The front page of today's London Daily Telegraph. Welcome to what single payer is really like. pic.twitter.com/hYS6cMs3Fl
— Ari Fleischer (@AriFleischer) July 7, 2017
If the UK/Euro horror stories aren’t enough, our VA healthcare failures coupled with this is all we ‘unwashed masses’ need to know about government-run healthcare in the US…
‘People Are Dying Here’: Federal Hospitals Fail Native Americans – Indian Health Service facilities sanctioned for dangerous, faulty care, leaving often-impoverished patients on remote reservations without services required by law
In some of the nation’s poorest places, the government health service charged with treating Native Americans failed to meet minimum U.S. standards for medical facilities, turned away gravely ill patients and caused unnecessary deaths, according to federal regulators, agency documents and interviews.
The IHS, a unit of the Department of Health and Human Services, operates a network of hospitals and clinics, much like the Veterans Health Administration. Under U.S. treaties that date back generations, the service is legally responsible for providing medical care to about 2.2 million tribal members.
But that system has collapsed in the often-remote corners of Indian Country, where patients live hours from other medical providers, often have no insurance and depend on the federal service.
“We’ve lost faith in the IHS, but we have no alternatives to go anywhere else,” said Lisa White Pipe, a tribal council member for the Rosebud Sioux, whose father died last year after a delay in cancer treatment that she blames on the agency…
The problems have come to a head in recent months after IHS hospitals repeatedly failed inspections, shut down services or lost access to crucial federal funds. Such failures have prompted new calls for broader oversight of the IHS by Congress. The Rosebud tribe, whose reservation stretches across a rural swath of South Dakota, is also now suing the agency in federal court, alleging that the IHS has failed to fulfill its treaty responsibility to care for tribal members.
The latest crisis has arisen after the IHS and the Health Department failed to address a chorus of warnings over many years about neglect at the agency’s facilities. The warnings came from lawmakers in both parties, internal whistleblowers and the families of patients who died. Over and over, they reported that IHS hospitals were plagued by inadequate supplies, poor training, overwhelmed staff and critical positions left unfilled. […]
… After the initial outrage of the EU’s highest court denying Charlie’s parents the right to take their child to another country for medical care, the usual round of contrarian “you really don’t understand the real issue” posts began popping up.
This isn’t about Charlie’s chances to live. Anyone looking at the evidence and Charlie’s medical history can plainly see all signs point towards a sad ending. The doctors and hospital and even the high courts have come to the very reasonable conclusion that further medical intervention will not save this baby. He may not even have real brain function anymore. They aren’t wrong for recommending life support be removed.
But therein lies the rub. They are not simply recommending life support be removed. They are ordering two parents to remove the life support and watch their baby die. All choice has been removed from their hands in this matter.
Just try for one moment to imagine an anonymous court officer telling you that you are not empowered to make decisions for your child, but they are. Think about how outrageous you would find that.
These parents are only doing what we’ve all said we would do for our own precious children – anything. In this case, they’ve done that “anything” all by themselves. They are not asking the government to cover the costs, they are not demanding more services or more more money or more doctors. The Gards have raised all the funds, arranged the medical staff and transportation. Their request is painfully simple –
Let us take our son somewhere.
Charlie might live or Charlie might die. Their efforts may be fruitless. That isn’t the point…
The Gard family should be the only ones making the ultimate call on their son’s care. To suggest otherwise is terrifying. They have the right to make a choice, good or bad. This is their baby. Theirs.
The big problem with socialized medicine is that when the government controls your healthcare they can control any aspect of your daily life under the guise of “cost” … The Gards are British and this is the reality of the system they voluntarily live in. That isn’t the case. In fact, it is costing the British government more money to deny the Gards the right to leave than it would just to release him and escort him out of the hospital.
The fact that this doesn’t at all bother the contrarian crowd really bothers me. Especially those who claim to fall on the side of pro-life. This is a faceless bureaucracy legislating death instead of empowering their free citizens to make their own choices (and arrangements) for their own children and their medical care. It is about forcing people to suffer in a system that was supposed to be all about helping in the first place. […]
Because liberals/democrats say something is “free” doesn’t mean somebody isn’t paying for it…