• ratz30
    link
    14
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Death panels still aren’t a thing you dingus. No bodies of people deciding whether or not you should live or die, just people gaining the option to request it.

    • @SheeEttin
      link
      English
      151 year ago

      They are in the US. They’re called insurance companies.

      • @PetDinosaurs
        link
        -6
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This is technically the case everywhere.

        Healthcare is one of those things that will consume all available resources, and we can’t do that.

        Consider someone that requires round the clock, individual care. They are consuming the entire economic output of more than three people to care for someone that will have no more. I know there’s a lot of communists here, but communism doesn’t change that fact.

        What if we could keep someone alive for $1M per day? How long should we do it? We shouldn’t, and “death panels” are how that needs to be decided.

        You can talk about price gouging, but really high end medical care is akin to magic. It takes very smart people to do it, and something like an MRI requires liquid helium to remain superconducting. That’s just extremely expensive.

        Edit: this place is really weird. So many down votes. No argument against it. Very toxic.

        • @michaelmrose
          link
          English
          11 year ago

          While this is technically true. Back in reality land they were found to be automating the process of groundless denials having doctors lie about having examined dozens of cases despite having spent all of 10 seconds in a screen clicking deny all. Our current situation IS death panels and not just for the dying.

          • @PetDinosaurs
            link
            11 year ago

            Sure. That’s not really a death panel though. That’s the inefficiency of lots of systems. If you make someone jump through enough hoops, they’ll give up. That saves money.

        • GreenM
          link
          11 year ago

          Well EU has pretty good healthcare but noons pays 3x market value of their car for single ambulance.

          • @PetDinosaurs
            link
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            No one is talking about that. Healthcare has a budget. You have to distribute that budget equitably.

            It’s a more generalized, non emergency version of triage.

            Some people will die no matter what you do. Don’t waste resources on them. Some people will recover if you do nothing. Don’t waste resources on them.

            Some people will recover if you spend resources on them and die if your don’t. Use your resources on them.

            There’s always a cost benefit tradeoff.

            • GreenM
              link
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Aside from you though 🫠

              Healthcare is one of those things that will consume all available resources, and we can’t do that.

              Consider someone that requires round the clock, individual care. They are consuming the entire economic output of more than three people to care for someone that will have no more.

              I just pointed that it doesn’t consume so much resources in EU as in US. So it can afford better care for longer period of time. And by that i mean tenfold in some cases.

              And guess what, insurance companies paying for that make huge profits yearly as well.

              I’m just pointing to system that can afford to keep patients alive without killing them because they or others can’t afford to pay for them while maintaining high quality care.

              Off topic

              Edit: this place is really weird. So many down votes. No argument against it. Very toxic.

              I didn’t down vote you if that matters 😉

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      -31 year ago

      And those bodies totally won’t start gently suggesting this option. It totally hasn’t already happened…

      • ratz30
        link
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Like when? The big one people were up in arms about was the veteran who was advised to look into it by a Veteran Affairs employee. Veteran Affairs has absolutely no say in whether someone can or should seek MAID, and that employee was acting alone. Pretty sure they got shit canned for it too.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        One involves someone who hasn’t fully developed their brain, being taken advantage of. The other involves grown people who are most likely not going to make the decision lightly, and have years of proof they’ll keep suffering. I’d also imagine it’s not some instant suicide booth like Futurama, there’s not gonna be a “Death same night, guaranteed” run of clinics.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          So you don’t believe that medical conditions affect your brain?

          Aging alone effects it, elderly people are arguably less mentally capable than teenagers. So if teenagers cannot consent to sex based on mental capability, then how are lower capability elderly supposed to be able to consent to death?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            I literally never said that…

            Those are 2 very very very different ideas you’re trying to compare, and feels like poor logic.

            Teenagers can absolutely consent to sex, as sex and grooming are very different things. 2 teenagers having sex, normal. Someone much older than a teenager grooming them mentally for years to eventually have sex, not normal.

            Lastly, elderly people’s mental faculties declining that hard isn’t guaranteed. Plenty of old people stay mentally sharp and capable of making decisions. Teenagers, though, 100% will have an under-developed brain until ~25, not to mention how little of life experience they’ll likely have.