John Simkin Posted September 21, 2009 Author Share Posted September 21, 2009 In the meantime perhaps you can answer why Simon Stevens who worked with Tony Blair to set up a national task force in order to get the NHS euthanasia program going in England, is working with the Obama administration to export the same kind of Liverpool Pathway Careplan into the United States? But we don't have a NHS euthanasia program in the UK. Why do you keep on posting this nonsense? Does your NHS deny people life saving or prolonging treatments due to cost, age or physical condition? If so you have a euthanasia progrom.... One of the problems of having a debate with you Craig is your lack of understanding of the English language. This is illustrated by your attempt to accuse the NHS of having an "euthanasia progrom". The Dorland Medical Dictionary provides this definition of the word: euthanasia /eu·tha·na·sia/ (u″thah-na´zhah) 1. an easy or painless death. 2. mercy killing; the deliberate ending of life of a person suffering from an incurable disease. Anybody in the UK, even the most unintelligent, would not accuse the NHS of having an "euthanasia progrom". I suppose some American might be fooled, if they do not know anything about our health system, but I can't imagine else buying such a ridiculous idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 In the meantime perhaps you can answer why Simon Stevens who worked with Tony Blair to set up a national task force in order to get the NHS euthanasia program going in England, is working with the Obama administration to export the same kind of Liverpool Pathway Careplan into the United States? But we don't have a NHS euthanasia program in the UK. Why do you keep on posting this nonsense? Does your NHS deny people life saving or prolonging treatments due to cost, age or physical condition? If so you have a euthanasia progrom.... One of the problems of having a debate with you Craig is your lack of understanding of the English language. This is illustrated by your attempt to accuse the NHS of having an "euthanasia progrom". The Dorland Medical Dictionary provides this definition of the word: euthanasia /eu·tha·na·sia/ (u″thah-na´zhah) 1. an easy or painless death. 2. mercy killing; the deliberate ending of life of a person suffering from an incurable disease. Anybody in the UK, even the most unintelligent, would not accuse the NHS of having an "euthanasia progrom". I suppose some American might be fooled, if they do not know anything about our health system, but I can't imagine else buying such a ridiculous idea. Tsk, Tsk John, cherry picking is a really childish ploy....and lets not forget the Liverpool Care Pathway.... It seems a good part of your country is "buying it" John. http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/euthanasia also : the act or practice of allowing a hopelessly sick or injured patient to die by taking less than complete medical measures to prolong life http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia Euthanasia by means Euthanasia may be conducted passively, non-actively, and actively. Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments (such as antibiotics, chemotherapy in cancer, or surgery) or the distribution of a medication (such as morphine) to relieve pain, knowing that it may also result in death. http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/euthanasia The act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, as by lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment 1 also called mercy killing. the deliberate causing of the death of a person who is suffering from an incurable disease or condition. It may be active, such as by administration of a lethal drug, or passive, such as by withholding of treatment. Legal authorities, church leaders, philosophers, and commentators on ethics and morality usually distinguish passive euthanasia from active euthanasia. the act of facilitating death in a terminally ill patient, whether by deliberate activity, such as the administration of drugs that hasten death (known as active euthanasia), or passive, as in the withholding of life-extending treatment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted September 21, 2009 Author Share Posted September 21, 2009 In the meantime perhaps you can answer why Simon Stevens who worked with Tony Blair to set up a national task force in order to get the NHS euthanasia program going in England, is working with the Obama administration to export the same kind of Liverpool Pathway Careplan into the United States? But we don't have a NHS euthanasia program in the UK. Why do you keep on posting this nonsense? Does your NHS deny people life saving or prolonging treatments due to cost, age or physical condition? If so you have a euthanasia progrom.... One of the problems of having a debate with you Craig is your lack of understanding of the English language. This is illustrated by your attempt to accuse the NHS of having an "euthanasia progrom". The Dorland Medical Dictionary provides this definition of the word: euthanasia /eu·tha·na·sia/ (u″thah-na´zhah) 1. an easy or painless death. 2. mercy killing; the deliberate ending of life of a person suffering from an incurable disease. Anybody in the UK, even the most unintelligent, would not accuse the NHS of having an "euthanasia progrom". I suppose some American might be fooled, if they do not know anything about our health system, but I can't imagine else buying such a ridiculous idea. Tsk, Tsk John, cherry picking is a really childish ploy....and lets not forget the Liverpool Care Pathway.... It seems a good part of your country is "buying it" John. http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/euthanasia also : the act or practice of allowing a hopelessly sick or injured patient to die by taking less than complete medical measures to prolong life http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia Euthanasia by means Euthanasia may be conducted passively, non-actively, and actively. Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments (such as antibiotics, chemotherapy in cancer, or surgery) or the distribution of a medication (such as morphine) to relieve pain, knowing that it may also result in death. http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/euthanasia The act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, as by lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment 1 also called mercy killing. the deliberate causing of the death of a person who is suffering from an incurable disease or condition. It may be active, such as by administration of a lethal drug, or passive, such as by withholding of treatment. Legal authorities, church leaders, philosophers, and commentators on ethics and morality usually distinguish passive euthanasia from active euthanasia. the act of facilitating death in a terminally ill patient, whether by deliberate activity, such as the administration of drugs that hasten death (known as active euthanasia), or passive, as in the withholding of life-extending treatment And none of this is taking place under the NHS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 In the meantime perhaps you can answer why Simon Stevens who worked with Tony Blair to set up a national task force in order to get the NHS euthanasia program going in England, is working with the Obama administration to export the same kind of Liverpool Pathway Careplan into the United States? But we don't have a NHS euthanasia program in the UK. Why do you keep on posting this nonsense? Does your NHS deny people life saving or prolonging treatments due to cost, age or physical condition? If so you have a euthanasia progrom.... One of the problems of having a debate with you Craig is your lack of understanding of the English language. This is illustrated by your attempt to accuse the NHS of having an "euthanasia progrom". The Dorland Medical Dictionary provides this definition of the word: euthanasia /eu·tha·na·sia/ (u″thah-na´zhah) 1. an easy or painless death. 2. mercy killing; the deliberate ending of life of a person suffering from an incurable disease. Anybody in the UK, even the most unintelligent, would not accuse the NHS of having an "euthanasia progrom". I suppose some American might be fooled, if they do not know anything about our health system, but I can't imagine else buying such a ridiculous idea. Tsk, Tsk John, cherry picking is a really childish ploy....and lets not forget the Liverpool Care Pathway.... It seems a good part of your country is "buying it" John. http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/euthanasia also : the act or practice of allowing a hopelessly sick or injured patient to die by taking less than complete medical measures to prolong life http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euthanasia Euthanasia by means Euthanasia may be conducted passively, non-actively, and actively. Passive euthanasia entails the withholding of common treatments (such as antibiotics, chemotherapy in cancer, or surgery) or the distribution of a medication (such as morphine) to relieve pain, knowing that it may also result in death. http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/euthanasia The act or practice of ending the life of an individual suffering from a terminal illness or an incurable condition, as by lethal injection or the suspension of extraordinary medical treatment 1 also called mercy killing. the deliberate causing of the death of a person who is suffering from an incurable disease or condition. It may be active, such as by administration of a lethal drug, or passive, such as by withholding of treatment. Legal authorities, church leaders, philosophers, and commentators on ethics and morality usually distinguish passive euthanasia from active euthanasia. the act of facilitating death in a terminally ill patient, whether by deliberate activity, such as the administration of drugs that hasten death (known as active euthanasia), or passive, as in the withholding of life-extending treatment And none of this is taking place under the NHS. Just who do you think you are kidding John? The web is filled with this information. Your denials show a decided lack of intellectal honesty on your part. And lets not forget the Liverpool care pathway..... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthad...omplex-one.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Mauro Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) John doesnt know what he is talking about. Listen to what Anton Chaitkin has to say on this British euthanasia program. Anton Chaitkin is a member of this forum as well as the author of "Treason in America" and the "Unauthorized Biography of George Bush. http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=11764 Edited September 21, 2009 by Terry Mauro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 John doesnt know what he is talking about. Listen to what Anton Chaitkin has to say on this British euthanasia program. Anton Chaitkin is a member of this forum as well as the author of "Treason in America" and the "Unauthorized Biography of George Bush.http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=11764 Terry you clearly know nothing and will learn nothing about the NHS from your weird cult. Instead try this link http://www.kented.org.uk/ngfl/subjects/his...39_achieve.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) I don't "scare" you? You are a piece of work...Willing is imaginary? Amazing! I guess those folks who spend their lives living on welfare, sucking deeply from the governmetal teat are exempt? Sheesh. I don't see anyone forcing people to exchange their labor for compensation at the point of a gun, howver I DO see people being forced to give the fruits of their labor to the government at the point of a gun. It appears that slavery IS alive and well in the US and YOU support it in a whole hearted manner... imagine that. I think that the poor soul falling into contradiction is you Daniel. Be afraid...very afraid...LOL! BTW, IF you ever find a 'real publisher" for your book, will the the WILLING exchange of your book for compensation ( how did you put it..."some kind of money") be imaginary? At the point of a gun? Good god, evil capitalism! My,my, the contradictions continue to mount...roflmao! See?? Just as I said -- the "roflmao! argument" could just as well come from Healy The fact that you can't understand Andy's earlier point -- that "free choice" is subject to whether or not one has money -- only means it's as nonsensical to try to seriously discuss the issue with you as it would be to try to seriously discuss many things with Ms. Mauro. If you think prostitutes "choose" to be prostitutes, when they really could eke out a "respectable" living at or below minimum wage, then you really don't understand economics and its social dimension at all. (In other words, to make it simpler for you, a woman can make a lot more money by serving as a kind of bucket than she could by using a bucket to clean out bathrooms.) There's so little substance and content to what you have to say that it seems really pointless to pretend to argue with you. (In other words, you expend very little effort.) With all your SHOUTING, you think that stands as an argument and your only other option is to make things personal. So I'll try to avoid that except to say that in regard to my book, I've always been much more interested in having someone read it and tell me what they think of it than I am in "selling" it, and I'm grateful that a member of this forum has been doing that the past few months. But let me know what you think of this, the main points of the issue in this "health care" discussion as I see it: 1) Conservative interests make the argument that a "public option" or "government-run" health care system "will put government between you and your doctor"; but very few people seem to have the good sense to point out that the current system has private insurance companies standing "between you and your doctor", and that this is almost entirely only facilitated through health care options provided by one's employers ...... So instead of a government plan (which would have laws and regulations and procedures for redress of grievances built in to the system), we should prefer that private companies (all but entirely unregulated and accountable only to themselves) should be in charge of our health care??? And another set of private companies acting as the middleman for this??? And that this costs those employers an enormous amount of money in expenses that could be spent in expanding their plant and retooling their equipment??? Amazing!!!! 2) A distrust of government is healthy and wise, for the most part; but it is too often merely used as a propaganda ploy on the part of vested interests to create and shore up opposition to anything the vested interests don't want to see happen. So anything government did to regulate business or to protect workers became a case of "creeping socialism." And the same went for Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And anything government did to end segregation and to try to protect the civil rights of minorities became a war against "State's Rights" and the assumption of "dictatorial" power on the part of the Federal government. This case is no different, and the bottom line argument often made by conservatives -- that government-run things are "evil as such" -- is not only erroneous and disingenuous (since it implies that everything "privately-run" is great and wonderful), but it's also fundamentally insulting to anyone who works for or has ever worked for any form of government "organization" -- policemen, firemen, and members of the military, to name only the most obvious ones ........ Wow, that alternative reality you live in must be a doosie! And such an easy mark as well! ROFLMAO! ( I suppose that will zoom right over your head as well.) Lets see... A hooker who makes a personal CHOICE to become a hooker and not a maid is not really making a personal CHOICE because one job PAYS more than another...fricking amazing. MONEY is the only factor in PERSONAL CHOICE... You are mostly limited to getting health care from your employer...except that there is a CHOICE afforded by a robust individual policy marketplace... Having ONLY the government standing between you and your healthcare is better than having the option to CHOOSE from different private companies... The health insurance industry is unregulated. My how astute you are..LOL! You are a hypocrite when you state that willingness to trade labor for compensation is imaginary when in fact you state you will gladly do that very thing. When caught you say it not really the money but rather people reading that matters yet I don't see your free PDF published anywhere on the web,...and then there is still your claim to want to "MAKE SOME MONEY"..... Government is good.... The Nazi's were good, else anyone who ever worked for them were bad.... You are right, its impossible to have a discussion with you, simply because your thinking is not grounded in reality. Edited September 21, 2009 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen Turner Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 I have worked for the NHS (Psych) for over twenty years, I have treated patients from their early teens, to their late eighties, and not once in that time has ONE Person been denied treatment because of age, cost or for any other reason. Some of the comments in this thread are insulting, and laughable at the same time, quite a feat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) John doesnt know what he is talking about. Listen to what Anton Chaitkin has to say on this British euthanasia program. Anton Chaitkin is a member of this forum as well as the author of "Treason in America" and the "Unauthorized Biography of George Bush.http://www.larouchepac.com/lpactv?nid=11764 Terry you clearly know nothing and will learn nothing about the NHS from your weird cult. Instead try this link http://www.kented.org.uk/ngfl/subjects/his...39_achieve.html Ah yes the public propaganda "benchmarks" And still the NHS, and Andy, has no problem with death panels and euthanasia. Why not, just look at how many people the NHS has helped stop smoking or the wait times reduced...after all that makes really good propaganda for the befuddled masses... Edited September 21, 2009 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 I have worked for the NHS (Psych) for over twenty years, I have treated patients from their early teens, to their late eighties, and not once in that time has ONE Person been denied treatment because of age, cost or for any other reason. Some of the comments in this thread are insulting, and laughable at the same time, quite a feat. Just to be certain I understand, you claim the NHS does NOT deny treatment because of cost or age...EVER? Or is it your claim this only applies in PHYCH patients. The web is full of accounts of people being denied treatment by the NHS due to cost and age. Are they ALL false? Is hte Liverpool care pathway a falsehood as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 And still the NHS, and Andy, has no problem with death panels and euthanasia. There aren't any such things - all made up by far right wing ideologues....... but you know this already don't you Craig? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen Turner Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 I have worked for the NHS (Psych) for over twenty years, I have treated patients from their early teens, to their late eighties, and not once in that time has ONE Person been denied treatment because of age, cost or for any other reason. Some of the comments in this thread are insulting, and laughable at the same time, quite a feat. Just to be certain I understand, you claim the NHS does NOT deny treatment because of cost or age...EVER? Or is it your claim this only applies in PHYCH patients. The web is full of accounts of people being denied treatment by the NHS due to cost and age. Are they ALL false? Is hte Liverpool care pathway a falsehood as well? Craig, I can only speak for my own, extensive, experience. I hope this is clear. the web is also full of accounts of 911 being a government conspiracy, NASA faking the Moon missions, and the British Royal family being Space reptiles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 And still the NHS, and Andy, has no problem with death panels and euthanasia. There aren't any such things - all made up by far right wing ideologues....... but you know this already don't you Craig? Really, NICE and the Liverpool care pathway don't exist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Lamson Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 (edited) I have worked for the NHS (Psych) for over twenty years, I have treated patients from their early teens, to their late eighties, and not once in that time has ONE Person been denied treatment because of age, cost or for any other reason. Some of the comments in this thread are insulting, and laughable at the same time, quite a feat. Just to be certain I understand, you claim the NHS does NOT deny treatment because of cost or age...EVER? Or is it your claim this only applies in PHYCH patients. The web is full of accounts of people being denied treatment by the NHS due to cost and age. Are they ALL false? Is hte Liverpool care pathway a falsehood as well? Craig, I can only speak for my own, extensive, experience. I hope this is clear. the web is also full of accounts of 911 being a government conspiracy, NASA faking the Moon missions, and the British Royal family being Space reptiles. Ok. So you want to debunk the reports by people in the UK of being denied treatments by the NHS and debunk that the Liverpool care pathway exists? I can accept that in the phych area, the NHS might not limit services, but the question is much broader than your limited area of practice, don't you think? Edited September 21, 2009 by Craig Lamson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 21, 2009 Share Posted September 21, 2009 I have worked for the NHS (Psych) for over twenty years, I have treated patients from their early teens, to their late eighties, and not once in that time has ONE Person been denied treatment because of age, cost or for any other reason. Some of the comments in this thread are insulting, and laughable at the same time, quite a feat. Just to be certain I understand, you claim the NHS does NOT deny treatment because of cost or age...EVER? Or is it your claim this only applies in PHYCH patients. The web is full of accounts of people being denied treatment by the NHS due to cost and age. Are they ALL false? Is hte Liverpool care pathway a falsehood as well? Craig, I can only speak for my own, extensive, experience. I hope this is clear. the web is also full of accounts of 911 being a government conspiracy, NASA faking the Moon missions, and the British Royal family being Space reptiles. Ok. So you want to debunk the reports by people in the UK of being denied treatments by the NHS and debunk that the Liverpool care pathway exists? I can accept that in the phych area, the NHS might not limit services, but the question is much broader than your limited area of practice, don't you think? The Liverpool Care Pathway exists but it is not what you represent it to be. Learn more about it here if that is what you wish to do http://www.mariecurie.org.uk/forhealthcare...carepathway.htm Palliative care and hospice care for the terminally ill in the UK is second to none worldwide in its excellence and humanity. Several of us here know this from personal experience and find you half baked idiot misinformed drivel about euthanasia and death panels grossly offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now