If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   British hospitals prepare to euthanize 60,000 old people. Minister calls this "fantastic step forward"   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 238
    More: Obvious, Royal College of Physicians  
•       •       •

21779 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Dec 2012 at 12:15 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



238 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-31 12:29:52 AM
100% of people die without giving consent.
 
2012-12-31 12:30:01 AM

GAT_00: This is the Daily Fail.  At least one key piece of information is missing here, assuming this wasn't totally distorted.


i.imgur.com
 
2012-12-31 12:31:41 AM

Uchiha_Cycliste: I know, let's spend hundreds of millions of dollars so that they can live a few more months.
Money well spent.

On a more serious note we need a serious discussion about end of life care in the US that we are not having, and we need to have it before the Boomers bankrupt us all. Just because something can be done for a patient doesn't mean it should.


Good Christ, THIS. In large, flaming letters visible from space.
 
2012-12-31 12:32:19 AM
Just because you have a right to live, doesn't mean you should.
 
2012-12-31 12:33:16 AM

Uchiha_Cycliste: On a more serious note we need a serious discussion about end of life care in the US that we are not having, and we need to have it before the Boomers bankrupt us all. Just because something can be done for a patient doesn't mean it should.


We tried to. The teahadists called them "Death Panels." Didn't go over very well.
 
2012-12-31 12:34:23 AM

ModernLuddite: 100% of people die without giving consent.


Zombie Jack disagrees

img2u.info

I don't have a problem with terminal patients or older people whose quality of life is increasingly worse, who give their permission, being allowed to end their lives on their own terms... but not getting consent? That's a dick move any way you cut it, and it is a huge ethical problem.

I doubt the Queen or any member of the royal family would ever be considered for this... and they certainly are on the public dole.
 
2012-12-31 12:34:43 AM
Happens all the time. My mother-in-law was in the last stages of lung cancer (although she was a non-smoker) and in agony. The doctor turned up her morphine drip to put her down.
 
2012-12-31 12:36:14 AM
Life has a 100% fatality rate.

Well, unless you're a jellyfish.
 
2012-12-31 12:36:30 AM

duffblue: Now if we could only get the Baby Boomers to off themselves we'd be in business.


No such luck. They are determined to burn it all down before they finally check out.
 
2012-12-31 12:36:36 AM
3.bp.blogspot.com

Good Carrousel tonight!
 
2012-12-31 12:38:45 AM
So when's the queen scheduled to die? She has to be one of the oldest bastards on that island.
 
2012-12-31 12:38:55 AM
"It found that in 44 per cent of cases when conscious patients were placed on the pathway, there was no record that the decision had been discussed with them."

If this is true, it's outright murder.
 
2012-12-31 12:40:14 AM

Matrix Flavored Wasabi:

He added: 'What should never happen is that people should be put on to that care pathway without patients being fully in the loop and their families and relatives being fully in the loop as well.'



I don't believe that should be the standard. The key question is: who gets to decide? Legally, who has jurisdiction? I don't believe that jurisdiction belongs with the people who have the most to benefit from it; there is too much potential for self-dealing. To draw an further analogy with the law: there is a reason why we divide up the roles of prosecutor and the judge.

Now, whether the assertion in the article is true as a matter of fact, I don't know. But if it is I agree with BM that it is an act of evil.
 
2012-12-31 12:40:25 AM

unclecrazy99: Pass the soylent green please !


Came for this, time for dinner
 
2012-12-31 12:41:11 AM
"Good news Mr. Johnson! You will be out of here in a couple of days."
 
2012-12-31 12:41:26 AM
Oblig

img2-cdn.newser.com
 
2012-12-31 12:42:38 AM
FTA: "Up to 60,000 patients die on the Liverpool Care Pathway each year without giving their consent, shocking figures revealed yesterday."

Well, I don't consent to death. Take that.

i.dailymail.co.uk

Come on, she's gonna be just fine. Whattaya mean she wasn't consulted about her care despite being clearly "conscious." Keep spending a shiatload on palliative care and life support just to keep her organs fuctioning for as long as possible. Life is sacred!
 
2012-12-31 12:45:07 AM
It can cost upwards of $15,000 or MORE per MONTH to keep old people in assisted living. How much do you think it costs to to keep them alive in hospice care? Less??
 
2012-12-31 12:45:51 AM

Bucky Katt: The Daily Fail is making shiat up again.


Yes it is.
 
2012-12-31 12:46:09 AM
Sorry but when your Health Secretary looks like this:

i135.photobucket.com">

You are going to have problems, probably zombies too.
 
2012-12-31 12:47:13 AM
Why so dour?
thefunambulistdotnet.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-12-31 12:47:22 AM

justtray: It can cost upwards of $15,000 or MORE per MONTH to keep old people in assisted living. How much do you think it costs to to keep them alive in hospice care? Less??


Yes, much less. An at home nurse doing nothing but switching out oxygen tanks, changing diapers and controlling morphine output for a few hours a day if that is much cheaper than 24/7 nursing home hooked up to god knows what.
 
2012-12-31 12:48:29 AM

Benevolent Misanthrope: Jesus Fark.  I'm all for the idea of not prolonging death when folks are suffering - but this... this is absolutely sinister.


I can tell you've never been to visit anyone in a nursing home.
 
2012-12-31 12:50:24 AM
Well, this sounds like a slippery slope. There are so many degrees of suffering, quality of life, potential of recovery and so forth.
People who are obviously and very palliative generally would rather die quickly and easily rather than dragging out an extra week-month of suffering and struggling.Many won't even be coherant enough to make an informed decision.But it does vary from person to person.

In the meantime, I'm ordering a soylent cola, so I'm getting a kick....
 
2012-12-31 12:51:15 AM

brandent: Bucky Katt: The Daily Fail is making shiat up again.

Yes it is.


FTA: "The national audit by Marie Curie and the RCP examined a representative sample of 7,058 deaths between April and June last year. The figures were scaled up to give a national picture."

It's pretty indefensible math to get to 60K for sure.

Here's the question for me, though. What's the threshold? If it's ONLY about economics, you could sure make some good arguments about how expensive it is to keep other types of people around. Somewhere you could make the argument that if you or your family cannot afford to pay, you cannot afford to live. There are those in the past who have successfully argued that those who don't produce are not worth keeping around...

Note here I'm asking you to identify the threshold, not yammer on about a slippery slope.
 
2012-12-31 12:53:20 AM
Everyone wants to go to heaven,It paradise , much better and earth, But no one want to die to get there.
 
2012-12-31 12:53:49 AM

Pribar: Sorry but when your Health Secretary looks like this:

[i135.photobucket.com image 634x418]">

You are going to have problems, probably zombies too.


He looks like a Doctor Who villain.
 
2012-12-31 12:54:53 AM
This is what I learned - the doctors/nurses who will care for you will not KNOW you.

This is what I did on my 30th b-day - called my mother and made her cry. "Mom? I am writing my wishes, having it notarized and telling you..................your turn"

It took 5 years but, at the end of it? we knew what we wanted and we know to drill health care providers to the floor to be as frank and honest as we learned to be with each other.

Death is hard - trying to hide it just makes it cheap and, i think, makes for cynical health care providers. If you make them face you about the hard parts you've already agreed to with those you love its better for everyone.
 
2012-12-31 12:56:24 AM

justtray: It can cost upwards of $15,000 or MORE per MONTH to keep old people in assisted living. How much do you think it costs to to keep them alive in hospice care? Less??


The bigger problem is: WHY THE FARK ARE HOSPITALS SO DAMN EXPENSIVE?!?!?!??!?

Why does my Mom's overnight stay cost $3000, for... let's see, an on-call doctor (shared between her and 100 other patients), 3 duty nurses (for each 8 hour shift), shared between 20 patients in 10 rooms, 3 aides (again, 3 shifts) shared between 10 patients. So, approx $120 goes to pay those people... call it another $20 for support people "shared" by all the patients. Forget the meds and stuff, that's billed extra (and exorbitantly, why do a handful of aspirins cost $150?!?). The hospital has been standing for almost 20 years, so beyond maintenance, I can't see anything justifying $3000/night. She had no MRIs or CAT Scans (those are also billed on their own).

Hospitals are a huge rip-off. Most "second world" countries provide similar quality hospital stays at a fraction of the cost.

There is simply no reason why it should cost that much to care for somebody. Until that gets fixed, health care will always be hopelessly broken.
 
2012-12-31 12:58:31 AM
My father passed away in a Taiwanese hospital this February. I don't know if he was unconscious for the last three days, but he certainly wasn't moving. One morning, he just kind of faded out.

Almost every day since then, I've wondered if I farked up bad by believing he was going to get better and thereby prolonged his suffering. He had suffered a stroke due to his liver tumor pressing against a major vein, but was almost fully recovered when I got to the hospital to see him. Then, one night, he took a turn for the worse and we had to start feeding him through a tube. I thought he would get better, but he didn't. The end came ridiculously fast (three weeks) -- until his stroke, he was the image of elderly Asian vitality. Sharp, active, a better tennis player than me, and acting more like 50 than 70.

For the last few days, the hospital staff suggested we move him to the hospice and to stop giving him emergency revival care. I was furious, but my mom made the call. She probably made the right decision, but I have so many doubts and I wonder if we could have fought. The hospital never said we had to leave the ward, though they strongly implied they could use the bed.

The point of this story is that I now have dust in my room. Also, Taiwanese has full-on state-owned and operated healthcare and things didn't go too bad for us at all. We still had to foot a bill for the hospice (I don't know why it wasn't covered -- it wasn't much nicer), but it added up to next to nothing.

Xaneidolon: "It found that in 44 per cent of cases when conscious patients were placed on the pathway, there was no record that the decision had been discussed with them."

If this is true, it's outright murder.


It could, also, simply mean a lack of paperwork. 44 percent of the time, no discussion is on record. That does not mean that no discussion was had.
 
2012-12-31 01:03:38 AM

the_chief: Just because you have a right to live, doesn't mean you should.


Just because you can pay to have some poor soul murdered and harvest their organs so you can live, doesn't mean you should.
 
2012-12-31 01:06:58 AM
i135.photobucket.com
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-12-31 01:08:02 AM

Seth'n'Spectrum: It could, also, simply mean a lack of paperwork. 44 percent of the time, no discussion is on record. That does not mean that no discussion was had.


Rule #1 of medical documentation: if you don't write it down, it didn't happen.
 
2012-12-31 01:09:39 AM

beautifulbob: I pray I never get put in that position. I can't imagine how hard it will be to pull the plug, even with their expressed desires. I will need to rely on an authoritative opinion of a doctor. More than one probably. Maybe even take the condition to a panel of doctors. But the final decision should be left to the family. Families will make poor, emotional decisions. But fully informed, it should be their right. Not the right of a doctor, even if they are making the best choice for the patient.


in my mother's case she wanted nothing extraordinary. the doctors said the feeding tube wasn't so they wouldn't take it out. although she had been pulling everything she could out. once she realized her life was going to be to lie there only barely responsive while the doctors did the very minimum she gave up and died.
 
2012-12-31 01:10:26 AM

Uchiha_Cycliste: I know, let's spend hundreds of millions of dollars so that they can live a few more months.
Money well spent.

On a more serious note we need a serious discussion about end of life care in the US that we are not having, and we need to have it before the Boomers bankrupt us all. Just because something can be done for a patient doesn't mean it should.


Absolutely correct. That said, I find your youthful arrogance disgusting.

/Boomer
//Will leave my children much more than my parents left me.
///Plans in place for my demise.
////So fark you.
 
2012-12-31 01:11:21 AM

Xaneidolon: brandent: Bucky Katt: The Daily Fail is making shiat up again.

Yes it is.

FTA: "The national audit by Marie Curie and the RCP examined a representative sample of 7,058 deaths between April and June last year. The figures were scaled up to give a national picture."

It's pretty indefensible math to get to 60K for sure.

Here's the question for me, though. What's the threshold? If it's ONLY about economics, you could sure make some good arguments about how expensive it is to keep other types of people around. Somewhere you could make the argument that if you or your family cannot afford to pay, you cannot afford to live. There are those in the past who have successfully argued that those who don't produce are not worth keeping around...

Note here I'm asking you to identify the threshold, not yammer on about a slippery slope.


Doesn't matter how many. It probably is 60,000. The lies are the manner in which they describe it. It's only for dying patients in their final hours. It standardizes the care to provide comfort. It's very similar to the way it is done in nursing homes in the US. Think hospice here (wife worked in hospice for years). The patient is in their final day or two, they cannot breathe, eat, drink, etc on their own (some subset of those). Typically their lungs will start to fill up and they have difficulty breathing (if not on a respirator). This is just a way to give them morphine to kill the pain, while discontinuing other treatment and removing the feeding tube. It's exactly how it is done hundreds of thousands of times per year in the US. If you do a little google you will see the whole complaint about the family not knowing is actually "wasn't given a pamphlet". Most of the characterization of the procedure, the general success of it, etc is grossly mischaracterized in the article. Prior to adopting this set of procedures, medical facilities tended to keep people alive unnaturally well past the natural point of death without clear guidance on how to proceed.

Here are the specific "accusations":

• In 44 per cent of cases when conscious patients were placed on the pathway, there was no record that the decision had been discussed with them.

• For 22 per cent of patients on the pathway, there was no evidence that comfort and safety had been maintained while medication was administered.

• One in three families of the dying never received a leaflet they should have been given to explain the process.

Item 1: It didn't say the patient disagreed or their wishes weren't consulted. It said there wasn't documentation. Someone didn't write it down.

Item 2: How does one record comfort and safety being maintained when you inject morphine? They are simply sedating the patient to keep them comfortable from what presumably is an agonizing death that they already were going to go through. Adoption of the ability to sedate the patient simply makes the death humane. Again though clerical issue. No claim of mistreatment.

Item 3: Doesn't say they didn't discuss/engage the families. Simply said they weren't given a pamphlet. I've done this with both parents, an in law, and a grandparent and never received a pamphlet. Again administratively lax. No evidence they disregarded the patient or the family.

So yes the daily fail is full of crap. Not because of the 60,000 number but because of the substance of the article/accusation.
 
2012-12-31 01:11:39 AM
The hospital that treated my dad for his "exploded heart" tried this shiat. Dad lived anyway. Fark anyone that tells you death panels are a myth.

Dad is doing very well.
 
2012-12-31 01:12:46 AM
One should never let morality get in the way of common sense.
 
2012-12-31 01:13:20 AM
Been said once or twice before, but I bet it's the Daily Fail getting shiat wrong again, as they often do.
 
2012-12-31 01:15:36 AM

GAT_00: This is the Daily Fail.  At least one key piece of information is missing here, assuming this wasn't totally distorted.


THIS. the Fail is only slightly more reliable that FOX News.


i135.photobucket.com

Wow, I had no idea Johnny Rotten had gotten into politics.
 
2012-12-31 01:16:31 AM
There is almost nothing in this revolting article that in any way represents the truth, which is hard-working caring people in the health service working to make peoples dying days as pain-free and comfortable as possible, while respecting their wishes as much as the law allows. I really do actually hate the journalists and editors of this evil rag.
 
2012-12-31 01:20:47 AM

LesserEvil: justtray: It can cost upwards of $15,000 or MORE per MONTH to keep old people in assisted living. How much do you think it costs to to keep them alive in hospice care? Less??

The bigger problem is: WHY THE FARK ARE HOSPITALS SO DAMN EXPENSIVE?!?!?!??!?

Why does my Mom's overnight stay cost $3000, for... let's see, an on-call doctor (shared between her and 100 other patients), 3 duty nurses (for each 8 hour shift), shared between 20 patients in 10 rooms, 3 aides (again, 3 shifts) shared between 10 patients. So, approx $120 goes to pay those people... call it another $20 for support people "shared" by all the patients. Forget the meds and stuff, that's billed extra (and exorbitantly, why do a handful of aspirins cost $150?!?). The hospital has been standing for almost 20 years, so beyond maintenance, I can't see anything justifying $3000/night. She had no MRIs or CAT Scans (those are also billed on their own).

Hospitals are a huge rip-off. Most "second world" countries provide similar quality hospital stays at a fraction of the cost.

There is simply no reason why it should cost that much to care for somebody. Until that gets fixed, health care will always be hopelessly broken.


Because that's what they can bill to the insurance companies.

Last trip to the ER was billed at almost $3K for a couple of x-rays and some steroids. They gave us a "no-insurance" discount that dropped the price to $750. You think they're losing money on that lower bill? Doubt it. Why bill out only $750 and make a (pulls number out of ass) 30% profit when you can bill out $3K and make that much more?

Same reason college tuition is through the farking roof. You can charge a student (pulls another number out of ass) $2k/year or you can charge them $20K a year knowing they can hit up Uncle Sam for nice cushy loans.
 
2012-12-31 01:22:41 AM
Written it appears by a graduate of the Byzantine School of Journalism. Makes one wonder if perhaps the author had some kind of agenda. Oh wait! The Daily Mail! The Diogenes of newspapers! Distortion? Unpossible!
 
2012-12-31 01:24:31 AM

gaspode: There is almost nothing in this revolting article that in any way represents the truth, which is hard-working caring people in the health service working to make peoples dying days as pain-free and comfortable as possible, while respecting their wishes as much as the law allows. I really do actually hate the journalists and editors of this evil rag.


Yeah it's pretty awful. My wife has worked in hospice and nursing homes for 20 years. ALL of her patients die. She has exactly a 0% survival rate.
 
2012-12-31 01:24:31 AM
Ah, here it is, right at the bottom:

It found that in 44 per cent of cases when conscious patients were placed on the pathway, there was no record that the decision had been discussed with them.

For 22 per cent, there was no evidence that comfort and safety had been maintained while medication was administered.

And it also revealed that one in three families did not receive a leaflet to explain the process.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2255054/60-000-patients-death- pathway-told-minister-says-controversial-end-life-plan-fantastic.html# ixzz2Gbjvtbyn
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook


Huge headlines about 60,000 sent to die without being told, but all that's actually been found is that there wasn't specific records about whether it was discussed or not. Basically, despite the large sensationalist headlines, they're actually complaining about the book keeping. Yes, these things should be discussed with the patient/family, and from the sounds of it, they're supposed to be, but that doesn't mean that in some or even most cases it was not discussed with them.

Daily Fail flails again.
 
2012-12-31 01:26:07 AM

crabsno termites: Uchiha_Cycliste: I know, let's spend hundreds of millions of dollars so that they can live a few more months.
Money well spent.

On a more serious note we need a serious discussion about end of life care in the US that we are not having, and we need to have it before the Boomers bankrupt us all. Just because something can be done for a patient doesn't mean it should.

Absolutely correct. That said, I find your youthful arrogance disgusting.

/Boomer
//Will leave my children much more than my parents left me.
///Plans in place for my demise.
////So fark you.


Don't take it personally. It's nice you have plans for after death but you can't possibly deny the drain on the economy? If we don't figure out something, everything you leave your children will be for nothing.
 
2012-12-31 01:28:44 AM

maddermaxx: Huge headlines about 60,000 sent to die without being told, but all that's actually been found is that there wasn't specific records about whether it was discussed or not. Basically, despite the large sensationalist headlines, they're actually complaining about the book keeping. Yes, these things should be discussed with the patient/family, and from the sounds of it, they're supposed to be, but that doesn't mean that in some or even most cases it was not discussed with them.


I kinda agree with this, but if they couldn't be bothered to do basic paperwork, how do we know they did the notifications?
 
2012-12-31 01:37:46 AM
Bob was your uncle.
 
2012-12-31 01:40:29 AM

Boojum2k: maddermaxx: Huge headlines about 60,000 sent to die without being told, but all that's actually been found is that there wasn't specific records about whether it was discussed or not. Basically, despite the large sensationalist headlines, they're actually complaining about the book keeping. Yes, these things should be discussed with the patient/family, and from the sounds of it, they're supposed to be, but that doesn't mean that in some or even most cases it was not discussed with them.

I kinda agree with this, but if they couldn't be bothered to do basic paperwork, how do we know they did the notifications?


Ask for better book keeping then, that's all good. The Doctors I know all hate all the paperwork they have to do already, but this is important enough to justify a better process.

However, this does not justify the Daily Fails headlines, or their insinuation that 60000 old people are going to be unknowingly and involuntarily euthanized while conscious.

Basically, the Daily Mail just sucks. The Fox News of tabloids.
 
2012-12-31 01:45:32 AM

Bonanza Jellybean: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x584]

Come on, she's gonna be just fine. Whattaya mean she wasn't consulted about her care despite being clearly "conscious." Keep spending a shiatload on palliative care and life support just to keep her organs fuctioning for as long as possible. Life is sacred!


What part of "posed by a model" don't you understand?

/don't really care which side of the argument you're on, publishing the Fail's propaganda images is a no no.
 
Displayed 50 of 238 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report