The Reality of Socialized Medicine

[DawnODay]

Here is the inevitable reality of state-run health care and what happen when government bureaucrats and bean-counters make your medical decisions for you:

The heart of the problem is that, according to the UK courts' interpretation of the Children Act of 1989, a life of permanent disability and dependency, whether long or short, is not worth living. The UK High Court "root(ed)" its opinion in the ethical guidance of the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, which asserts that "it is no longer in the child's best interests to continue (living)" in those cases "where the severity of the child's condition is such that it is difficult or impossible for them to derive benefit from continued life." Because of his disability, Alfie's very life was deemed no longer beneficial to him. And therefore it was declared illegal to keep him alive.

This decision reflects a profound, indeed lethal intolerance of dependence and disability. But it is even worse than that. Just as in the Charlie Gard case, the courts here effectively terminated the rights of Alfie's parents, forbidding them to seek transfer to other facilities that wished to care for Alfie. Both Pope Francis and the Italian government pled for Alfie's life, going as far as to make him an honorary Italian citizen and offering air transport to a pediatric hospital in Rome. But the UK government refused.

What began with a hospital's deadly policy against a child with apparently permanent disabilities ended with a shocking totalitarian intervention by the state, annihilating his parents' rights in order to ensure Alfie's demise.​

O. Carter Snead, The Alfie Evans case is straight out of a dystopia, CNN (Apr. 29, 2018).

 

[coachdb18]

Having lived and worked in the socialized medicine environment, I can tell you, it is not about the best health care for you the patient, it rapidly becomes the most expedient, cheapest way of dispensing with you, the state of your health be damned. Having an infant child at the time, for which well baby checkups were promised, there was also only one phone line to get those appointments, which booked up EVERY DAY within the first five minutes. Only way I ever got appointments was being a neighbor and friend to one of the pediatricians I the system... and that’s basically how it works, it only works if you know someone. The typical quality of care is about what you’d expect from a horse doctor... rude, inconsiderate, give fuck health care. No, thanks, never again for me!

 

[dan_c00000]

Wow, one story! I'm sure there are hundreds, no probably thousands, of stories about private insurance.

Look! Here's one in Wisconsin where your hero the Orange Nazi is destroying the middle class.

The start of another very rough week for you.

 

[oggbashan]

The Wikipedia account:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfie_Evans_case

 

[RelentlessOnanism]

As someone who lives in a country with 'socialized medicine' (sic), I wouldn't exchange it for any other system. The NHS is not perfect, by any means, but it's a much better system than what you've got in the States.

 

[oggbashan]

I have posted this several times but some people still don't accept it:

In the UK you can use the National Health Service; you can have medical insurance with varying levels of co-pay and use the extensive number of private medical hospitals and facilities; you can pay your own way for private treatment; or you can do all three depending on your choice at the time.

You are not FORCED to use the NHS but if you are in employment or being taxed you cannot avoid paying for it. But if you become seriously ill, the health costs of your treatment on the NHS cannot and will not bankrupt you because it is free at the point of use.

If you want to, you can go abroad for treatment. Several European countries offer specialist treatments much cheaper than private care in the UK. Even the NHS can send you abroad if it is appropriate and you are willing to go.

 

[DeYaKen]

Having lived and worked in the socialized medicine environment, I can tell you, it is not about the best health care for you the patient, it rapidly becomes the most expedient, cheapest way of dispensing with you, the state of your health be damned. Having an infant child at the time, for which well baby checkups were promised, there was also only one phone line to get those appointments, which booked up EVERY DAY within the first five minutes. Only way I ever got appointments was being a neighbor and friend to one of the pediatricians I the system... and that’s basically how it works, it only works if you know someone. The typical quality of care is about what you’d expect from a horse doctor... rude, inconsiderate, give fuck health care. No, thanks, never again for me!

Not true of the UK system. As a twenty-year-old man with no connections to any medical practitioner. I was referred to an orthopaedic surgeon who was the orthopaedic consultant to the International Olympic committee. A man who developed the cruciate ligament operation that allowed footballers to return to the game after what was a career-ending injury. Within six weeks of being referred, I had a hip operation which fifty years later is still working.

As an ordinary working class lad, I would never have been able to afford the level of insurance needed to pay for that man.

While I was recovering from that and "enjoying" the free physiotherapy. I met an American accountant who had broken his arm in Singapore. Rather than be flown to the US he chose to be flown to the UK. It wasn't because the treatment was better but prior to moving to Singapore he'd worked for two years in the UK, long enough to be entitled to free treatment. He didn't want to lose any of his yearly entitlement on his insurance (I did say he was an accountant) so he came to the UK.

 

[Oliver_Klozoff]

Having lived and worked in the socialized medicine environment ...

Notably omitting where you "lived and worked in the socialized medicine environment."

I'm going to bet that with that additional information, most of us would just dismiss your comments out of hand ... hence the omission.

I'm going to guess some Eastern European country, prior to or just after the fall of communism.

What do I win?

 

[Oliver_Klozoff]

Here is the inevitable reality of state-run health care and what happen when government bureaucrats and bean-counters make your medical decisions for you: ...

What I want to know is, what can we change to end the inevitability of your stupid ass?

 

[hadruprider]

Yeah right. So much better to have a system where medical decisions are taken according to how the company providing the service can make the most profit, and poor people just have to hope they don't get sick.

 

[DawnODay]

The point you are all missing is that the parents had the opportunity to take their child elsewhere for treatment and the government forced them to leave him in the UK to die. Only government has that power. No private insurer could do that.

 

[oggbashan]

The point you are all missing is that the parents had the opportunity to take their child elsewhere for treatment and the government forced them to leave him in the UK to die. Only government has that power. No private insurer could do that.

Treatment? No. The Italians could not treat him. All they could offer was palliative care until the inevitable death but even they eventually admitted that the transfer from the UK to Italy could cause death.

As I have said before, it is NOTHING to do with how the treatment was paid for. It is everything to do with a child's rights not to be harmed by parental decision making. The legal case went to the highest court in the UK more than once and the European Court refused to hear the case because they considered the UK court had acted correctly.

It wasn't the GOVERNMENT. It was the court's decision taken reluctantly and after lengthy consideration.

You constantly ignore the facts to make political points.

 

[DeYaKen]

It isn't the original story that disturbs me, but the way it is molded into some sort of propaganda. The amount of misinformation and distortion is sickening, like other posts of you. Thank you for sharing, but actually it isn't anything new in this time of 'fake news'.

It is indeed very sad that so many bandwagon jumpers have used the case simply to further their own ends. None of them could actually do anything about the poor lad's condition. All they could do was to artificially prolong his life so they could make political capital out of it, just as the poster is doping here.

 

[DawnODay]

Treatment? No. The Italians could not treat him. All they could offer was palliative care until the inevitable death but even they eventually admitted that the transfer from the UK to Italy could cause death.

As I have said before, it is NOTHING to do with how the treatment was paid for. It is everything to do with a child's rights not to be harmed by parental decision making. The legal case went to the highest court in the UK more than once and the European Court refused to hear the case because they considered the UK court had acted correctly.

It wasn't the GOVERNMENT. It was the court's decision taken reluctantly and after lengthy consideration.

You constantly ignore the facts to make political points.

I did not mean to "ignore the facts," nor do I think I did. In part, it is a difference between vocabulary and perspectives in the UK vs. the USA.

First, we are using the word "government" differently. As I understand it, you're using the word "government" to mean the current set of ministers, including the PM. You distinguish this from the courts. In the USA, the word "government" is more encompassing, and includes the courts. Instead of "government," let's refer to the "power of the state."

As for whether the decision was made under the auspices of the NHS or some other law, it matters little. In the USA, such life and death decisions are generally left to the parents, not the "power of the state." As it goes in our founding document:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.​

In the USA it is for individuals, not the "power of the state," to decide how and when to live.

Meanwhile, in the UK under socialized medicine: "Patients with terminal illnesses are being made to die prematurely under an NHS scheme to help end their lives, leading doctors have warned." K. Devlin, Sentenced to death on the NHS, Telegraph (Jun. 20, 2018).

 

[cherries_on_snow]

According to the Annals of Internal Medicine, September 2017, a single payer option does reduce child mortality.

 

[oggbashan]

In the USA, such life and death decisions are generally left to the parents, not the "power of the state." ...

Generally?

That is the situation in the UK too. Such court cases are extremely rare.

 

[cherries_on_snow]

The reality of socialized medicine is that fewer children die, more people get preventative care and fewer people wait for hospital emergency care. Corporatists are fond of billboarding misleading narrative. This thread is another example of poor argument.

 

[coachdb18]

According to the Annals of Internal Medicine, September 2017, a single payer option does reduce child mortality.

A few million abortions, and you’re talking about child mortality? That’s off the rails stupid!!!

 

[cherries_on_snow]

Another logical fallacy. But sure, let's talk about abortion. Right after you get raped and give birth. Because I did.

 

[cherries_on_snow]

In the meantime, can you clarify your stance? So you are anti-governmental support of healthcare, but fine with governmental control over women's bodies.

 

[cowslinger64]

A few million abortions, and you’re talking about child mortality? That’s off the rails stupid!!!

It's funny, coach dumdum is so concerned with an UNBORN NOT A CHILD FETUS, but couldn't care any less for any other ACTUAL child to suffer needlessly. Him and the op are part of the "fuck you, I GOT MINE!" crowd.

Just like that other idiot, botanydummy.


Single payer is by far, the best way for this country to go.

 

[BotanyBoy]

IHim and the op are part of the "fuck you, I GOT MINE!" crowd.

Just like that other idiot, botanydummy.

The all American freedom loving capitalist crowd?

Damn straight.

Better than being an Anti-American communist stain like yourself.

Single payer is by far, the best way for this country to go.

Da comrade!!!!

 

[oggbashan]

The all American freedom loving capitalist crowd?

Damn straight.

Better than being an Anti-American communist stain like yourself.

...

Suggesting that there might be other ways of paying for health care does not make someone Anti-American or a communist.

In the UK if you want private health care you can have it, either by insurance or by paying your own health costs directly. There are a number of private hospitals in every part of the UK.

You can use the NHS if you want to, and for emergency care it is fastest and best, or use private health care instead.

What you can't do is avoid paying for the NHS through taxation.

 

[oggbashan]

The reality of socialized medicine is that fewer children die, more people get preventative care and fewer people wait for hospital emergency care. ...

I'm sorry. That sentence is not currently accurate as far as the UK's NHS is concerned.

Our death rates for children are higher than they should be.

Preventative care is failing because of other pressures.

Waiting times in UK's emergency care hospitals are unacceptably long.

Those are some of the reasons why the UK government announced last Sunday that there would be a major increase in funding for the NHS and a five-year funding plan.

There are three major reasons for the NHS's problems:

1. An ageing population that does not have access to properly funded social care and therefore puts more pressure on the NHS's emergency care.

2. Inefficiencies caused by older hospitals and political (internal and external) resistance to modernisation which includes closing hospitals.

3. Last but NOT least - the legacy of PFI - Private Funding Initiatives - that provided new buildings privately funded by the construction companies but has left massive debts at high interest rates that have to be paid from NHS current annual fundings. IF the UK government would take over or buy out all existing PFIs and fund new hospitals by government debt, most of the financial pressure on the NHS would end.

The NHS isn't perfect. It never was and never will be. But what it does is worth celebrating. It provides health care for every UK person without them having to worry about the cost.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Suggesting that there might be other ways of paying for health care does not make someone Anti-American or a communist.

No....but there is a 99.99999999% chance that anything other than freedom, like private fundraisers and voluntary charity, which is NOT what anyone here is talking about, it kinda does.

Because anything other than that will require government oppression to be realized.

What you can't do is avoid paying for the NHS through taxation.

And that, at a very fundamental, basic level is why.

At the end of the day no matter how you dress/church it up....the government is still sticking a gun to everyones head and taking their money to pay for it. It's economic oppression, state confiscation of the means of production, control and administration over the distribution of goods and services.

Nothing M'arican about that commie shit.