Sunday, November 15, 2009

The truth behind the whole "death panel" fiasco

Oregon Congressman Earl Blumenauer shares the backstory on the healthcare reform provision that sparked a summer of lies and distortions about supposed "death panels." It's a sad tale of how fracked up U.S. politics have become:

I found it perverse that Medicare would pay for almost any medical procedure, yet not reimburse doctors for having a thoughtful conversation to prepare patients and families for the delicate, complex and emotionally demanding decisions surrounding the end of life. So when I was working on the health care bill, I included language directing Medicare to cover a voluntary discussion with a doctor once every five years about living wills, power of attorney and end-of-life treatment preferences.

I was especially committed to this issue because helping patients and their families clarify what they want and need is not only good for all Americans, but also a rare common denominator of health care politics. Indeed, the majority of Congressional Republicans supported the similar provisions for terminally ill elderly patients that were part of the 2003 prescription drug bill. In the spring of 2008, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska issued a proclamation that stated the importance of end-of-life planning.

With this history in mind, I reached out to Republicans, including conservative members of Congress who often expressed support for the concept, and worked with national experts in palliative care and advocacy groups in devising the end-of-life provision. My Republican co-sponsor, Charles Boustany of Louisiana, told me he had many end-of-life conversations as a cardiovascular surgeon but unfortunately they often were too late. He wished that he could have spoken to patients and their families when they could have reflected properly, not when surgery was just hours away.

But before long:

Then Betsy McCaughey entered the fray. A former lieutenant governor of New York, Ms. McCaughey had gained notoriety in the 1990s by attacking the Clinton health plan. In a radio interview, she attacked the end-of-life provisions in the health care legislation, claiming it “would make it mandatory, absolutely require, that every five years people in Medicare have a required counseling session that will tell them how to end their life sooner.” The St. Petersburg Times’s fact-checking Web site PolitiFact quickly excoriated her: “McCaughey isn’t just wrong; she’s spreading a ridiculous falsehood.”

But in today’s vicious news cycle, lies take on lives of their own on Web sites, blogs and e-mail chains and go viral in seconds. Ms. McCaughey’s claims were soon widely circulated in the thirst for ammunition against the Democrats’ health care reform plan. “Mandatory counseling for all seniors at a minimum of every five years, more often if the seasoned citizen is sick or in a nursing home,” was how Rush Limbaugh described the provision a week later. “We can’t have counseling for mothers who are thinking of terminating their pregnancy, but we can go in there and counsel people about to die,” he added.

Two days later, the lie found its way into Republican politicians’ statements.

And unfortunately, it went downhill from there. :-/

Labels: , ,

1 Comments:

Blogger TomS said...

Good stuff here Michael.

It always seems that those on the airwaves who intentioanlly misinform speak loder than their educated counterparts...and get all the attention.
A truly educated populace, and electorate, would not tolerate the constant spin that is intended to stir up the ignorant.
I made a remark yesterday on my post regarding spending among government agencies:

"A manual published by the GSA shows that of the top 10 Government Agencies (by annual average spending), the Department of Defense, at #1, spends over 160 Billion Dollars a year. The Department of Education, at number 10, spends only 3 billion. Wow. What more can one say about the character of the country, our priorities, and where we may be headed?"

2:28 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home