Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The idea that “we” spend money for people’s care is a fiction created to improve insurers’ bottom lines. People spend their own money, or their own benefits, and insurers collect premiums according to their own actuarial tables and experience.

Too many people die, not because they are in intractable misery, but because somebody else feels miserable looking at them. There are few slopes more slippery than “mercy killing.”

Well, this just goes to show you don't know what you're talking about. In the US, Medicare eligibility starts at age 65, and "we" the taxpayers are absolutely paying for all the end-of-life care that prolongs life for a very short time at best. One-quarter of all Medicare spending goes to care in the last year of life.

Also, there are a lot more rumors about mercy killings than there are actual mercy killings. It's really, really hard to die voluntarily with medical assistance in this country, and medical professionals are far too worried about *murder charges* to go around giving *controlled substances* out like candy.

Anonymous wrote:

The idea that “we” spend money for people’s care is a fiction created to improve insurers’ bottom lines. People spend their own money, or their own benefits, and insurers collect premiums according to their own actuarial tables and experience.

Too many people die, not because they are in intractable misery, but because somebody else feels miserable looking at them. There are few slopes more slippery than “mercy killing.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
My husband is a doctor, other relatives are doctors, and you are entirely wrong, OP. Doctors take the Hippocratic Oath. Saving lives is more than a job. It's a calling. If the patient does not have a terminal diagnosis, then it's the standard of care to do everything possible to save their lives and not discuss palliative care until it's needed.

You are shockingly ageist: just because someone is old and frail, with the normal ills of age, does not mean they're ready to be put out to sea on an ice floe. When patients are in terrible pain and death is certain... that's when they ask for a painless exit, and deserve one, at any age. Pain and hopelessness are the criteria, not age.

I hope you're a troll, actually.

I appreciate that your husband and relatives may not have this view but I fully understand the OP’s experience because I am living it also. And, fwiw, I used to work in healthcare (at a local hospital) and I have relatives who are doctors and nurses.

My parent is in his 90s and their specialist was shockingly indifferent to their care. The testing showed a treatable condition at 90 but my parent was never told that nor offered treatment. We found out years later, when it was too late to do anything.

Recently, when my parent was hospitalized, the doctor said the tests weren’t clear as to diagnosis. I asked if there are other tests - and his response was, “What test would you like me to do?” When I asked if there was medicine to help, he asked, “What medicine would you like me to prescribe?” I called the primary doctor and they gave me something to try.

In contrast, my other parent is also in their 90s and has been given treatment and options. They are divorced and in different states.

I think it is very doctor dependent but I do think some doctors write off patients because of age.

I’d be curious to know whether one of your parents is male and one female. Male patients tend to get better treatment than female patients in general, so I wonder how much that aspect may affect the difference in how each parents is treated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m on your parents’ side. They still feel there is value in living. No one has the right to overrule them and decide that their life has less significance because of their age. That’s a terribly slippery slope that I think we should be wary about. If someone can determine that old people might not derive sufficient benefit from their life to justify the possible inconvenience to others, what’s to say that’s where the line gets fixed? What about people with serious illnesses, physical disabilities, mental illness, cognitive impairment, chronic disease, addiction, poverty, people who aren’t likable, people who are just different, people whose death can benefit someone else?

Every life is precious. When we start marginalizing lives and trying to decide which are worthy of continuing, all lives are imperiled.

Doctors do this all the time. It’s why when a 75 year old needs a lung transplant they don’t get one - they give it to the younger healthier patient who who will get better/longer use out of it.

You may not like it, and think that everyone will be treated the same, but that’s just not the way it is.

Anonymous wrote:I think in an ideal world doctors could give their all to everyone. The reality is they are understaffed, very overworked and many are burned out. Since they are not superhuman, would you rather a doctor give more attention to a mother or father with children at home, one of whom may have special needs or medical issues or emotional struggles or put all their energy into giving your elderly parent a few more months?

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of you can't imagine the trauma of CPR on an 80 year old. It's incredibly violent on the body.

Anonymous wrote:Eating ice cream and watching the birds would be fine.

How about being limited to a feeding tube and having your daily activities consisting of being moved to prevent bedsores?

Anonymous wrote:Horrible thread title - should be bias against.

And I totally disagree with you. I think American health care goes overboard in interventions and I think heavy interventions in old age are damaging to quality of life and ridiculously expensive for our health care system and society.

Anonymous wrote:I think a lot of you can't imagine the trauma of CPR on an 80 year old. It's incredibly violent on the body.

Anonymous wrote:Kudos to you OP. We don't treat the elderly well or right in this country. It is truly a disgrace.