End of Life Counseling

If you ask me (and nobody did), I think this whole thing over arguing about whether seniors should have end of life counseling and things like that is a lot of silliness.

Why? Well, because it doesn't seem to be ANYTHING like people are trying to make it out to be.

End of life counseling does not mean that you are 70 years old, so instead of getting the health treatment that you need, you are sent to a person who is going to counsel you on the fact you are going to die soon instead.

It means that if you are 70 years old, you probably don't have as much of an estimated lifespan as you did when you were 20. I think anybody who has made it to 70 can tell you they might think they have 20 years, but not 50 more years or 60 more years.

It just simply means (and it seems to me that's what it means from the context I've seen it in the bill they're trying to pass) that it's an option (not a mandate) that the elderly will have access to if they want it.

Why would they want it? Well, first of all that doesn't mean that they can choose either to go to the doctor and get a problem fixed or just go to counseling about how they'll die soon. It IS true that a lot of elderly men and women ARE a afraid of dying, have realized that they probably don't have several decades before they're going to just simply die of natural causes, and they might want to talk to someone about it.

I would. I definitely would NOT forgo medical treatment if I were 70 and got sick or had an injury. And nobody would be forcing me to. But, regardless of whether I was sick or not, I'd probably want to talk to someone about my fears or just my thoughts about the fact that...hey...I could go to sleep tonight and not wake up tomorrow, because sometimes people in their 70's do that.

Not always. But, it's a real possibility you have to account for when you are that old. It isn't that Obama is trying to say that you're going to die anyway, so you can't have health care because you are not a productive member of society anymore, or you are not going to be a productive member of society much longer.

I don't know why this is so hard to understand. Is it so hard to believe that people who once used to look in the mirror when they were 20 and saw a young and vital person, who now are 70 or so and look into the mirror and see what time and age has just simply naturally done (which they always knew it would) would maybe feel sad?

And under the bill that's out now, if they feel sad from what I understand from what I've read, it will be covered by their health insurance if they are under the public option to go and talk to a professional about it. They wouldn't have to worry about paying for it out-of-pocket, because lets face it not all elderly men and women have the money to do something like that.

I think its a good thing. It's not deciding for you when to pull the plug on grandma. I find that insinuation to be very insulting and very mean and nothing but fearmongering. And to misinform the public on something like that, by using such examples, is almost tantamount to evil in my opinion.

Not all elderly will take advantage of something like that, even if it were covered by their health care. Why? Well, not all elderly even need it. Some seniors are very happy where they are in life and have little to no trouble accepting their age and the fact that they don't have as long to live anymore as they did when they were 20.

My grandmother was always very upset at the way she had aged, but I thought she was beautiful. Then again, maybe that's 'cause she was my grandma. :p

By contrast, my grandfather was just fine with how old he was, and it didn't bother him that he didn't have as much time as he would've if he were still 20.

Everyone is different. So therefore, everyone has different needs and wants. That's fine.

But, if my grandmother wanted to take end of life counseling, and this bill were in place at the time, she would not have needed to be ill to do it. She would not have needed to forfeit any future health care just because she was old and chose to talk to someone about her fears, feelings and thoughts on growing old and maybe dying soon.

And nobody would force her to do it, either. Even if it were to be something encouraged, they wouldn't have to say yes. Encouragement and making something mandatory are not the same thing. And having an "option" has never meant that you HAVE to take it. That is why it's an option and not a mandate.

I don't know, I just thought someone ought to say it out like this. Maybe it'll make people angry. Maybe it won't. I don't know, and I don't care.

I've read it and this is what I garnered from it.

To me, from what I understood, it would be like when my primary care physician recommended to me that I have a pelvic exam. I'm uncomfortable with the ideas of this. So, I said no. She didn't like it, she encouraged it, but she couldn't FORCE me to do it.

In the same token, under this new bill, if I were 70 and my primary care physician recommended that I have end of life counseling for whatever reason, I could easily just say no and whether he/she liked it didn't matter. It would be my decision.

There are other things in this bill, as well, that I've noticed people are being misinformed about. Here is what I used to look things up.

H.R. 3200

This is a PDF file, though. Just so you know. :p If the link becomes broken, let me know and I will do my best to fix it.

Also, if anyone would like to, I don't mind if people give ME links. Just, if you think I'm wrong, I do want you to back it up by giving me a link. I'm from Missouri, and anyone that knows us here knows that we're The Show Me State for a reason! ;)

Anyway...I just wanted to get that off my chest.