Except that the man was NOT dying.....

Tick Box Medicine - Another Example

Mrs Munkenbeck said that her father was taken off an intravenous drip last week but she argues that he has as much of a right to life as anyone else. Although a spokesman for Frimley Park Hospital in Surrey says Mr Troake is not on the scheme "at the moment", it is likely he will be offered a plan of care for dying patients.

"We believe that he has been forced down this route. By withdrawing fluids he is now very weak and there's no going back from it," she told The Daily Telegraph yesterday.

"I just want him protected. He's looking at us and talking to us. He's not suffering from a terminal illness, he just had a stroke. We just feel they decided from the beginning that he's 95 so they've written him off."

A spokesman for Frimley Park Hospital said: "Sometimes, actively treating a patient who is dying can unnecessarily prolong suffering.

Except the man wasn't dying....

Do you really think that OUR system wouldn't do this if the government was running it and wanted to save money?

And to think that our government, the same government that can run Cash for Clunkers, wants to run our health care....

Question a Doctor, Lose your Child - The future of American Medicine?

As a father of a young girl, I follow any information that might keep her healthy. Gardasil, developed a couple of years ago, released with great hype and fanfare as the savior of young women everywhere, has proven to be dangerous. While millions of women have taken the vaccine, dangerous side effects, including death, have been reported.

Now, of course, one doesn't HAVE to get vaccinated. Unless the medical care is mandatory. Or the drug company has close ties to the governmental authority in charge. Or the government is in charge of health care. Anytime that the government is in charge of something and makes it mandatory, there is a chance for corruption.

And if the procedures are enforced by law, how does one sue for damages? If you think that corporations are reluctant to accept blame, how hard will it be to affix blame on a governmental authority? And what happens when you do? As I've written before, look to England to see the future of a Progressive America.

Tell me THIS wouldn't happen in an American Government run health system. Especially run by liberals..... (Heck, children are being removed NOW for spurious reasons, including homeschooling.)

Question a Doctor, Lose Your Child

PARENTS are being threatened with having their children taken into care after questioning doctors’ diagnoses or objecting to their medical care.

John Hemming, a Liberal Democrat MP, who campaigns to stop injustices in the family court, said: “Very often care proceedings are used as retaliation by local authorities against ‘uppity’ people who question the system.”

Cases are emerging across the UK:

The mother of a 13-year-old girl who became partly paralysed after being given a cervical cancer vaccination says social workers have told her the child may be removed if she (the mother) continues to link her condition with the vaccination.

Heaven forbid that the authorities actually get blamed for this. Its for our own good, don't you see?

Hoping They Don't Change Anything

"[T]his threat is with us, and at the moment, more imminent. One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine… most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly can't afford it."
Ronald Reagan
1961


Michael Reagan:
Obama-Care is an idea that would surely wreck the greatest health-care system in the world and give you... your children... and your grandchildren… health care that is both sub-standard and expensive. Ask yourself the following questions:

Would you be willing to wait for six painful months to have cancer surgery, while the malignancy spreads through your body... hoping and praying that you would receive treatment before the cancer become inoperable?

Would you be willing to give the federal government the power to assign you to a physician, tell doctors which treatments they can prescribe and which tests they can run, and even decide at what age you're too old to receive a transplant or continue dialysis ?

And would you be willing to obey a law that forbids you to consult a private physician, even if you are willing to pay for the visit yourself?

Don't treat the old and unhealthy, say doctors

As I have posted before, I believe that events in England prophesies the nature of our society under a liberal government and culture. Here is one more example of a Health Care Train Wreck
that is going to happen if we allow the government to dictate our health care requirements and system. I thought having the government involved was supposed to guarantee health care for ALL. No rationing. No worrying about costs. No triage. Isn't this some of the complaints about insurance companies. At least you can sue a company. Try doing that to the government.

From the Telegraph.Co.UK

excerpts:

Doctors are calling for NHS treatment to be withheld from patients who are too old or who lead unhealthy lives.

Smokers, heavy drinkers, the obese and the elderly should be barred from receiving some operations, according to doctors, with most saying the health service cannot afford to provide free care to everyone. Fertility treatment and "social" abortions are also on the list of procedures that many doctors say should not be funded by the state.

Among the survey of 870 family and hospital doctors, almost 60 per cent said the NHS could not provide full healthcare to everyone and that some individuals should pay for services.

One in three said that elderly patients should not be given free treatment if it were unlikely to do them good for long. Half thought that smokers should be denied a heart bypass, while a quarter believed that the obese should be denied hip replacements.