As commonly occurs during debate surrounding legislation that would actually benefit the majority of Americans, a vocal minority creates a catch-phrase to try to tilt the scales of the discussion in their favor. Who are these people? Usually they are groups that stand to lose something (read: money) if the legislation goes forward without their input. The health care reform debate is no different.
I don't know who came up with the term "death panel" to refer to language regarding end-of-life counseling. I do know that somehow Sarah Palin, never afraid to say the most nonsensical things in a public arena, has become their poster girl, claiming that "bureaucrats" will be empowered to deny health care to persons such as her "...parents and ...baby with Down's Syndrome", based on how much these panelists feel such persons contribute to society. Huh?
Now, the foregoing is silly enough to be laughable if not for the fact that, apparently, people are believing this nonsense. Notwithstanding Mark Twain's famous comment on the American populace, I'm still reeling from the realization that educated adults actually think that their government is drafting laws to decide who lives or dies based on cost considerations. The language only requires that Medicare cover this counseling, which I understand to be things like pain management, hospice care, living wills, etc., if it is desired. How is this wrong or "evil"? Notable, too, is the fact that this language is not new, and has been supported by Senate Republicans. So, what's the problem?
Hopefully, those behind this ridiculousness will be exposed for the muckrakers they are sooner rather than later, so that the rest of us can get back to the necessary task of making health care available for all.
I don't know who came up with the term "death panel" to refer to language regarding end-of-life counseling. I do know that somehow Sarah Palin, never afraid to say the most nonsensical things in a public arena, has become their poster girl, claiming that "bureaucrats" will be empowered to deny health care to persons such as her "...parents and ...baby with Down's Syndrome", based on how much these panelists feel such persons contribute to society. Huh?
Now, the foregoing is silly enough to be laughable if not for the fact that, apparently, people are believing this nonsense. Notwithstanding Mark Twain's famous comment on the American populace, I'm still reeling from the realization that educated adults actually think that their government is drafting laws to decide who lives or dies based on cost considerations. The language only requires that Medicare cover this counseling, which I understand to be things like pain management, hospice care, living wills, etc., if it is desired. How is this wrong or "evil"? Notable, too, is the fact that this language is not new, and has been supported by Senate Republicans. So, what's the problem?
Hopefully, those behind this ridiculousness will be exposed for the muckrakers they are sooner rather than later, so that the rest of us can get back to the necessary task of making health care available for all.
No comments:
Post a Comment