LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 2,344
0 members and 2,344 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 01-19-2005, 01:38 PM   #11
Replaced_Texan
Random Syndicate (admin)
 
Replaced_Texan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Romantically enfranchised
Posts: 14,282
National healthcare

Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
whose ethics (or under what ethical system)? IF they don't get to see a doctor, then the doctor's ethics aren't implicated.
The system's ethics. Hell, we have a problem terminating whatshername Shivo's (very expensive) care in Florida because someone thinks she's benefiting from it.

I don't have a problem with healthcare rationing per se (I was and continue to be in love with the Oregon model that Bush I slapped down as barbaric), but I do have a problem with cutting people off because of class or age, and no one has been able to show how it's possible to cut people off.

When most end-of-life treatment starts, the caregivers don't know it's the end of that patient's life, and a hell of a lot of patients in the same situation pull through. The physicians', nurses' and other allied health professionals' ethics get involved with withdrawing that care.
__________________
"In the olden days before the internet, you'd take this sort of person for a ride out into the woods and shoot them, as Darwin intended, before he could spawn."--Will the Vampire People Leave the Lobby? pg 79

Last edited by Replaced_Texan; 01-19-2005 at 01:40 PM..
Replaced_Texan is offline  
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:53 AM.