Saturday, January 2, 2010

Once is happenstance...

...but twice? According to the old saying, twice is circumstance, three times enemy action, but given that this makes two deaths at a government-run hospital (and make no mistake, the government is the enemy of free people), I think enemy action happened the second time. This is the second woman who wasn't properly treated at the same, county owned, Las Vegas hospital, and who gave birth to a premature baby that died.

This one wasn't a shrinking violet like the one who went home because she was tired of being ignored--no, Ms. Richardwas sent home by personnel who gave her a sleeping pill, rather than rush her into a room with a magnesium sulfate drip that might have stopped her labor and saved her baby.

Should mandatory Medicaid be passed against the will of the people, this is just going to keep happening, with increasing frequency and in more places.

And that's not all. The Mayo Clinic in Arizona is going to refuse Medicare/Medicaid patients, unless they want to/can pay out of pocket to keep their doctors. OCM, that means senior citizens who won't likely be able to keep their doctors because the government doesn't pay but about 60% of charged rates. By designed policy. The Mayo Clinic has decided that they're tired of losing money on this policy (and I don't blame them, since doctors usually are paid less than $.35 of every dollar charged, with the rest going to overhead. Government payments don't even cover overhead).

Should mandatory Medicaid be passed, there will be no insurance for doctors' offices and hospitals to overcharge to make up for what the government won't pay. That means the most expensive patients--like senior citizens and the chronically ill--will be shorted at best, or refused treatment or euthanized like this boy, who had Cerebral Palsy, at worst.

4 comments:

  1. What does the new health care
    legislation say about the Hippocratic Oath?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't know that it *says* anything, per se, but it certainly states that cutting costs is more important than patient care.

    Which is why more than two-thirds of doctors are against it, and why most of those say they'll go into a different profession if it passes.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "but it certainly states that cutting costs is more important than patient care......"

    I wonder which of the 2000 pages contains this 'reform' statement?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Several, actually. Vilmar's published excerpts.

    And keep in mind: this is what the bureaucrats and administrators want, not what the doctors do.

    ReplyDelete