What would you do?
Last month, a proposal to establish a U.S. Special Operations Command (SOCOM) Center for Excellence in Operational Neuroscience at Yale University died a not-so-quiet death. The broad goal of “operational neuroscience” is to use research on the human brain and nervous system to protect and give tactical advantage to U.S. warfighters in the field. Crucial questions remain unanswered about the proposed center’s mission and the unusual circumstances surrounding its demise. But just as importantly, this episode brings much needed attention to the morally fraught and murky terrain where partnerships between university researchers and national security agencies lie.
via Neuroscience, Special Forces, and Ethics at Yale | Psychology Today.
Hat Tip to James J. Hughes and the Institute for Emerging Ethics and Technology newsletter
Just one reason that Medicaid expansion is a bad idea. (There are more at the source.)
The GOP Governors who are expanding Medicaid at the behest of the federal government are helping to facilitate and accelerate this process, paving the way for full government run healthcare. Insurance companies will be unable to compete with the federal government, which is acting as both a player in the insurance market and also as the referee in the system, until private insurance companies cease to exist in healthcare.
via Connecting the Dots on Healthcare – Hal Scherz – Page 2.
I testified in front of the Texas House State Affairs Committee on Tuesday. The video is here, House State Affairs 2/20/13 (Free RealPlayer program required.) Mr. Raymond comes up at about 3:30 minutes in, and my effort starts at 8 minutes in. It’s short and sweet.)
HB 142, authored by Representative Richard Raymond of Texas’ House District 42 in Laredo, looks a lot like his HB 1829 from 2007. These are “clone and kill bills, which nominally ban cloning, but actually redefine cloning, and would force the killing of any human embryo intentionally killed by nuclear transplantation. HB 142 ignores the history of the last 6 years, and uses inaccurate terminology.
Watch this space for alternative language that would actually ban human cloning.
New on LifeEthics.org, my blog on medical technology and ethics, a post on the use of adult stem cells for the treatment of diabetic retinopathy.
Those regulations on penalties and exemptions for not buying insurance are not “final regulations” until after the comment period, which ends May 2, 2013 and a public hearing on May 29, 2013.
The IRS publication document can be found here, http://www.irs.gov/PUP/newsroom/REG-148500-12%20FR.pdf
Here’s how to comment
1. “Snail Mail,” or old fashioned paper letters and postcards –
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-148500-12), room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044.
2. Hand-deliver your comments –
“Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-148500-12), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC.”
3. Send comments by e-mail –
“electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-148500-12).”
4. In person at the public hearing:
“May 29, 2013, beginning at 10:00 a.m., in the Auditorium, Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC.”
Update 2/3/13: these are not “final regulations” until the comment period has passed. Information on comments to the IRS is appended st the end of this post.
We thought it couldn’t get worse:
(CNSNews.com) – In a final regulation issued Wednesday, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) assumed that under Obamacare the cheapest health insurance plan available in 2016 for a family will cost $20,000 for the year.
Under Obamacare, Americans will be required to buy health insurance or pay a penalty to the IRS.
via IRS: Cheapest Obamacare Plan Will Be $20,000 Per Family | CNS News.
Send your comments to
CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-148500-12), room 5203, Internal Revenue Service, PO Box 7604, Ben Franklin Station, Washington, DC 20044. Submissions may be hand-delivered Monday through Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. to CC:PA:LPD:PR (REG-148500-12), Courier’s Desk, Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, or
sent electronically via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at http://www.regulations.gov (IRS REG-148500-12).
The comment period ends May 2, 2013, and there will be a public hearing “May 29, 2013, beginning at 10:00 a.m., in the Auditorium, Internal Revenue Building, 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC.”
The IRS publication document can be found here, http://www.irs.gov/PUP/newsroom/REG-148500-12%20FR.pdf. The examples begin on page 67.
Gov. Rick Perry has reappointed seven members to the Texas Institute of Health Care Quality and Efficiency Board of Directors for terms to expire Jan. 31, 2017. The institute improves health care quality, accountability, education and cost to the state by encouraging health care provider collaboration, effective health care delivery models and coordination of health care services.
. . . Beverly Nuckols of New Braunfels is a board certified family physician. She is a member of the Texas Medical Association, Texas Academy of Family Physicians, Comal County Medical Association, and Texas Physicians Resource Council. She is a fellow of the American Academy of Family Physicians, and a board member and secretary of Texas Alliance for Life.
via Office of the Governor Rick Perry – [Appointment] Gov. Perry Reappoints Seven to Texas Institute of Health Care Quality and Efficiency Board of Directors.
Office of the Governor Rick Perry – [Appointment] Gov. Perry Reappoints Seven to Texas Institute of Health Care Quality and Efficiency Board of Directors.
The answer to the question I asked back in July, 2011, is “yes.”
Has the United States of America reached the Moment predicted by Alex de Tocqueville when he warned that,”The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public’s money?”
Worse, Congress has proven that “some animals are more equal than others” and that the majority – or their representatives – can take liberty and property from the minority for the benefit of the majority. (“Life” was already infringed by abortion laws.)
Forget for a moment that nearly half of the people in the US haven’t paid income taxes for years, and in fact, 1/5 don’t pay income taxes or payroll taxes, at all. (Their taxes are “negative,” meaning they get more from the Federal system than they pay.)

“Weary” wink?
Most people who don’t pay taxes understand that it’s wrong to take from others, and that good ethics do not demand that other people give them stuff, no matter how much the “rich” have. Nevertheless, the Golfing President from Hawaii (not Illinois) demonizes people who “only” pay 35%-40%.
That 39.6% tax rate on “the rich” will effectively be closer to 41%, since personal deductions and itemized deductions are being phased out or eliminated for those earning more than $300,000. Add in the 3.8% “the unearned income Medicare contribution tax,” and we’re creeping toward 50%.
Welcome to Newspeak.
Grover Norquist says a vote for tax increases is a vote for permanent tax decreases. (Yes, some is better than none, but let’s be honest – the Bill is a tax increase that’s not balanced by cuts in spending.)
How about the extension of unemployment benefits for another year or, better yet, retro-active tax benefits for those who use trains, buses, trolleys or trams to go to work? $230 per month for tickets and another $240 or more per month for parking!
Another “back door tax” resulting from the Bill passed by the House and Senate over the last 2 days is a delay in tax refunds. Since many who were taxed under the Alternative Minimum Tax won’t know their real tax rate for 2012 until mid- February or so, they can’t file and can’t get their money back from the IRS.
11:30 p.m. ET – Obama will depart the White House late Tuesday, the White House announced, to resume his vacation in Hawaii. He left his family on the island earlier this week, putting his vacation on hold and returning to Washington to deal with the fiscal cliff negotiations.
via Latest updates: House approves fiscal cliff bill – CNN Political Ticker – CNN.com Blogs.
30 day review and comment, dump of regulations, and still no one knows what we’re dealing with, come January 1st:
To take one example, for the better part of a year states and groups like the bipartisan National Governors Association and the National Association of Medicaid Directors have been begging HHS merely for information about how they’re required to make ObamaCare work in practice. There was radio silence from Washington, with time running out. Louisiana and other states even took to filing Freedom of Information Act requests, which are still pending.
Now post-election, new regulations are pouring out from HHS—more than 13,000 pages so far and yet nuts-and-bolts questions are still unanswered. Most of what we know so far comes from a 17-page question-and-answer document that HHS divulged this week, though none of the answers have the force of law and HHS says they’re subject to change at any moment.
HHS is generally issuing rules with only 30 days for public comment when the standard is 60 days and for complex regulations 90 days and more. But the larger problem is that HHS’s Federal Register filings reveal many of the rules were approved in-house and ready to go as early as May. Why the delay?
****
In other implementation hilarity, no fewer than 18 Democratic Senators and Senators-elect came out last week against ObamaCare’s $28 billion tax on medical device sales—and not just the usual penitents from Massachusetts and Minnesota. The list includes Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and Patty Murray.
“With this year quickly drawing to a close, the medical device industry has receive little guidance about how to comply with the tax—causing significant uncertainty and confusion for businesses,” they write about the tax most of them voted for.
The last entitlement to get off the ground was President Bush’s Medicare prescription drug benefit. Those rules were tied up with a bow by January 2005, giving business and government nearly a year to prepare—and that was far simpler than re-engineering 17% of the economy. No one knows where the current magical mystery tour is headed, especially not HHS. via Review & Outlook: It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad ObamaCare – WSJ.com.
Note that the providers are up to date and much more widespread than the few PP clinics. The numbers of patients served in 2011 are all before the new program was established along with the outreach by DSHS to contract with more doctors and clinics.
The dots represent approved state women’s health program providers as of October, such as clinics or private physician practices. Many have more than than one doctor at the location.The color designates the number of Medicaid Women’s Health Program clients the provider saw in fiscal 2011, the most recent year data is available.
via Map: Approved women’s health program providers in North Texas | Dallas-Fort Worth Breaking News – News for Dallas, Texas – The Dallas Morning News.
Just in time for all those same-sex newly-weds in the state of Washington, the Obama Administration and Democrat-pushed ObamaCare taxes will kick in, taxing married couples as one for the first time since Social Security and Medicare taxes were instituted as “payroll taxes.”
From the New York Times:
Among the most affluent fifth of households, those affected will see tax increases averaging $6,000 next year, economists estimate.
To help finance Medicare, employees and employers each now pay a hospital insurance tax equal to 1.45 percent on all wages. Starting in January, the health care law will require workers to pay an additional tax equal to 0.9 percent of any wages over $200,000 for single taxpayers and $250,000 for married couples filing jointly.
The new taxes on wages and investment income are expected to raise $318 billion over 10 years, or about half of all the new revenue collected under the health care law.
Ruth M. Wimer, a tax lawyer at McDermott Will & Emery, said the taxes came with “a shockingly inequitable marriage penalty.” If a single man and a single woman each earn $200,000, she said, neither would owe any additional Medicare payroll tax. But, she said, if they are married, they would owe $1,350. The extra tax is 0.9 percent of their earnings over the $250,000 threshold.
Since the creation of Social Security in the 1930s, payroll taxes have been levied on the wages of each worker as an individual. The new Medicare payroll is different. It will be imposed on the combined earnings of a married couple.
The NYT article advises us all, that since our employers may not (!) know how much our spouses make, we need to make sure our employers take out enough taxes each pay period or to begin making extra estimated payments on our own.
Hitting the debt ceiling, borrowing 40 cents of every dollar we spend, and about to go over the “fiscal cliff” if a compromise isn’t worked out. The Obama strategy is to spend more, borrow more and pretty much sabotage the “bipartisan” deal.
How grand is that?
And who does the New York Times blame?
via Republicans Balk at Obama’s Short-Term Stimulus – NYTimes.com.
The Obama administration is arguing that the sluggish economy requires a shot in the arm, and it included tens of billions of dollars of little-noticed stimulus measures in its much-noticed proposal to Congressional leaders last week. But Republicans have countered that the country cannot afford to widen the deficit further, and have balked at including the measures in any eventual deal.
Maybe they could tax all lottery winnings at 100%?
The actual liabilities of the federal government—including Social Security, Medicare, and federal employees’ future retirement benefits—already exceed $86.8 trillion, or 550% of GDP. For the year ending Dec. 31, 2011, the annual accrued expense of Medicare and Social Security was $7 trillion. Nothing like that figure is used in calculating the deficit. In reality, the reported budget deficit is less than one-fifth of the more accurate figure.
Why haven’t Americans heard about the titanic $86.8 trillion liability from these programs? One reason: The actual figures do not appear in black and white on any balance sheet. But it is possible to discover them. Included in the annual Medicare Trustees’ report are separate actuarial estimates of the unfunded liability for Medicare Part A the hospital portion, Part B medical insurance and Part D prescription drug coverage.
As of the most recent Trustees’ report in April, the net present value of the unfunded liability of Medicare was $42.8 trillion. The comparable balance sheet liability for Social Security is $20.5 trillion.
via Cox and Archer: Why $16 Trillion Only Hints at the True U.S. Debt – WSJ.com.
Governor Rick Perry explains why Texas won’t create a State Obamacare health insurance exchange:
Setting aside the obvious fact that health insurance is readily available under current conditions — the problem has been price, not availability — these exchanges represent nothing more than another federal power grab in the guise of a supposedly free market.
States were given the option to set up and execute their own exchanges — at their own expense. The fine print, however, specified that the exchanges would have to follow all rules and guidelines imposed by the federal government, with little to no flexibility. The kicker: Many of these rules and regulations are unknown.
Again, this is par for the course as we continue down the road to fiscal disaster at the hands of ObamaCare.
In Texas, Medicaid spending already accounts for nearly 25% of our general revenue spending, and its costs are only expected to continue skyrocketing.
While the president has promised to subsidize states for Medicaid costs in the near term, in the long term, states are going to be on their own.
ObamaCare has already begun to affect many companies, too, with some publicly announcing plans for layoffs in order to make up for increased insurance-related costs.
via Rick Perry: ‘Another federal power grab’.
Governor Rick Perry wrote a letter to Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sibelius:
Gov. Perry’s letter said. “It would not be fiscally responsible to put hard-working Texans on the financial hook for an unknown amount of money to operate a system under rules that have not even been written.”
via Office of the Governor Rick Perry – [Press Release] Gov. Perry: Texas Will Not Implement State Insurance Exchange Under Obamacare.
The Texas Institute for Health Care Quality and Efficiency Draft Report is posted for public comment.
You only have a day and a half to comment, since the next meeting of our Board of Directors is Thursday, November 15th. All comments should be sent by 1 PM on Wednesday, November 14th.
Report to the Texas Legislature on Activities to Improve Health Care Quality and Efficiency
Report Number: 2012-001
The following downloads are available:
Report 2012-001: 2012-001-Draft-Report.pdf
Appendix E: AppendixE.pdf
Appendix F: AppendixF.pdf
Instructions on submitting your comments are here.
Now, for a few comments on my observations as a Board member:
Believe it or not, the time frame from the passage of the legislation in SB 7 last June, 2011, to today and in anticipation of preparing for legislation beginning in January, 2013, is too tight. The Institute’s staff and coordinators did a good job of herding cats in the Board. In addition, the Board members worked hard to make all the meetings, to participate, and to contribute. We have met at least once a month, sometimes more than twice, since our appointment. The Board isn’t paid or even reimbursed for expenses by the State, and many gave up work in order to attend meetings far from their homes.
I haven’t commented on the draft until now, because the Board received our first full copy for review and comment on November 2, and comments were due by 5 PM, Election Day, November 6th. We’re all appointed by the Governor — it stands to reason that a few of us would be actively involved in the election and campaigns. I didn’t even open the email until Nov. 7.
I’m not happy with the length of the report, but I guess the nuances of our discussions over the last few months needed to be documented somewhere. Go to the page 34 in the pdf, numbered “26” in the Draft, for the actual recommendations made by vote in the Board meetings.
Finally, my main concern has been with the bureaucracy and regulation that the members of the Board have sometimes appeared to support. In the end, I believe that we have limited recommendations for regulation and “hassle factors” more than some would like. My hope is that the Legislature will decide to focus initially on implementing any new measures in our own State health plans and not interfere directly in private health care practice and systems, except where and when the State foots the bill.
Since President Obama won reelection, I believe that the ability of the 83rd Texas Legislature to adapt and react to Federal Regulations – Obamacare – will be improved by the work of the Institute.
Next stop: getting our money back from the Feds!
Granted a legal victory Thursday by a federal appeals court, state officials said they will begin working quickly to exclude Planned Parenthood from the Women’s Health Program, which provides contraceptives and health care to low-income women.
The state also reversed course on funding for the health program, saying it would seek to have the federal government continue funding it, rather than switching to a state-funded program as planned.
“In Texas we choose life, and we will immediately begin defunding all abortion affiliates to honor and uphold that choice,” Gov. Rick Perry said.
Thursday’s ruling by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was expected because it reaffirmed an August opinion that said Texas could legally exclude Planned Parenthood — or any organization that provides abortions or promotes the procedure — from the program.
But in a new wrinkle, state officials said the court victory will prompt them to press the federal government to continue providing money for the program — a reversal of U.S. policy that could save tens of millions of dollars in state money but is unlikely to happen without a fight.
via Texas seeks to keep federal money for women’s health program | www.statesman.com.
Think you can keep your doctor under ObamaCare? Look around at how many of your neighbors have lost their docs just this year, due to the new hassle factors, including mandates for electronic medical records, constant threats of cuts, and repeated delays in payment and changes in the rules.
For the last 10 to 20 years, the question has been whether your doc would keep seeing you after you turned 65 and became Medicare eligible.
Over the next couple of years, the question will be whether your doc will still practice. If he or she does, the question will be whether he will be allowed by law to continue to see you and how the local hospitals divide up all the ObamaCare “exchange” patients. If you’re very lucky, your doc, who will be forced to chose one and only one of the “Accountable Care Organizations,” will choose the same one you’re assigned to.
The Physician Foundation surveyed over 13,000 doctors about their plans for practicing as the regulations and requirements for ObamaCare kick in. The result of the survey, the largest in U.S. history, reveal that over the next 4 years, more than 50% of docs are planning to cut back their hours or services, change to a concierge, cash only, practice or quit the practice of medicine altogether.
The report is here, and this is the Executive Summary:
Executive Summary: American patients are likely to experience significant and increasing challenges in accessing care if current physician practice patterns trends continue, according to a comprehensive new survey of practicing physicians. One of the largest physician surveys ever undertaken in the U.S., the research was commissioned by The Physicians Foundation.
Physicians are working fewer hours, seeing fewer patients and limiting access to their practices in light of significant changes to the medical practice environment, according to the research, titled “A Survey of America’s Physicians: Practice Patterns and Perspectives.” The research estimates that if these patterns continue, 44,250 full-time-equivalent (FTE) physicians will be lost from the workforce in the next four years. The survey also found that over the next one to three years, more than 50 percent of physicians will cut back on patients seen, work part-time, switch to concierge medicine, retire, or take other steps likely to reduce patient access. In addition, should 100,000 physicians transition from practice-owner to employed status over the next four years (such as working in a hospital setting), the survey indicates that this will lead to 91 million fewer patient encounters.
via A Survey of America’s Physicians: Practice Patterns and Perspectives.
A fellow Texas Medical Association member asked me today how I felt about TexPAC – was it even worth giving them money and “what about their endorsements for judges?” He had been surprised to notice the TMA’s endorsement of some Democrat candidates after the Judicial endorsements caught his eye. (He even asked whether the list was just a pet of some of the more wealthy docs in the TMA.)
I explained that, while the TMA generally opposes ObamaCare, the Association unfortunately has what they call the “friendly incumbent” rule. I also agreed that the policy doesn’t explain all of the choices on the TexPAC list. But for the most part, It’s virtually a given that the PAC endorses the incumbent in a race, even if the candidate doesn’t agree with the TMA on such vital issues as ObamaCare and the (Un-) Sustainable Growth Rate (“SGR”) or even the “RAC audits.” (“Recovery Audit Contractors” – *private* contractors who audit Medicare “providers” – doctors and hospitals, and earn more for finding more “fraudandabuse.”)
The policy – along with the heavy-handedness of some of the leaders of the PAC – leads to such debacles as their mistaken endorsement of Jeff Wentworth, who opposed tort reform, over Dr. Donna Campbell, the eventual winner (by a 2 to 1 vote!) of the Texas Senate District 25 Republican Primary,
I suggested that he include a note about his disagreements with the PAC in any check he writes in the future. As for this election, I advised my friend – who is very opposed to ObamaCare – to ignore any recommendation that didn’t have an “R” for “Republican” in front of the candidate’s name – especially when it comes to the candidates for our Third Court of Appeals: Scott Fields is a much better choice for conservative voters than the incumbent. (I could say the same about Congressional District 35, where I hope my neighbors will vote for Susan Narvaiz, rather than Layoff Lloyd Doggett.)
Did you hear about the 90 people, doctors and nurses, and “healthcare professionals” who were arrested for $430M in Medicare fraud? About a fourth of that money went to the Houston hospital where Mrs. Jackson-Lee’s husband is on the Board of Directors.
Since her days on the Houston City Council, Jackson Lee has pushed to use city funds to keep Riverside’s doors open. At that time, the councilwoman suggested that the facility was a good investment for the city.
Jackson Lee’s interest in Riverside goes back to the ’80s when her husband Elwyn C. Lee, now University of Houston vice-chancellor (see video), served on Riverside’s board from 1981-1988. In his last year at Riverside, Mr. Lee was made chairman of that board, and over the years, husband and wife have been influential in keeping the financially strapped hospital open. Jackson Lee was voted into Congress in 1994, representing the 18th district, where Riverside is located.
The president of Riverside, his son, and five others were arrested on October 4 as part of a nationwide Medicare fraud sweep. Earnest Gibson III, chief executive officer of Riverside General Hospital for 30 years, has been charged with bilking $158 million out of Medicare over the last seven years.
His son, Earnest Gibson IV, was charged with thirteen counts, including money-laundering and conspiracy to commit health care fraud. The older Gibson became president around the same time Jackson Lee’s husband was appointed to the board in the early ’80s.
Friday’s arrests at Riverside came nine months after the arrest of Mohammad Khan, the hospital’s acting administrator, who pled guilty to his role in the Medicare fraud scheme and is now serving time.
via Articles: Systemic Medicare Fraud Under Houston’s Sheila Jackson Lee.
The Directors haven’t been charged with any crime, but don’t you think they should have been aware of questionable billing practices?
Health care policy expert, Sally C. Pipes, spoke to our @D4PC meeting this morning about the Benjamin Rush Society. The Society is an organization that she founded in order to inform and enable medical students and residents to defend the traditional medical ethic that the doctor should work for the patient, not a third party, and “certainly not one that wields the coercive force of law.”
While the topic of the talk was the Benjamin Rush Society, Ms. Pipes also discussed her own experience as a former citizen of Canada and about her mother’s death from colon cancer after being refused a colonoscopy under the Canadian health care system. The reason given was that “Seniors” weren’t given colonoscopies and that those under 65 years old had a several months long waiting period, even if bleeding. When Ms. Pipes’ mother began bleeding from the colon, she spent 3 days in the Emergency Department and passed away 2 weeks later with metastatic colon cancer.
There were also comments from members in the audience about the United Kingdom’s National Health Service, which has even longer wait times for services, including heart surgery.
Ms. Pipes is married to Charles Kesler, whose book, I AM the Change, Barack Obama and the Crisis of Liberalism, will be released on September 11. Mr. Kesler spoke to out group yesterday.
Robin Alta Charo, the lawyer/ethicist-for-hire, one time Clinton advisor turned Obama transition advisor then FDA consultant, has been appointed to 2 new positions at the National Institutes of Health.
In her new role, Charo will advise on ethical and regulatory issues raised by translational research, such as privacy and civil rights concerns raised by research using human tissues residing in large biobanks or public health implications of deploying genetics and personalized medicine to target drug development toward narrower segments of the population. She will also participate in overseeing the peer review process for research proposals submitted to NCATS.
Ms. Charo, the inventor of the “Endarkenment,” supports sex-selection abortion, believes cloning will finally prove there’s no God, and frequently writes op-eds for the New England Journal of Medicine, specializing in her opposition to conscience rights. She likens Medicine to a “public utility, obligated to provide service to all who seek it. Claiming an unfettered right to personal autonomy while holding monopolistic control over a public good constitutes an abuse of the public trust — all the worse if it is not in fact a personal act of conscience but, rather, an attempt at cultural conquest.”
Please consider getting your Whooping Cough vaccine.
By the time you start coughing, we can’t change your course – you will probably cough for the next month or more. The new pertussis vaccine in the “D-TaP” or “T-DaP” is “acellular,” not the old one that so many worried about in the past. http://www.immunize.org/catg.d/p4212.pdf
From the Texas Medical Association’s “Me and My Doctor:”
Texas Department of State Health Services Commissioner David Lakey, MD, issued an advisory yesterday urging Texans to protect themselves and their loved ones from pertussis (whooping cough) by getting vaccinated. An increase in cases this year claimed the lives of six children — two of whom were infants — and sickened more than 1,000. That’s the highest number of pertussis victims since 2005. Texas doctors urge families to avoid tragedy by vaccinating their children and themselves from this deadly disease. Read More:
“By Doctors . . . For Patients.” It’s about the patient, who is the only boss the doctor should have, other than his or her own conscience and integrity.
I’m attending my first annual meeting of Docs4PatientCare this weekend, in Crystal City, Virginia, just over the river from Washington, DC. I stumbled upon D4PC following links from American Doctors for Truth last March.
Doctors 4 Patient Care stands in stark contrast to – and as a viable alternative to – the American Medical Association. The AMA has become a partner with the US government through the publication and sale of mandatory “code books,” and increasingly with its advocacy for government funded healthcare coverage, especially by its endorsement of “ObamaCare,” even before the law (much less the ever-evolving regulations) was written.
So far this morning, we’ve heard from the founder of D4PC Dr. Hal Scherz, an advocate for reaching medical students through the Benjamin Rush Society, Beth Haynes, an expert on Media Strategy and Training, Ernest DelBuono, Sr., and two speakers on reforming medical liability (tort reform), Dr. Jeff Segal of “Medical Justice,” and Rick Jackson of “Patients for Fair Compensation.”
I’ll post more through the weekend. In the meantime, read a some of the D4PC literature, “Like” Docs4PatientCare on Facebook and/or follow @D4PC on Twitter. Watch a few of the D4PC videos on YouTube. Consider supporting the efforts of the group and/or to donating money. There’s even an alliance membership for non-physicians.
It’s difficult to write about a respected medical journal which promotes “Aid in Dying” without resorting to emotional words such as “horrifying,” “shocking,” or “murder,” but I’ll try. However, I will not call the practice “physician aided death” or “aid in dying.” It is, at best “physician assisted suicide,” and at worst, “euthanasia,” or the use of medical technology and procedures to actively end the life – to intentionally kill – a patient. This is not “medicine” as I understand it.
Chest is the journal of the American College of Chest Physicians. These are the Internal Medicine subspecialists who focus on lung disease, cardiac care, and sleep medicine. They are likely to be the doctors who care for the most vulnerable patients, especially in the Intensive Care Unit at your hospital.
Under the heading “Medical Ethics,” in the July, 2012 issue is an article titled, “Aid in Dying: Guidance for an Emerging End-of-Life Practice,” authored by Kathryn L. Tucker, J.D. The article is available online as a web page, here, and as in pdf., here.
Beginning with a principle that virtually all of us can agree with,the right to refuse intentional medical intervention, the article quickly moves to the very controversial opinion that the first principle ensures the “right” to request “treatment” that is intended to end the life of the patient – to kill:
•A patient with decision-making capacity has the legal right to refuse or request the withdrawal of any medical treatment or intervention, regardless of whether he or she is terminally ill and regardless of whether the treatment prolongs life and its withdrawal results in death.
•A patient with decision-making capacity has the legal right to request and receive as much pain medication as necessary for relief, even if it advances the time of death.
•Principles of autonomy that underlie respecting patient rights to refuse or direct withdrawal of life-prolonging interventions or to request pain medication even if it advances time of death support the choice for aid in dying. Aid in dying is increasingly accepted in law and medicine in the United States.
•Provision of aid in dying does not constitute assisting a suicide or euthanasia. Aid in dying is a practice with growing support in the public and medical and health policy communities and is likely to become more widely requested in the future.
•A clinician cannot be compelled to provide treatment that conflicts with his or her personal values. In these circumstances, the clinician cannot abandon the patient but should refer the patient to a colleague who is willing to provide the service.
Four prima facie principles have been used to characterize most ethical concerns in medicine: respect for patient autonomy, beneficence, nonmaleficence, and justice. Respect for patient autonomy refers to the duty to respect patients and their rights of self-determination; beneficence refers to the duty to promote patient interests; nonmaleficence refers to the duty to prevent harm to patients; and justice refers, in part, to the duty to treat patients and distribute health-care resources fairly.11 When applied to the care of an individual patient, however, these principles may conflict with one another. For example, a patient’s values, preferences, and goals may be at odds with a clinician’s perception of how best to help and not harm the patient. Clinical ethics identify, analyze, and provide guidance on how to resolve these conflicts.
While I believe that there may come a time when it is ethical to stop trying to keep a patient alive – when treatment is only making the dying process longer – I will never assist in an act that can only end in the death of my patient. The way I explain this is that I will assist in removing a ventilator under certain circumstances, but I won’t then put a pillow over the patient’s face to make sure she can’t breathe on her own afterwards. The intent of medicine is to diagnose and treat disease, not to end the life of patients suffering from disease.
Guess what? States are allowed to decide what they want to spend tax money on!
From the ruling by the Fifth Circuit Court on Texas’ Law prohibiting our Family Planning tax funds from going to any “affiliate” of an abortion provider or anyone who “promotes” abortion: ”
Although this restriction functions as a speech-based funding condition, it also functions as a direct regulation of the content of a state program, and is therefore constitutional . . . “[W]hen the government appropriates public funds to promote a particular policy of its own it is entitled to say what it wishes.” Rosenberger, 515 U.S. at 833 (citing Rust, 500 U.S. at 194).
Needless to say, the press, including the Texas Tribune and theAustin Chronicle disagree with this ruling, the latter more obviously than the former.
Once again, please look at the Texas Tribune’s own interactive map or the State’s data base of doctors and clinics who have contracted with Texas’ WHP. Those Planned Parenthood clinics aren’t located in health care shortage areas. There are no shortages of willing providers for the services in question in the areas surrounding the abortion affiliates.
Not all of the members of Texas Medical Association agree with the TMA on this.
The San Antonio Express News published an editorial August 9th, by O. Ricardo Pimentel, entitled, “Texas tries to get between you, your doctor:”
For them, the issue isn’t abortion; it’s about the doctor-patient relationship, patient health and the ability to put everything on the table that needs to be discussed. Even if it’s abortion.
In a recent letter to the state, the Texas Medical Association, joined by other medical groups, said Texas is about to embark on a plan for providing medical care to low-income women that will impose a “gag order” on discussing abortion even on doctors working with patients not in the program.
Other groups, weighing in during the public comment period on proposed state rules, have similar concerns.
It’s a plan, they say, that will ensure not enough doctors for this program willing to provide care, including family planning services. And this, they say, will guarantee more unintended pregnancies, more abortions and more illness that might have been prevented for low-income women.
Among those also commenting on the rules were the Center for Public Policy Priorities, and leaders of Planned Parenthood entities in the state, South Texas groups among them.
Trust me, for everyone who is mentioned above, it’s about abortion. The law doesn’t stop anyone from discussing or even promoting true contraception that doesn’t end the life of our youngest children of tomorrow.
And it is about “elective abortions:” those that are performed on health babies in healthy mothers. We’re not talking about the more controversial abortions in cases of rape and incest, much less in the cases of congenital disorders that are “not compatible with life outside the womb and certainly not in cases where the mother’s life is in danger. Since when do elective abortions “need to be discussed?”
How difficult is it to understand that Texas taxpayers should not pay for “promotion” of abortion? Or that we most certainly do not want our State tax funds to go to doctors who perform elective abortions on healthy babies and healthy mothers?
While I don’t speak for the Society, I am an elected delegate for my County Medical Society to the TMA House of Delegates and I believe that most of our members would agree with me on this. I am very much in favor of restricting payment from our limited State funds to only those doctors and organizations that provide comprehensive and continuing medical care for the whole woman and her whole family. With Texas Family Doctors, Internal Medicine Docs, Pediatricians and OB/Gyns reeling from the lack of increasing fees from Medicare and decreases in Medicaid funding, why not help keep them in business by adding the availability of billing the State for screening tests like pap smears, exams for breast masses, diabetes and high blood pressure?
In fact, that’s what the Legislature decided: that money would be prioritized. First come the comprehensive care docs, hospitals, and county and city clinics. Planned Parenthood is never mentioned, although there is a section of the law that absolutely prohibits the State from contracting with anyone who “promotes” abortion *if there are other qualified providers available.*
Texas DHS has already identified more than enough doctors and clinics that qualify under the law. These doctors can actually treat the diseases for which the Texas Women’s Health Plan screens. Our Texas Legislature made a wise decision when they agreed that it doesn’t make sense to send our few dollars to a clinic that treats a very narrow medical spectrum in an intermittent manner.
And the law has already saved human lives: Austin city and Travis County taxes once paid for 400 elective abortions each year. A year ago, the law achieved what the taxpayers who protested this use of their money couldn’t do: Austin and Travis County health clinics were forced to stop funding those abortions.
If you have a family doctor, consider a polite call to his or her front desk asking them to let the TMA know their views on using Texas’ tax funds to support Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers.
You might also consider contacting Texas Alliance for Life and/or you local Crisis Pregnancy Center to let them know that you support their efforts to keep your State (and federal) tax funds from paying for the ending of lives of our Texans of tomorrow.
Based on the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of our United States is designed to secure our rights to life, liberty and property for every human being, not just the ones who can speak out. Those of us who can speak, should join in the effort to protect the rights of all, including the unborn children of tomorrow, male and female, and everyone who objects to government-sponsored efforts to end their lives. The recent Obama mandate that infringes on the First Amendment protection of the right of free exercise of religion and their on-going efforts to force Texas to fund Planned Parenthood with State taxes is in direct violation of the Bill of Rights.
I received an email tonight from the group, “Women Speak for Themselves” asking for comments on next Saturday’s Washington, DC rally sponsored by pro-abortion, anti-family and anti-First Amendment rights groups:
This Saturday, on the National Capitol lawn, Think Progress (a George Soros funded group) is hosting a “We Are Women” rally. Soros’ group, along with some of their co-sponsors, the usual—the National Organization of Women, Planned Parenthood, and the National Women’s Political Caucus—along with some more peculiar groups—Rock The Slut Vote, The National Center for Transgender Equality, and the Reformed Whores entertainers, among others—have a specific goal in mind.
“Our mission,” their website reads, “is to bring national attention to the ongoing war on women’s rights…”
Not surprisingly, the language on their website gives the appearance that they’re claiming to speak for all women on matters of healthcare, family, and freedom…which makes this just the type of event at which we need to make our voices heard! And so, here’s where YOU come in.
Prior to the rally, we’ll be releasing a statement to the press, informing them that there are women with alternative views on these matters, should the press wish to include us in the discussion. We’d like to add YOUR voices to that statement.
Send us a brief statement (2-3 sentences), articulating why as a woman you stand for and believe freedom includes protection for life, family, and/or religion. Be sure to include your full name, city and state, and your occupation, if you’d like—along with permission for us to include your information and quote in our press release.
If you’re not sure where to start, feel free to use our two sets of talking points for ideas (though your statement need not be solely focused on the HHS mandate), and try to stay focused on why you’re FOR our view of women’s freedom, as opposed to AGAINST the view of women’s freedom being put forth by Soros and cohorts.
Thanks for your help with this….I look forward to your statements!
My best to you,
Helen
http://womenspeakforthemselves.com/
https://www.facebook.com/WomenSpeakForThemselves
https://twitter.com/womenspeak2012
P.S. I’m told some pro-lifers will be gathering at the North Capitol Lawn on Saturday, to hold a counter protest. The rally starts at 11am, I believe, so feel free to head on over, with signs and pro-life gear, if you’d like to be a joyful example of the alternative.
I wish I could attend the counter protest, but I’m committed to a meeting for the Christian Medical and Dental Association that day. If you can attend, please do. Either way, send a message to http://womenspeakforthemselves.com/ or @womenspeak2012!
My idea for “Constitutional Solutions” for health care is up on the site. Take a look and second it, here.
Another place to read is under the Family Values and Faith-based Issues subheadings of Marriage and Family Values and Sanctity of Life. It seems the site is being bombarded by “Republicans” who want to get rid of these planks in our Platform. Please comment on the “ideas” that want to approve same sex marriage and get “pro-life” completely out of our Platform.
I wrote one of my (long) posts in response to “Remove Pro-life from the Party Platform,” here:
This idea can’t be considered by the Republican Party. The major difference between our Party and all others is the basic belief in and defense of the ideals embodied in the Declaration of Independence as well as the Constitution. In fact, the Constitution means nothing without the right to life. The freedom from tyranny that the Constitution preserves is nothing without the security “that all men are created equal and endowed by God with *unalienable* rights, …Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” The definition of human being is scientific, it’s not arbitrary or dependent on stage of life or geography. Once we stop assuming that all human individuals are endowed with these rights and allow the government to decide which humans are human enough to have these inalienable rights protected by the force of law, we all become slaves to the majority, whether that majority is in numbers or the power of the biggest guns. We are the only species having this conversation.