RATIONING: The Key Component Missing In The Current Healthcare Debate

Share on Facebook1Tweet about this on Twitter4Share on LinkedIn0Share on Google+0Share on Reddit0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Email this to someonePrint this page

By: Renee Nal | New Zeal

Why isn’t anyone talking about the Independent Payment Advisory Board (IPAB), or Obamacare’s inevitable rationing? (Photo Washington Times)

While it has been proven that the Affordable Care Act was designed specifically to fail in order to pave the way for Single Payer, one major piece of the Obamacare puzzle has been inexplicably left out of the existing debate, and that is the inevitable rationing that the legislation brings.

This is a reprint from an article I wrote (from a now-defunct website) warning people about how rationing is a key element of Obamacare. It is one of the most important articles I have ever written and proves that the academics promoting Obamacare at the time were also staunch advocates of rationing, which is a necessary part of any government health program.

****

I am writing this because I think that this topic is urgently important and nobody truly understands what is happening behind closed doors (and open doors) in academia, in conferences, seminars, etc., all to ensure that rationing is “accepted” in the public square. The word “Rationing” has been somewhat marginalized, but one can very easily do a Google Scholar search for rationing and find it all over various academic publications.  The idea is to find “code words” in order to make the idea of rationing, i.e., death panels more palatable for Americans.

Make no mistake, it IS going to happen under ObamaCare and is already happening now, in some instances, but will get worse: much, much worse.  How do I know?  I read their words and I take them at their word.

The way this will be justified will be by using “experts” in the field of bioethics, just like it was to justify abortion – I know this because I have been familiarizing myself with academic journals.  Therefore, people must know some basic principlesin bioethics in order to understand the positions and know how to respond.

Justifying Death Panels: (Code Words / Phrases)

Rationing Patient’s rights
End of Life Care Fairness
Resource Allocation Care Effectiveness
Sustainability Unnecessary Tests
Unsustainable Increases in health care costs Healthcare is a ‘right’
Priority Setting Tough choices
Psychosocial influences QARYs “quality adjusted remaining years”
Setting Limits Resource Allocation


Some common arguments for rationing (most deal with cost):

  • “Healthcare is already being rationed” referring to people willing to wait for an organ transplants, being turned down for insurance, etc.
  • “People do not need all of these tests.” (See the Choosing Wisely Campaign below)
  • The last year of life is a costly burden that negatively impacts future generations.
  • Many people would rather die at home.1
  • It is not fair to use expensive interventions when people will die soon anyway.

The idea of rationing health care became a very popular topic within Bioethics circles after the passage of the Affordable Care Act, aka, “ObamaCare.” Many conferences and journal articles dealt with the issue, particularly surrounding the issues of “fairness” and “end of life care.”

As this report shows, not only do bioethicists advocate rationing, but some have learned to not use the word, and they freely admit that they believe rationing to be inevitable.

Read more here…

Share on Facebook1Tweet about this on Twitter4Share on LinkedIn0Share on Google+0Share on Reddit0Pin on Pinterest0Share on Tumblr0Email this to someonePrint this page

Speak Your Mind

*