge and increase the number of Alaska’s citizens with advance directives.

WHEREAS, the Foundation for End of Life Care in Juneau, Alaska, and other organizations throughout the United States have endorsed this event and are committed to educating the public about the importance of discussing healthcare choices and executing advance directives.

WHEREAS, as a result of April 16, 2008, being recognized as Healthcare Decisions Day in Alaska, more citizens will have conversations about their healthcare decisions; more citizens will execute advance directives to make their wishes known; and fewer families and healthcare providers will have to struggle with making difficult healthcare decisions in the absence of guidance from the patient.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Sarah Palin, Governor of the state of Alaska, do hereby proclaim April 16, 2008, as:

Healthcare Decisions Day in Alaska, and I call this observance to the attention of all our citizens.

http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache...lin&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

Now, if we twist her words, as she twisted them in the bill, we could accuse her of the same or worse. Admit it folks, she is simply a politician tying to stay in the public eye.

However, on April 16th 2008, then Gov. Sarah Palin endorsed some of the same end of life counseling she now decries as a form of euthanasia. In a proclamation announcing “Healthcare Decisions Day,” Palin urged public facilities to provide better information about advance directives, and made it clear that it is critical for seniors to be informed of such options.
http://pubrecord.org/politics/3560/palin-backed-end-of-life-counseling/

http://politicsorpoppycock.com/2009/08/19/palin-backed-end-of-life-counseling-as-alaska-governor/

For ‘Death Panels’ Before She Was Against Them? Palin Endorsed End Of Life Counseling As Governor.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/08/palin-deathpanel-flipflop.

 

[OldRegular]

Crabtownboy

You would not understand it but there is a world of difference between individuals making decisions regarding end of life care and the government making those decisions for them.