Socialized Medicine


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Carborendum said:

Doesn't surprise me in the least.  Once you are admitted to the hospital, you are basically in jail-you can't leave until they say you can leave.  Trying to leave on your own without their permission can cause big, big problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/03/parents-beg-judge-let-son-live-saddest-case/

This is not a problem with socialized medicine but rather a different view of the rights of parents. In ??, we have socialized medicine and parents can take sick kids to the states. In the uk, you can't take your kids out of school for a trip to Disneyland. In Canada, no problem

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, yjacket said:

Once you are admitted to the hospital, you are basically in jail-you can't leave until they say you can leave.  Trying to leave on your own without their permission can cause big, big problems.

What problems does it cause? What if I just up and leave? What's going to happen to me? I honestly just want to know. I've always hated how we lose our freedom going into the hospital but I want to know exactly how that all works. 

Edited by eddified
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
2 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/03/parents-beg-judge-let-son-live-saddest-case/

This is not a problem with socialized medicine but rather a different view of the rights of parents. In ??, we have socialized medicine and parents can take sick kids to the states. In the uk, you can't take your kids out of school for a trip to Disneyland. In Canada, no problem

Exactly,and I am absolutely against socialized medicine. Nothing is free folks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Exactly,and I am absolutely against socialized medicine. Nothing is free folks. 

My province has just brought in free medicine for those under 25 years old. You do not have to pay back your student loans until you are making >35 k. And we are trying out guaranteed income in 3 locations. Not sure where. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Sunday21 said:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/03/parents-beg-judge-let-son-live-saddest-case/

This is not a problem with socialized medicine but rather a different view of the rights of parents. In ??, we have socialized medicine and parents can take sick kids to the states. In the uk, you can't take your kids out of school for a trip to Disneyland. In Canada, no problem

On some level I have to agree this is an accurate statement.  But it is a very simplistic one.  Let's take a look at the court statement:

Quote

 “... although the parents have parental responsibility, overriding control is vested in the court exercising its independent and objective judgment in the child’s best interests.”

That may seem harmless enough, but let's break that down to what it actually means:

Quote

In other words, in the U.K., parents have no say over life-and-death decisions regarding their children. As the sole supplier of healthcare, the state will make those decisions for them.

Again, while your statement is true, the question has to arise: What twisted background would give birth to such a philosophy?  How on earth did anyone come to justify a court's right to override the well-intentioned and well thought out intent of the parents?  It is inescapable that if we never had socialized medicine, it would never even be on the court's agenda.

Quote

Indeed, a professor who had been involved in Charlie’s care at the hospital admitted as much in court testimony. According to the Telegraph, the American doctor willing to treat Charlie testified that if the boy had been in any American hospital, he would surely have been given the experimental treatment. The professor, however, said there were “cultural differences” between the United States and the U.K.

She said “if we don’t consider something is in the child’s best interest” then they would not do it, but “in America, provided parents have the money, the financial means to access care, doctors will do anything parents would like to be done regardless of what is happening to the child.”

… When pushed on why the parents should not be given the chance to try and save him, no matter how slim his chances, the pediatric specialist said: “This is a treatment that could have theoretically been given here, but we don’t think that it is the right thing for this child because of the suffering and extent of his neurological damage.”

Of course, there is always the possibility that the treatment could succeed and greatly lessen Charlie’s suffering. “One can wonder, cynically, if the court system ordered his death to avoid risking embarrassing the NHS should the treatment they denied actually work,” 

We must admit that this goes beyond parental rights.  There is no escaping the fact that socialized medicine will eventually turn into death courts.

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, unixknight said:

You can't sign an AMA* document to leave? 

*Against Medical Advice

This is my point. . . you have to sign a document to leave, i.e. you can't just get up and leave.  You have to have permission to sign a document and then you can leave.

If I brought myself into the hospital, why should I have to sign a document just to leave?  And there are a whole host of reasons why (according to the hospital) they wouldn't allow you to sign the document.  What if the hospital now deems you medically incompetent?

Edited by yjacket
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MormonGator said:

almost

There's no almost about it.  Eventually, income dwindles to nothing while outflows increase and if nothing else, the system collapses and you have chaos.  There are better ways, but they are less warm and fuzzy and won't win votes for politicians or make money for the corrupt.  (I know you know all that.  Probably better than I do.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
3 minutes ago, zil said:

There's no almost about it.  Eventually, income dwindles to nothing while outflows increase and if nothing else, the system collapses and you have chaos.  There are better ways, but they are less warm and fuzzy and won't win votes for politicians or make money for the corrupt.  (I know you know all that.  Probably better than I do.)

Oh I completely agree with you. Socialism fails 100% of the time. Period. Greece is learning this the hard way. Venezulua is learning this the hard way. 

Remember that hilarious scene in Titanic when someone says "But this ship cannot sink!" And Thomas Andrews says "She's made of iron sir! I assure you, she can." Same thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dudes, seriously chill. The USA way is not the only way. I may be mistaken but I think that the us is the only OECD country without government run health care. We nonUS oecd people are, for the most part, doing ok. Yes, Greece and Portugal have some issues but ahem...so do we all. Let's not assume that it is the us way or disaster. Come on now. 

https://www.oecd.org/eco/growth/46508904.pdf

Edited by Sunday21
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MormonGator said:

Oh I completely agree with you. Socialism fails 100% of the time. Period.

Does 100% of the time mean always eventually, every day of every year, or something else? I ask because I think another socialist country (Bolivia) seems to have been doing pretty good lately compared to socialist Venezuela. And of course non-socialist countries have a good share of economic problems, too--not just right now but throughout history. So, I wonder whether the problem is a country practicing socialism to varying degrees, or whether other fiscal policies might have just as much or even more to to with economic disasters?

Edited by Mike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sunday21 said:

Dudes, seriously chill. The USA way is not the only way. I may be mistaken but I think that the us is the only OECD country without government run health care. We nonUS oecd people are, for the most part, doing ok. Yes, Greece and Portugal have some issues but ahem...so do we all. Let's not assume that it is the us way or disaster. Come on now. 

https://www.oecd.org/eco/growth/46508904.pdf

That's fair, and frankly I'll be interested to see how these guaranteed income programs go--I suspect they'll implode once people figure out that they can blow their money on drugs and women and whatnot, and then go back and still get traditional welfare services from a government that lacks the political will to let these folks die in the streets. But if they can make it work in the long term, and control costs, and let workers keep the bulk of what they produce and not start curtailing individual liberties for the sake of promoting "the program"--more power to them.

But when people start suggesting that the way of culturally homogenous peoples whose security is guaranteed by American defense treaties, ought to be implemented in a diverse and mistrustful America with staggering defense spending obligations and no assurance of a Brother Jonathan who can bail us out of a sticky spot--I start to get kinda cranky.

In a more topical vein, I agree with @Carborendum.  Power corrupts; and government bureaucrats who get used to playing God in one aspect of life quickly start believing they ought to play God in *every* aspect of life.  Moreover, they become willing to kill rather than to admit that someone else's way of doing things may be better than their own.  That's why the Brits have decreed that this child must die rather than risk becoming an argument for American market-based health care; and it's why Communist rulers have chosen to kill a hundred million of their own people over the last century rather than letting them live in exile elsewhere in liberty and peace. 

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Just_A_Guy. I am not suggesting that the US try socialized medicine. I am merely stating that government run medical systems are possible without imminent disaster.

I do not know why the Brits have taken this approach with this child. I live in a country with government run health care and we do not have such policies. THus This British approach is not a result of socialized or government supported medicine. Perhaps this British approach reflects the effects of facing the high probability of invasion in WWII? NOt sure.

My family is Scottish. With the exception of my bros & sisters, everyone lives in the uk. I assure you that no British person that I have ever met (my ex was English) even considers a private sector health system. Bear in mind that their nearest neighbors all have government run systems.

I sense that you are happy with your system. I am happy for you. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair points, @Sunday21.  Then again, as I understand it your program is only half as old as Britain's.  We'll see where you guys are when your bureaucrats are as used to playing God as Britain's apparently are.

And the article cited belies the suggestion that everyone in Britain thinks the NHS is just peachy.  In fact, the article shows an NHS that is so heck-bent on being uniformly respected, that it would rather kill a child than seen him cured after NHS had deemed him "incurable".

Tyrannies of the majority tend to make majorities very happy indeed.  It's how government treats embarassing, dissenting minorities; that illustrates how free a country really is.  

Market-based health care will inevitably have inequities, but at least they are not deliberate or malicious or absolutely unavoidable inequities.  A poor black kid in south central LA can't afford experimental mitochondrial therapy, and maybe the hospital can give him a grant; and even if nothing presents itself there is still hope right up through to the end.  A British kid is told he may not receive experimental mitochondrial therapy and may not leave the country to seek it elsewhere--and that kid may be walking and talking and eating, but he's already dead; because the State wills it so.

The simple truth is that once you've co-opted the health care game and then start denying health care to specific individuals for any reason--you may as well be shipping them off to the gas chambers. 

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, yjacket said:

This is my point. . . you have to sign a document to leave, i.e. you can't just get up and leave.  You have to have permission to sign a document and then you can leave.

If I brought myself into the hospital, why should I have to sign a document just to leave?  And there are a whole host of reasons why (according to the hospital) they wouldn't allow you to sign the document.  What if the hospital now deems you medically incompetent?

I'm not an expert, but my understanding is that you don't need anybody's permission to sign that document (in the USA.)  The AMA document is about covering the hospital to avoid liability.  And the hospital can't just arbitrarily declare you mentally unable to decide.  That requires at the very least, a staff psychologist to certify it after an evaluation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether socialism in any form works or not is one matter (I personally think it will fail ultimately), but whether it is moral or not is another matter. It is not. Socialism is theft. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Folk Prophet said:

Whether socialism in any form works or not is one matter (I personally think it will fail ultimately), but whether it is moral or not is another matter. It is not. Socialism is theft. Period.

Right. I believe there are many different forms of government that "work". But ones that allow free market capitalism to operate will usually do better. And I agree that socialism is not moral. 

I speculate that in the millennium we won't be operating under free market capitalism anymore--God has something even better in store. (Think of how the people in the BOM had all things in common after Jesus came.)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share