Should the Government or the Patient Decide What is Medically Necessary

  • Thread starter Thread starter HolySpirit
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Asking your parish priest about the Church rules on this would seem very helpful.
 
Monica83 said:
Suffocating via insufficient oxygenation w/ pain management vs ventilation w/ pain management. Tell me how its different? How suffocating is better?
Click to expand...
By suffocating do you define it as a symptom or as a sign (biological process of hypoxia)?
 
Hypoxia causes pain. It should be the patient’s or parent’s choice if they want to go down that route.
 
ratio1 said:
40.png
Monica83:
Hypoxia causes pain.
Click to expand...
But pain has already been managed? As per your scenario.
Click to expand...
It gets managed, yes, with combinations of drugs dependent on the patient’s condition.

We call it “snowing” and keep the patient comfortable without destroying the respiratory drive. You can ease the work of breathing without stopping the drive to inhale. It can be a fine balance, especially in patients with lung disease.
 
Last edited:
They die from respiratory acidosis caused by hypercapnia and hypoxia. Not suffocation.

Suffocation is defined as restricting the ability to breathe. EOL care doesn’t suffocate.
 
It sounds like Pope Francis’ recent address has given us some direction on this?
 
MonteRCMS said:
Keep the government out of decision-making.
Click to expand...
Insurance companies also decide what they will pay for. Without coverage the patient or family can still insist on a treatment without the ability to pay for it. It then becomes charity care and a burden to the hospital.
 
Pain has also been managed for the patient on the ventilator, so…it should be the choice of the patient, parent, POA with what measures they will cared for in the final stages and not the choice of bureaucrats.
 
Shakuhachi said:
40.png
MonteRCMS:
Keep the government out of decision-making.
Click to expand...
Insurance companies also decide what they will pay for. Without coverage the patient or family can still insist on a treatment without the ability to pay for it. It then becomes charity care and a burden to the hospital.
Click to expand...
Sooooooo much truth here.

Most care is decided by insurers. Not the patient, not the family, not the medical team, not the government (in the US, at least).

It’s insurance companies that drive decisions.

Hospitals won’t do things and not get paid for them. You can (no pun intended) take that to the bank. There is a limit to how far a facility will go in the name of one patient. I’ve heard treatments be denied by ethics committees because the insurance company was refusing to pay.

That’s not to say that there aren’t committees who run large endowments (like The Duke Endowment) that do arrange for some charitable care and some high dollar care to be written off.

Unpaid bills don’t become a burden just for the facility. They become our burden, and drive up our healthcare premiums and our out of pocket costs because someone is going to pay that bill.

People complain about nationalized health care and how it would increase taxes. What they don’t realize is they’re already footing the bill - if they’re insured - for most of the health care in this country.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top