DEATH PANELS: Stroke Victim Removed From Life Support Against Family’s Wishes

[Swordsmyth]

Texas stroke victim Carolyn Jones was removed from life support yesterday against the wishes of her family, as death panels become a reality in the increasingly socialized U.S. health care system.
“On Friday, May 3rd the family was notified by the hospital that the Ethics Committee had made the decision to take Carolyn Jones off of the ventilation by the power granted to them by the Texas’ Advance Directives Act [Futile Care Law],” Mark Dickson of East Texas Right to Life said to Faithwire (https://www.faithwire.com/2019/05/14/please-dont-do-this-texas-woman-taken-off-life-support-against-familys-wishes/).
The family begged hospital personnel to “please don’t do this,” but they went ahead and pulled the plug anyway. Similar to British child Alfie Evans, the supreme authority of the corporate state is prioritized before basic human decency.
“The Texas 10 Day Rule went into effect and on Monday, May 13th at 2:00 pm Carolyn Jones was taken off of her ventilator,” Dickson added.


The Texas Advance Directives Act (199), also known as the “Texas Futile Care Law,” is a rule that allows health care providers to cut individuals off from life support after giving the family 10 days notice.
The so-called medical professionals claim that treatment has become futile, but her family strongly disagrees. Jones continues to remain alive, defying the odds, and still giving her family hope that she can ultimately pull through.
“To the surprise of many, she did not die. As of 7:00 AM she is currently still alive and breathing on her own. At this point, the family has been told by the hospital that no other life-sustaining measures will be provided,” Dickson said.
A video shared with Faithwire (https://www.faithwire.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/received_288229968787740.mp4) by the family shows that Jones continues to be somewhat lucid despite her malady. Kina Jones, Carolyn’s daughter, can be seen in the video asking her mother to “give me another yawn,” and she complied a few seconds later.

“It’s not right, not for someone that is loving and is caring and has done nothing but serve 61 years of help, to just discard her like an animal,” Kina Jones said.
The family does not have the ability to transfer their beloved matriarch to a different hospital, but they have not given up hope and urge people to pray for Carolyn as she battles to hang on despite the callous nature of hospital personnel.
“Right now the family’s only option is to keep on fighting for the life of Carolyn Jones,” Dickson said. “Her life, like everyone else’s life is worth fighting for and none of us plan on giving up anytime soon.”
Former 2008 Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin once received massive criticism from the fake news for claiming that death panels would be apart of the leftist drive to socialize health care services.
Palin said (https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/aug/10/sarah-palin/sarah-palin-barack-obama-death-panel/) in 2009: “And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.”


The essence of Palin’s statement is correct, as bureaucrats and health care officials get to play God and decide who lives and who dies at their discretion.

https://bigleaguepolitics.com/death-panels-stroke-victim-removed-from-life-support-against-familys-wishes/

[Zippyjuan]

https://www.click2houston.com/news/local-man-fights-against-texas-law-to-keep-wife-alive


If a hospital’s medical ethics committee decides the continuation of “life-sustaining treatment” is futile, a patient has to be given the chance to seek treatment elsewhere -- within those 10 days. Moreover, the committee’s report must include a list of options for the patient, including other facilities that can treat the patient instead. A new facility has been secured for Carolyn Jones; however, her legal team is in the process of securing funds to cover living expenses. In Jones’ case, that requires approval by Medicaid. Cook said a separate attorney is handling that aspect, but they fear resolving the Medicaid quagmire may require more time than the 10 days allow. In this case, a court could approve an extension.



The Advance Directives Act became law in 1999, under then-Gov. George W. Bush. Critics allege it empowers hospitals to assemble “death panels,” deciding the fate of a patient’s life, without the need for approval from a court of law.

[Brian4Liberty]

When “insurance” is involved, government or otherwise, there will always be some variation of a “death panel”.

Even without insurance, Doctors often recommend no “drastic measures” or no extended life support. Many people create “advance medical directives”, which usually specify no drastic measures, no life support. The real world tends to operate differently than media and politically generated hysteria.

[Zippyjuan]

When “insurance” is involved, government or otherwise, there will always be some variation of a “death panel”.

Even without insurance, Doctors often recommend no “drastic measures” or no extended life support. Many people create “advance medical directives”, which usually specify no drastic measures, no life support. The real world tends to operate differently than media and politically generated hysteria.

Healthcare is always rationed- no matter who is providing or paying for it. Unlimited care for everybody is simply not possible and too costly.

[ATruepatriot]

Healthcare is always rationed- no matter who is providing or paying for it.

I don't know how old you are Zippy, But I remember when it was pretty much a free market and this was not so. It was only restricted by how much you could afford and it was still affordable for most as self pay aside from the very small minority of impoverished.

[Zippyjuan]

I don't know how old you are Zippy, But I remember when it was pretty much a free market and this was not so. It was only restricted by how much you could afford and it was still affordable for most as self pay aside from the very small minority of impoverished.

The people in the OP article are unable to afford the care they want.


In Jones’ case, that requires approval by Medicaid.

[ATruepatriot]

The people in the OP article are unable to afford the care they want.

Yes I understand that, and until we became a welfare state the "affordable" was much less and actually affordable for more. As more dependent we became on Medicaid because of increased welfare numbers, and because Medicaid only pays a lower percentage of the bill total, the medical industry was forced to greatly inflate pricing to compensate for these losses. This is were it started to snowball out of control. I watched it happen.

[Brian4Liberty]

I don't know how old you are Zippy, But I remember when it was pretty much a free market and this was not so. It was only restricted by how much you could afford and it was still affordable for most as self pay aside from the very small minority of impoverished.


You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to ATruepatriot again.

Beat me to it. In a cash for service model, the only limitation is what a person can afford. And not only that, with true cash competition, prices come down dramatically, and people can afford even more care if they want it.

[Zippyjuan]

Beat me to it. In a cash for service model, the only limitation is what a person can afford. And not only that, with true cash competition, prices come down dramatically, and people can afford even more care if they want it.

So healthcare was unlimited in the "good old days"? Would the OP person still be on a respirator?

If they had a stroke like this back then, they were probably sent home to die.

[ATruepatriot]

Beat me to it. In a cash for service model, the only limitation is what a person can afford. And not only that, with true cash competition, prices come down dramatically, and people can afford even more care if they want it.

Yep... And that was when employers could afford to provide their employees with company health insurance through self insurance without it being a huge cost to their overhead. Therefore not needing compulsory government intrusion. That was also when the drain Medicaid placed on the Social Security fund was very minimal because there were very few who could not afford medical care on their own even with a minimum wage job. This was when there was general productive free market economic prosperity rather than general welfare. And if we return to a free market removing the middle men and the government it really can go back to how it was.

[nikcers]

So healthcare was unlimited in the "good old days"? Would the OP person still be on a respirator?

If they had a stroke like this back then, they were probably sent home to die.

Are you saying that the current system isn't inflating prices with no end in sight? Do you really think we wouldn't get better healthcare with a free market?

[ATruepatriot]

So healthcare was unlimited in the "good old days"? Would the OP person still be on a respirator?

If they had a stroke like this back then, they were probably sent home to die.

Actually yes, In those days people would donate to the cause with compassion because they could afford to help. Now they can't help because they have to pay their own very inflated healthcare costs and insurance. The one defeats the other.

[Zippyjuan]

Yep... And that was when employers could afford to provide their employees with company health insurance through self insurance without it being a huge cost to their overhead. Therefore not needing compulsory government intrusion. That was also when the drain Medicaid on the Social Security fund was very minimal because there were very few who could not afford medical care on their own even with a minimum wage job. This was when there was general productive free market economic prosperity rather than general welfare. And if we return to a free market removing the middle men and the government it really can go back to how it was.

https://obamacarefacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/uninsured-rate-since-1963.png

[Zippyjuan]

Are you saying that the current system isn't inflating prices with no end in sight? Do you really think we wouldn't get better healthcare with a free market?

No, I am not. Under free market we did have fewer people covered. But when you cover more people and more services, the costs go up. And that does not count paying for fancy new equipment and treatments. Another problem is overhead costs- basically, paperwork. Multiple insurance companies with multiple plans means each patient needs a different form filled out with different information to a different address to try to get payment. National systems simplify the paperwork problem (though that system has its own share of issues). almost 1.5% of our total US GDP is paid out in hospital administration costs.

https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/journal-article/2014/sep/comparison-hospital-administrative-costs-eight-nations-us


Administrative costs accounted for 25 percent of hospital spending in the United States, more than twice the proportion seen in Canada and Scotland, which spent the least on administration. Administrative costs were notably higher in the Netherlands (20%) than in other European nation.

In the U.S., the share of costs devoted to administration were higher in for-profit hospitals (27%) than in nonprofit (25%) or public (23%) hospitals. Teaching hospitals had lower-than-average administrative costs (24%), as did rural facilities

U.S. hospital administrative costs rose from 23.5 percent of total hospital costs ($97.8 billion) in 2000 to 25.3 percent ($215.4 billion) in 2011. During that period, the hospital administration share of national gross domestic product (GDP) rose from 0.98 percent to 1.43 percent
Reducing U.S. spending on a per capita basis to Canada’s level would have saved $158 billion in 2011

There was no apparent link between higher administrative costs and better-quality care.

[Brian4Liberty]

https://obamacarefacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/uninsured-rate-since-1963.png

Very good. You have proven that as insurance expands, cost of service skyrockets.

[ATruepatriot]

https://obamacarefacts.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/uninsured-rate-since-1963.png

You are doing it again... Where on that chart is the real data for when they started to give expanded medicaid to those who were not "disabled"?

[Zippyjuan]

Very good. You have proven that as insurance expands, cost of service skyrockets.

That is true. It expands "ability to pay" along with demand. And all the paperwork also adds to the costs.

[Schifference]

After spending hours reading the 1904 PDF book by Adolf Just about living in tune with nature, I couldn't help but ponder what would be the consequence of doing so. Suppose your loved one is sick with some major fever and you and they opt to have you dig a huge hole in your backyard and bury everything but the person's head. You bury the person naked. Supposedly this is miraculous. So you and the sick person agree in writing that this is the preferred treatment that the patient wants to undertake. What do you think would be the consequence if the person dies while in the ground or under your care?

[nikcers]

After spending hours reading the 1904 PDF book by Adolf Just about living in tune with nature, I couldn't help but ponder what would be the consequence of doing so. Suppose your loved one is sick with some major fever and you and they opt to have you dig a huge hole in your backyard and bury everything but the person's head. You bury the person naked. Supposedly this is miraculous. So you and the sick person agree in writing that this is the preferred treatment that the patient wants to undertake. What do you think would be the consequence if the person dies while in the ground or under your care?

You guys haven't lived until you have tried it head first.

[donnay]

Actually yes, In those days people would donate to the cause with compassion because they could afford to help. Now they can't help because they have to pay their own very inflated healthcare costs and insurance. The one defeats the other.

You hit the nail right on the head-- "compassion" something so sorely missing in our society today. It isn't completely gone, because there are truly compassionate people out there who have paid off people's exorbitant medicals bills that wouldn't allow them to get ahead.

[ATruepatriot]

You hit the nail right on the head-- "compassion" something so sorely missing in our society today. It isn't completely gone, because there are truly compassionate people out there who have paid off people's exorbitant medicals bills that wouldn't allow them to get ahead.

Yes, and it is getting worse because it has moved from voluntary to compulsory. People are more willing to help when it is their own choice rather than forced without choice. It creates an environment of animosity rather than compassion. Unfortunately I don't see this virtue improving anytime soon if ever. First you have to care about others and very few do anymore.

[ATruepatriot]

No, I am not. Under free market we did have fewer people covered.

Because there were less people needing help to cover it. There was not a problem until we had the unproductive welfare generation come into play. A lazy ass welfare generation started all of this. Right in line with the Cloward Piven strategy.