Death Panels Are Here: 10 Year Old Girl Sentenced To Die Due To Federal Regulations

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Deleted member 472633, Jun 4, 2013.

  1. http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/02/health/pennsylvania-girl-lungs
     
     
    This is what happens when the government gets involved in health care.
     
    Who knows how many other little boys and girls have died because of this government regulation. 

     
  2. How would you prioritize the waiting list?
    Also, just for the record; this Act has been in place since 1984. :smoke:  
     
  3. The government should not be involved at all. Because of a stupid ass regulation they are causing a girl to die and yet of course you support them. The government could blow up a school bus full of children and you would still support them. In fact with this war on "terror" i am sure they have already. I forgot I was going to put you on ignore. Time to fix that.
     
  4. there are regualtions for a reason.
     
  5. She's not dead yet; from the article it still seems like there might be hope. If I was in charge, I would gladly illegally give her a pair of lungs if such were available. She is at the top of this "list" for goodness sake. 
     
    Also, aren't OBAMA's death panels supposed to be in the FEMA death camps? (alert: this is sarcasm. alert this is sarcasm)
     
  6. Well that is pretty petty of you.
     
    You believe I support the current system because I ask how you would prioritize it?
     
    It is a deep question and there is no simple answer.
     
    I believe government acted because of doctors and lawyers wanting a system. Other civilized Countries also have a system in place. To the governments credit, at least they understand the current system has flaws and they desire to fine tune it better. :smoke:
     
  7. [​IMG]
     
  8.  
     
     
    He merely asked a question. But judging on your responses to these posts you consider anyone who doesn't agree with you , or that challenges you, a sheep-person.
     
    It's an ugly situation yes, but try to go about it with a little more understanding and don't expect everyone to all the sudden start burning flags in agreement with you.
     
  9. It doesn't matter how long its been there.

    The point is thanks to.government regulations a girl that could be saved.might die

    Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app

     
  10. You might as well have added obama to your post title, since nothing else in the title seems accurate.
     
  11. This can't be the only such case, and the adult lungs are probably not used for children for very good reasons.  I do not know anything about the science of it, but say she has a 10% chance of surviving with adult lungs, but an adult has a 50% chance, the adult should receive the lung and the child should wait for an organ that would provide a better transplant and recovery.      
     
  12. Pretty misleading title, you should work in the media
     
  13. god damn beurocracy and red tape and shit, fuck regulations just do what needs to be done. if a kid can be saved then do it, fuck paperwork.
     
  14. Perhaps instead of reacting emotionally we should look into how the decision to transplant is determined. Here is a brief description from an interesting site.
     
    Contrary to popular belief, waiting on the list for a transplant is not like taking a number at the deli counter and waiting for your turn to order. In some respects, even the word "list" is misleading; the list is really a giant pool of patients. There is no ranking or patient order until there is a donor, because each donor's blood type, size and genetic characteristics are different. Therefore, when a donor is entered into the national computer system, the patients that match that donor, and therefore the "list," is different each time.
     
    and this:
     
    Patients on the waiting list are in end-stage organ failure and have been evaluated by a transplant physician at hospitals in the U.S. where organ transplants are performed. Policies that dictate organ allocation are created and revised through a consensus-building process that involves UNOS committees and a board of directors, all composed of transplant physicians, government officials, specialists in immunology and experts in organ donation, as well as donor families, transplant recipients and members of the general public. Any proposed changes to the organ allocation rules are openly debated and published for public comment before being implemented.
     
    More can be learned here: http://www.organtransplants.org/understanding/unos/
     
    :smoke:
     
  15. That's irrelevent. The point is the regulation are preventing anyone from having any say in the matter.

    If the doctor said it can save her life who gets to tell him he is wrong?

    Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app

     
  16. The regulations do not prevent say in the matter.
    Copied from above;
     Policies that dictate organ allocation are created and revised through a consensus-building process that involves UNOS committees and a board of directors, all composed of transplant physicians, government officials, specialists in immunology and experts in organ donation, as well as donor families, transplant recipients and members of the general public.
     
    Is there a better way of doing it (please read the current system in my post above)? :smoke:
     
  17. The regulations do not prevent say in the matter.
    Copied from above;
    Policies that dictate organ allocation are created and revised through a consensus-building process that involves UNOS committees and a board of directors, all composed of transplant physicians, government officials, specialists in immunology and experts in organ donation, as well as donor families, transplant recipients and members of the general public.

    Is there a better way of doing it (please read the current system in my post above)? :smoke:
    </blockquote>
    That doesn't really refute what I said.

    You explained how the rules are created. But the fact.is that the rules are there and the.doctor has to abide by them even if he believed they are wrong

    Sent from my LG-E739 using Grasscity Forum mobile app

     
  18. Every good Doctor is going to try and get their patient a transplant when needed. Everyone of them will have patients who need the procedure to live. If there are not enough organs, some have to wait and hopefully survive until the right opportunity is there.
     
    Her Dr. can't make the decision alone. There has to be a system to prevent others from taking advantage of equally qualified applicants. :smoke:
     
  19. kinda stupid they won't even try to let her use the adult lungs....considering she might die soon, but because of federal regulations, they won't even allow them to try and help...now thats messed up
     
  20. Fuck this hits close to home as I have CF and will probably need a lung transplant at some point in my life. This is so sickening.
     

Share This Page