Posted from Family Research Council blog
From Oregon comes a story almost hard to believe. Barbara Wagner, a Springfield, Oregon woman’s doctor hoped a new chemotherapy drug would help her but the Oregon Health Plan sent her a letter telling her they would not pay for the treatment, but would pay for assisted suicide.
And Mrs. Wagner is not the only one to get a letter.
53-year-old Randy Stroup of Dexter, Ore., has been in a fight for his life. Uninsured and unable to pay for expensive chemotherapy, he applied to Oregon’s state-run health plan for help.
Lane Individual Practice Association (LIPA), which administers the Oregon Health Plan in Lane County, responded to Stroup’s request with a letter saying the state would not cover Stroup’s pricey treatment, but would pay for the cost of physician-assisted suicide.
Even before the current debate on health care the Democrats were laying the ground work for potential rationing in a government controlled system. Within the stimulus bill passed in February the legislation created a “Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research.” The report issued by the House Appropriations Committee explained what they hoped to accomplish with this “research”
By knowing what works best and presenting this information more broadly to patients and healthcare professionals, those items, procedures and interventions that are most effective to prevent, control and treat health conditions will be utilized¸ while those that are found to be less effective and in some cases, more expensive¸ will no longer be prescribed. (Emphasis added)
The concerns over rationing in the current health care debate come from a number of different places, including the fact the provision on “end-of-life” planning for seniors in the House bill comes from Rep. Earl Blumenauer, a Democratic congressman from Oregon who supported Oregon’s assisted suicide law.
Additionally President Obama himself has made several public statements indicating the federal government would be making decisions on what sort of treatments people get, including in this New York Times piece where he stated:
“(T)here is going to have to be a very difficult democratic conversation that takes place. It is very difficult to imagine the country making those decisions just through normal political channels. And that’s part of why you have to have some independent group that can give you guidance. It’s not determinative, but I think has to be able to give you some guidance.”
The “independent group” he refers to would be a government run entity and most likely take form in the “Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research.”
The Republicans tried at least five different times to ensure that “comparative effectiveness research” is not used for rationing purposes. Three times in the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee and twice in the House of Representatives (once in Ways and Means and once in Energy and Commerce). Each time the Democrats on the committees voted the amendments down (House results are here and here.)
Rationing takes place in health care, that is the simple and sad truth of any system. However when it is a government entity making those decisions, with little input from the patients and doctors directly effected, you end up with the Kevorkian “cost saving” moves of the state of Oregon where they will take your liberties and give you death.
Entries (RSS)