You two are scaring me.

Originally Posted by islandgal

Chilling email I received this morning:
http://fredthompsonshow.com/premiums...lsaXN0U2l6ZT01

False Euthanasia Claims.
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/07/fal...anasia-claims/

fine for our family members, friends and neighbors all these years without having to be counseled by some beurocrat that as we discuss the subject barely knows how to spell some of the words whose objective is not your well being but reporting how much they saved by convincing one to not do something or medicine not to take or what the ever else they have on their list.

There are no positives in the clause what so ever. A very stupid, ill conceived notion on how to control costs.

Yes things like this scare me also when supposedly intelligent people not only buy into a concept they do not fully understand AND go so far as to promote why it is a good thing.

Why would anybody with lucid mind need to have the government involved in one of the most private aspects of life? What's next birth counseling? That would be just as stupid! Pre birth (intercourse and when) counseling?

Did I mention the stupidity of death counseling?

btk

Hey...womb to tomb. Uncle Sam has been replaced by Big Brother. Now lets all hold hands and sing. ( music in my head)."We are the World, We are the people....."

Originally Posted by billethkid

Did I mention the stupidity of death counseling?
btk

"For our ruling on this one, there's really no gray area here. McCaughey incorrectly states that the bill would require Medicare patients to have these counseling sessions and she is suggesting that the government is somehow trying to interfere with a very personal decision. And her claim that the sessions would "tell [seniors] how to end their life sooner" is an outright distortion. Rather, the sessions are an option for elderly patients who want to learn more about living wills, health care proxies and other forms of end-of-life planning. McCaughey isn't just wrong, she's spreading a ridiculous falsehood."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...will-be-requi/

Originally Posted by billethkid

fine for our family members, friends and neighbors all these years without having to be counseled by some beurocrat that as we discuss the subject barely knows how to spell some of the words whose objective is not your well being but reporting how much they saved by convincing one to not do something or medicine not to take or what the ever else they have on their list.

There are no positives in the clause what so ever. A very stupid, ill conceived notion on how to control costs.

Yes things like this scare me also when supposedly intelligent people not only buy into a concept they do not fully understand AND go so far as to promote why it is a good thing.

Why would anybody with lucid mind need to have the government involved in one of the most private aspects of life? What's next birth counseling? That would be just as stupid! Pre birth (intercourse and when) counseling?

Did I mention the stupidity of death counseling?

btk

I agree The last few months, days of our loved one's remaining time on this planet should not be filled with someone giving them options.

Originally Posted by Keedy

I agree The last few months, days of our loved one's remaining time on this planet should not be filled with someone giving them options.

There is a difference between having a voluntary counseling session to a mandatory continuing-your-coverage-depends-on-attending one. The first one is conducted by government-funded social workers of some kind, the latter is by thugs. If this proviso is in any final bill, it better be crystal-clear which it is, otherwise downstream regulations will be a mess.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

There is a difference between having a voluntary counseling session to a mandatory continuing-your-coverage-depends-on-attending one. The first one is conducted by government-funded social workers of some kind, the latter is by thugs. If this proviso is in any final bill, it better be crystal-clear which it is, otherwise downstream regulations will be a mess.

The only thing "mandatory" is that it would require Medicare to cover counseling sessions for seniors who want them.
The State of Florida has thousands of attorneys who specialize in elder issues, and this would be a blessing for seniors seeking information.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

There is a difference between having a voluntary counseling session to a mandatory continuing-your-coverage-depends-on-attending one. The first one is conducted by government-funded social workers of some kind, the latter is by thugs. If this proviso is in any final bill, it better be crystal-clear which it is, otherwise downstream regulations will be a mess.

Your right, and since the bill is not in the final draft (amendments?) it is still something to be concerned about.

Originally Posted by KayakerNC

The only thing "mandatory" is that it would require Medicare to cover counseling sessions for seniors who want them.
The State of Florida has thousands of attorneys who specialize in elder issues, and this would be a blessing for seniors seeking information.

What I don't understand is the need for government to provide this type of counseling. There's hundreds of clubs,associations, veterans groups, and this thing called "internet" as a minimum. All the free help in the world is available, and all that it takes is the person getting off their duff, applying minimum effort, and a wealth of information is as the fingertips. One way or another, the person will have to make some kind of effort, even to go to a government-paid counselor.

Medicare was never meant to be "legal insurance," and every non-medical additive just dilutes the moneys available for medical care.

All this provision does is throw money at groups like AARP, ACORN, La Raza and anyone else claiming to be "community helpers" to hire folk as "counselors." Licensed attorneys will not be the counselors, unless they are doing it as a pro bono service through a church group or something similar, and that's happening now without this proviso.

No, methinks this is going to be a "community action funding source." And for what?