This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
We actively work to ban assisted suicide (Mass currently has an initiative re: assisted suicide)
Les
My point is we are very conflicted in our views not that I am sure what is right. People hold views but do not think about what the fallout of those views can be. Example- Clinic in local HS dispensed BC and did education regarding prevention of pregnancy. Rates of pregnancy went way down. The numbers were astounding in a fairly short period of time. Funding was cut to these programs to 'balance the budget' and because there were those who weren't in agreement that govt should fund this type of venture. Rates went up significantly. This had the unintended affect of costing a lot of cash because a) the pregnancy medical costs b)the baby has medical costs c) mother can't afford daycare so can't work. This funding was eventually restored but not at the previous level and the numbers decreased again. We can argue all we want about the principle of the thing but the reality is that there are young people who have sex no matter what we think about the morality. That costs MONEY. We don't want to provide educationbecause of cost and morality but that is proven to decrease early sex .
There needs to be a like button on here
Young people have sex?!!!! This has never happened in the history of the species! Surely this is some greater sign of moral decay! If only we could go back to the old days where kids in today's middleschool would be starting families this would fix itself!
I think it is more a function of the fact that those of us who have been in medicine for a long time (and in my case it is now a long, long time) know what good medical practice should be. What is being foisted on the public (here and other countries) is medicine as determined by the dollar. It would not be so bad-if the powers that be were honest about it and explained that what they are suggesting is being done SOLELY for the purpose of saving money and in fact that practicing cheap medicine can at times be worse than practicing no medicine. But to keep trying to ram down our throats that they are just interested in our benefit and providing BETTER care is baloney. I do not see the health plans for the politicians in Washington limiting their access to care and in fact, they do not limit their medications to generic drugs. I am pretty sure when a Senator (like Ted Kennedy) needed care for his brain tumor that cost was never an issue to his insurer and that he was immediately approved for experimental, untested, therapies that you and i could never get and that his medications were top branded and perhaps even being used off label and not the Tier one commonly used generics that our health plans would limit us with. We will of course never know but it sure would be interesting to see what percentage of their medical care Congressmen are personally responsible for compared to what the rest of us are burdened with.
I have said in the past and actually believe this-what the government would see as the ideal case is that you live until age 65-contributing to the medicare fund for all your working life-and then just drop dead so you never need to collect anything from the fund.
