|
|
December 14, 2007“Free, Universal” Medicine is neitherPursing Holiness is looking once again at an end-of-life case in the news - this time in Canada, and makes some excellent points:
Very well said. I know this is a hot-button issue for a lot of people - but putting aside the whole end-of-life scenario and the worries that attend any policy that allows governments or institutions to decide whether your baby or your grandmother should be allowed to continue to live - the veriest problem with socialized medicine is that it gives too many people a say in how you live your life, the choices you elect to make, and your own personal liberty, and it does so with the excuse that since “everyone” is paying for your health care, the representative of “everyone” (that would be the government) must make economical considerations that preclude your concerns, because “everyone” should not have to pay for your health problems, whether genetic or behavioral. To those who are detached from a medical problem, it is easy to be pragmatic about a course of action. Very easy to say, “well, he’s old and he’s going to die anyway,” when it’s not your grandfather. It’s easy to say, “that baby has Down’s Syndrome and will have a difficult life that might weigh on the taxpayers (and those people make me uncomfortable, too) so it should be aborted,” when the baby growing and kicking and listening to bedtime stories every night, is not your own. Socialized medicine encourages that sort of detachment, but that detachment spills over into society in every way, and we’re already too self-absorbed, too plugged in to the iPods and satellite radios that keep us untouchable and alone. I imagine everyone has heard a story at one time or another about the very rare Catholic priest who will declare that a suicide can not have a Mass of Christian Burial, because suicide is an offense against the Creator…or who says a Catholic cemetery should not allow a burial for the same reason. That seems really harsh, doesn’t it? Particularly in light of our own understanding that most suicides are undertaken by people suffering in their minds and in need of help - people who are ill? Yes, it does seem harsh. Most people would probably look at the church, under those circumstances, and say, “what a horrible authoritarian institution; it has no compassion for the pain of that family - it doesn’t look at the human beings involved, it just issues it’s narrow rules and decides who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, etc, etc…you’ve heard the rant. This is the same thing. Some will argue that it is not, because “the socialized medicine folks are working from a place of compassion and concern for the quality of life,” but that’s not really true, and everyone knows it’s not true. Bottom lines trump compassion and “qualities of life” are subjective and cannot be measured on a spread sheet or appreciated in a board room. The more we detach ourselves from the everyday ordinariness of life and death and difficult times, the more we try to inoculate ourselves from having to do anything for each other because “the government is handling it,” the less we grow in empathy, wisdom, maturity, goodness and holiness - and then, the further away we are from each other, and from sharing the common experiences of life, the further we are from God. A few years ago, in another Advent season, I wrote:
Some people do everything “right” and they get breast cancer and die young, like Linda McCartney. Some people do everything “wrong” like Orson Welles or Ted Kennedy and they live into their late seventies or 80’s. Who is to say, under socialized medicine, who is a “good” patient and who is the “bad” one, who is “deserving” of care and who is not. And who is to say when it is a person’s “time to die.” I suggest such a “time” should not be the province of some overworked bureaucrat trying to keep his budget in the black. Not for human beings. Meanwhile in the UK, this breast cancer patient will not be cared for by the NHS if she dares to supplement her treatment out of her own pocket. Reader Dean sends this link to Small Dead Animals that is pertinent. Related: The Mystery of Suffering http://theanchoressonline.com/2007/12/14/free-universal-medicine-is-neither/trackback/ 15 Responses to ““Free, Universal” Medicine is neither” |
December 14th, 2007 at 9:06 pm
So beautifully said, God gave you a wonderful gift, thank-you for sharing it with us.
December 14th, 2007 at 9:36 pm
My great-uncle was one of the best conversationalists that I ever met. He was witty, attentive, and cunning. He was an old-school atheist; reason and his sharp mind were his guides in life. Me and my family loved him very much; he and my great-aunt used to take us kids out to use their metal detectors in local parks.
In the last few years, my great-uncle had developed progressive dementia. We didn’t really notice at first, but in the past year it became obvious. He could no longer follow a conversation, and we all grieved at seeing him in such a state, but we still loved having him and his wife at all the family events.
This fall, just after he had to be moved to a care facility, my great-aunt picked him up for a dr’s appointment, and they disappeared. The next day, their burned out car was found in the desert, with two bodies inside. My aunt had driven them both out there, and set the car on fire. The notes she left made it clear that she did not want to live apart from her husband, nor see him go downhill in such a manner.
I can understand her pain. I can hardly imagine the kind of grief she must have been feeling. But she took herself and my uncle away from us, without giving us the chance to say goodbye. They died with what some would call “freedom and dignity”, like a wounded animal, instead of letting us share the pain, and being at home with their family, and knowing they were loved.
Might euthanasia–or my aunt and uncle’s choice–be less painful? Sure. But sometimes the pain is what makes us human.
I will always wish that we had been given the chance to say goodbye.
December 14th, 2007 at 11:01 pm
Having faced the lingering deaths of three elderly relatives very close to me, I have thought about this issue hard and deep. In two of the three instances, the relative was cared for by a government program. I actually thought that too much was done in the way of tests and treatments that prolonged the suffering of both relatives under Medicare and VA care. The relative under private care was taken care of very well until his death, but was not subjected to the same life extending treatments. In each case those with the say on what treatments were authorized, I believe, determined how far medical science was used to prolong the life of the relative. The cost of the care did not seem to be the determining factor. I have another relative who is relatively active only because of the extensive medication and treatments given to him by the VA. Here again the cost of the services do not seem to be a factor in what he receives. However the notion that the greater society has to pay for maintaining life against the odds and calls of the medical profession has become something we are starting to hear in the US. We pass laws requiring helmets for motorcycle riders and other such regulations using the same argument about medical costs being borne by the general population that the Canadian government and those in Europe use; even when those costs are through private insurance. Mr. Edwards proposes that everyone be required to have health insurance to correct, I suppose, that perceived problem. I expect next that he use the $1.85 million given to some 9-11 families as an example of the need for more government regulation and intervention since their lost family member did not have life insurance and instead took money to maintain their life style with taxpayers footing the bill after their death.
Since personal choice can cause hardship, as in the ongoing mortgage sub-prime mess, where do we draw the line and when should the government not become the savior of those that make poor health, financial or life style choices? We certainly don’t want to return to the practices during the long depression of 1873 to 1878 where very young girls became prostitutes to feed the family because government would not intervene, but some semblance of personal responsibility must be maintained. I’m not sure there is a correct answer, but I have a tendency to believe that we should position our limited resources to help those who demonstrate that they are and have helped themselves.
December 15th, 2007 at 1:48 pm
[...] “Free, Universal” Medicine is neither - The Anchoress [...]
December 15th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
I work for a health care agency. I have also watched my parents and grandparents die. The truth is that health care for many older Americans is already paid by the government. Medicaid and Medicare are not private pay. They are both public money. I have watched people lose everything to pay for health care, only to end up supported by the state.
I agree that anytime the state pays, the state has control..but we do not need to wait for Hillary care to get there, millions of Americans are already there.
December 15th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Anchoress,
Beautiful post about health insurance. I agree with you in one thing- neither private nor universal health care is free. In any system, you pay for what you get.
I disagree, though that only socialized medicine makes life and death decisions based on cost. Private insurance routinely denies bone marrow trqansplants for cancer patients, if they don’t think that it will cure the cancer. Organ transplants are denied if insurance doesn’t feel the patient is a “good candidate”. My best friend is having serious issues with her bleeding stomach ulcers because the insurance company will not approve a more expensive drug for her treatment- even though in her specific case, cheaper drugs are not working.
You state this as if this is different in private care- as if, just because you have paid for insurance, you can have as much care as you want. This is not the case.
December 15th, 2007 at 5:33 pm
To continue:
You say: “the veriest problem with socialized medicine is that it gives too many people a say in how you live your life, the choices you elect to make, and your own personal liberty, and it does so with the excuse that since “everyone” is paying for your health care, the representative of “everyone” (that would be the government) must make economical considerations that preclude your concerns…” But private insurance companies, do it all the time-they tell you how toi live your life, what treatments you can and cannot have, what choices you can and cannot make, with the excuse that they are responsible to their shareholders to spend money wisely, or the argument that they must be able to care for all their patients. You say that “I suggest such a “time” should not be the province of some overworked bureaucrat trying to keep his budget in the black. Not for human beings.” It’s better if they’re doing it to protect their profit margin????
December 16th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
[...] The Anchoress provideds many good examples of how it should be done. Here is one. [...]
December 16th, 2007 at 7:42 pm
“…the veriest problem with socialized medicine is that it gives too many people a say in how you live your life, the choices you elect to make, and your own personal liberty, and it does so with the excuse that since “everyone” is paying for your health care, the representative of “everyone” (that would be the government) must make economical considerations that preclude your concerns, because “everyone” should not have to pay for your health problems, whether genetic or behavioral.”
Amen, Anchoress. I’d even extend that train of thinking to when we demanded our insurance companies pay for well visits, thus giving them power over our lives that they didn’t have before. Too few people are frightened by the thought of the government telling you what sins you can and can’t commit.
December 17th, 2007 at 12:02 am
A-
It was almost 7 years ago that I got a call from my sister that my mother had been found unconscious and taken to the hospital.
I had just talked to her late the night before. How could this be?
I frantically called the ER and found out she had not regained consciousness and was having seizures. I was asked what meds she took and told them my sister was on the way with all her meds. I live 1000 miles away.
As each day passed and my mother didn’t awaken I told my sister I was going home to be with my mother. I was told to wait because she would need me more when she got out of the hospital.
After an agonizing week of praying and hoping my mother would come out of her deep sleep I flew home on a cold January night in Maine.
I went directly to the hospital ICU and saw my mother lying there with a breathing tube down her mouth and a feeding tube in her nose. She was so very still.
I went outside into the cold air and cried like a baby.
The medical team met with us and told us she had aspirated on her own vomit when she had a seizure and she had severe brain damage. They said feeding her with a tube was artificial means of supporting her life. I disagreed then and disagree now that feeding someone is artificial means of supporting life.
After two weeks there the doctor finally told my sister and me it was time to take the feeding tube from my mother. She never needed the breathing machine but it was always connected to her just in case she did.
I cried as hard as I’ve ever cried and begged him to give my mother three more days to see if she’d wake up, to no avail.
He told me it could take up to two weeks for her to starve to death but didn’t say starve. I had no idea what she would have endured until I read about Terry Schiavo.
My sister asked to keep the feeding tube in in case she had seizures so they could get the drugs into her. He agreed to that.
We went in and told our mother again it was OK for her to leave us. The next day we walked in to visit her and as I walked through her door she looked dead to me. I said, “Oh, my God!” to my sister. The breathing specialist was there to give my mother a breathing treatment. She told my sister my mother had just taken a big breath.
I figured the way she looked she wasn’t going to take many more, so I went outside, washed my hands (she had MRSA by now) and announced I’d be in the solarium if they needed me.
When the breathing specialist confirmed where I was going to be I figured I’d better hang around. When I calmly asked if my mother was still breathing she told me she was going to get the nurse.
By then I knew. That big breath she took was her last breath. She took it as soon as she knew we were there. My sister, a nurse, couldn’t bear to be in the room at that time so I went in and held my mother’s hand and arm. I wiped the sweat from her forearms.
I don’t remember the nurse coming into the room or getting the stethoscope. All I remember is seeing her put it on my mother’s arm as though she were checking her temperature and I calmly asked her if she was breathing.
“There is a definite lack of pulse”, was the answer I got and I collapsed over my mother’s body, begging her to hear me when I said, “Mama, I love you! Please, God, let her hear me! Mama, I love you!”
Two nurses had to hold me up when I left the room because I felt as though I had no legs.
I called for a pastor and he and I went in and prayed. I removed her personal belongings from her room as my sister refused to enter the room. I sat with my mother’s body for at least an hour and my heart was never as full of love, loss and regret as it was that day.
When it was time for her wake my sister again didn’t stick in the room so it was left up to me to meet and greet everyone when I wanted to scream I had lost my mother and life would never be the same.
I’ll never forget that and I’ll never be able to tell someone it’s OK to end someone’s life after that experience.
It’s OK to do it to me, but I can’t do it to someone I love, and I thank God my mother died before I had to see the horror of her starvation death.
Sorry for the long post.
December 17th, 2007 at 8:55 am
Philosophically, you’re right, except obviously Stephanie has a valid point about private insurance companies also making these kinds of decisions for patients. But putting that aside for a moment, I wonder what exactly you think should be done about health care in this country? What are people who can’t afford the cost of health care supposed to do? So far, the party you support has done nothing after almost eight years in power to lower the cost of health care or to see to it that those who can’t pay are provided for. Those who oppose plans proposed by others really should have their own plan.
December 17th, 2007 at 4:52 pm
Nate, if I had the answer to that, I’d run for president.
And btw, just so you know, I’m not much of a GOP girl - what you call “the party [I] support” is losing me right after the primaries and I’ll be back to my old Independent status. I realize I am once again a bad fit for a major party!
December 17th, 2007 at 5:02 pm
Jeanette, thank you for sharing that very painful ordeal. I remember when one of our uncles was dying, when it was very clear that he simply wasn’t going to eat or drink any more and he was “fixing to go” as they say, his wife simply ordered that he be kept hydrated until the end, which is what they did. Her thinking, and I consider it wise, was that there was no reason to simply “stop” hydration, but also no reason to force feed him simply because he’d stopped eating. When a dying patient stops eating it’s (usually) a natural part of dying and a sign that they’re close. Hydration simply prevents adding one more harsh measure (dehydration) to any discomfort. This is, I think, quite different than withholding nutrition and hydration simply because a breathing person who shows some responsiveness is alive but not “alive enough” for some.
December 17th, 2007 at 7:26 pm
I hope this doesn’t seem too uncharitable. And I’ll say up front, it’s easy for me to hold this opinion since I’ve never been tested over a deathbed. Yet.
I can see why nonChristians are pull-the-pluggers. But what explanation can we make for the large number of Christians who hold the same view? In truth, I think it is because so many families have pulled the plug. They listened to their doctor and, let’s be honest, suffering is so inconvenient for the nonsuffering. Then there is that buffet Aunt Sally was supposed to get and we always wanted the China Cabinet. And there’s no HOPE any way…
So they hasten the end and now they do NOT wish to be criticized, even indirectly.
December 18th, 2007 at 12:28 am
Anchoress - Glad to hear you’ve rejoined the ranks of the independents. I have to admit I really don’t know the answer to the health care question either. I’m not at all comfortable with socialized health care, but I don’t find the status quo at all acceptable and I don’t see anyone presenting an alternative to socialized medicine that would actually make a change for the better.