View Full Version : Obama's Amerika: Ten year old Sarah meets the death panel!
http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/04/18754425-sebelius-wont-intervene-in-girls-transplant-case
U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius reiterated Tuesday that she won’t intervene in the “incredibly agonizing” case involving a 10-year-old Pennsylvania girl who is waiting for a lung transplant.
Medical experts should make those decisions, said Sebelius, who was grilled by Republicans at a Congressional hearing about the situation involving Sarah Murnaghan, who has end-stage cystic fibrosis.
“I’m begging you … Sarah has three to five weeks to live. Suspend the rules until we look at this policy,” Rep. Lou Barletta, R-Pa., told Sebelius at a session of a House Education and Workforce Committee hearing.
“Forty people in your home state are waiting for a lung,” Sebelius countered in the exchange in which the pair spoke over each other.
Marxist/Leninism is responsible for more human death in one century, then all of the worlds past wars, combined! Its how they roll...
Mauser KAR98K
06-05-13, 13:03
Marxist/Leninism is responsible for more human death in one century, then all of the worlds past wars, combined! Its how they roll...
Funny how they said Obamacare has no "death panel." Lying yet to our faces again.
This qoute she said made my blood boil:
"There are other kids that are just as sick."
****in' communists.
GeorgiaBoy
06-05-13, 13:15
So the secretary of the DHHS not bypassing the OPTN rules, which predate the PPACA, is now considered a "death panel"?
No worries. The State controlled media will have Republicans take the blame for rationed health care in the end... and the idiot masses will vote more corrupt leftists into power. :rolleyes:
it's because of sequestration. :rolleyes:
So all of the rules in this case were put in place by Obama? They didn't predate his term? There have never been cases like this in the past prior to Obama?
Can you site your sources for this information because if you can that is pretty damning. I would love to read over that information.
Are there adults on the lung list that would be ahead of her? If she gets a lung does someone else die?
woodandsteel
06-05-13, 13:45
So the secretary of the DHHS not bypassing the OPTN rules, which predate the PPACA, is now considered a "death panel"?
Ignoring the fact that mythical "death panels" were never even accused to be involved in situations like this.
If anything, this case illustrates how screwed up things can get when the government gets involved in health care. The girl has a few weeks to live, and Sebelius ordered an emergency review that will take months.
http://washingtonexaminer.com/sebelius-wont-waive-regulation-for-girl-with-five-weeks-to-live-someone-lives-and-someone-dies/article/2531097
She can’t qualify for an adult lung transplant until the age of 12, according to federal regulations, but Sebelius has the authority to waive that rule on her behalf. The pediatric lungs for which she currently qualifies aren’t available
Barletta countered that medical professionals think Murneghan could survive an adult lung transplant.
it's because of sequestration. :rolleyes:
Yeah.. there you go. :D
Stupid Republicans standing in the way of out of control Gubmental growth, and killing children!
Are there adults on the lung list that would be ahead of her? If she gets a lung does someone else die?
I'm no expert but isn't the actual issue the fact that an adult lung in a child has a significantly higher rejection rate? Isn't she basically waiting on a child lung (rare) so that adult lungs aren't wasted on her that could be used to save the life of an adult?
GeorgiaBoy
06-05-13, 13:54
I'm no expert but isn't the actual issue the fact that an adult lung in a child has a significantly higher rejection rate? Isn't she basically waiting on a child lung (rare) so that adult lungs aren't wasted on her that could be used to save the life of an adult?
That's pretty much what I'm gathering from it.
They are requesting the the secretary bypass the rules of the OPTN that don't allow adult organs, which are more available than children's organs, to be used for children seeking transplants.
Those rules are there for that reason and I'm not connecting this to a death panel argument.
It's a sad situation for sure, regardless.
Bad optics regardless for HHS, Obamacare, and this administration... I thought this was being sold as the compassionate way to do things. :rolleyes:
But hey when we've had 50 million abortions and you have asshats like gov cuomo trying to extend the time frame in which abortions are legally performed who gives a dam about the children... lets just take peoples guns away... for the sake of he children..
The transplant list is a very complicated process as is being a transplant candidate. One has to have appropriate immunologic match/profile between donor organ and recipient patient. The patient has to be sick enough to need lungs, yet healthy enough to survive surgery. The lungs must be of appropriate size. They must not have been damaged at the time of the donor's death/postmortem. And many other very important nuances. One can see that the contingencies (that are all critical for a successful transplant) are often the rate limiter.
In addition to being a surgeon and having spent many months on Pediatric Pulmonary, Pediatric Surgery, and Thoracic Surgery as a medical student and intern, my best friend had CF and passed away at age 22 while waiting for an appropriate donor lung match. He was #1 on the list, but no appropriate match was found.
This should NOT be political, only medical. None of us have the medical facts, nor will we ever. If her surgeons were campaigning for this, testifying before Congress that this should take place, I would say I agree whole heartedly and they should push immediately to change the policy. This is a medical issue, not political, albeit a heart-wrenching one. I truly hope that she gets lungs, the process should just be directed from a medical feasibility (ie is it possible ) and not based upon emotional testimony.
The facility in which I work will transplant organs into just about anyone, but adult organs in a kid is bad ju-ju. It almost never works (sometimes, sure, but not often).
The facility in which I work will transplant organs into just about anyone, but adult organs in a kid is bad ju-ju. It almost never works (sometimes, sure, but not often).
I think that's the issue.... and apparently they do it in other countries so why can't we.... Not my sentiments but that's sort of what I've been hearing.
So all of the rules in this case were put in place by Obama? They didn't predate his term? There have never been cases like this in the past prior to Obama?
Can you site your sources for this information because if you can that is pretty damning. I would love to read over that information.
A valid point, one duly noted...However, is not Obama lord of the land? Is not U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius his appointee? Is it not Sebelius who turned down little Sarah? Is it not in her considerable power to override the established protocols, which in this instance are stupid, and intractably bureaucratic? Are these not the very same people who have seized absolute control of American health care by rendering the greatest tax in human history?
I would ask you, at what point are you willing to finally hold these people accountable?
At any point in the future some politician throws the firearm related death of child on the table as grounds for further gun control this case should be thrown in their face like brick.. repeatedly.
...However, is not Obama lord of the land?
I've got to agree on that one... I mean that is what Obama was selling from day one. Hell he was even going to install a new kitchen in that one ladies home.
There was to be no more pain and suffering once he was in charge. Only the land of milk and honey. ... and of all things... health care. He was to render the miracle of health care upon the land.
So in that regard I feel it's fair and news worthy.
No new kitchens
No new shovel ready jobs
No end to war
ObamaCare doesn't work
Death panel? not really... just another view of the Kings new clothes.
obama should step in and help, after all,
he's the one who keeps saying
"if it saves on child's life, we've got to do something"
Forget the specifics of this one case, and apply the broader lesson we are learning. Even with the "compassionate" ObamaCare mandate in place, people will still not get the healthcare they need unless they have endless monetary resources at their disposal.
This lesson will be learned soon enough by people with hopeless forms of cancer, heart disease, etc.
I think that's the issue.... and apparently they do it in other countries so why can't we.... Not my sentiments but that's sort of what I've been hearing.
Not to sound flippant, but it's just not cost effective or an effective use of resources (I was the Nurse manager of Operations for the surgery-trauma ICU; we also had adult post-liver transplants, so I know a little about that side of the issue). Most kids that get adult organs have a poor outcome, and one has to look, too, at the general "sickness" of how sick the person (kid or adult). A new organ is not necessarily a panacea, and some people are just too sick to get a new organ because they would likely die anyway.
So the secretary of the DHHS not bypassing the OPTN rules, which predate the PPACA, is now considered a "death panel"?
The secretary or anyone in government having the power to decide one way or the other is a death panel. This is one BIG example of why government should stick to paving roads, running a military, enforcing contracts and property rights, and virtually nothing else. That people are hazy on this point is very disturbing.
The secretary or anyone in government having the power to decide one way or the other is a death panel. This is one BIG example of why government should stick to paving roads, running a military, enforcing contracts and property rights, and virtually nothing else. That people are hazy on this point is very disturbing.
^This. Big time.
Forget the specifics of this one case, and apply the broader lesson we are learning. Even with the "compassionate" ObamaCare mandate in place, people will still not get the healthcare they need unless they have endless monetary resources at their disposal.
This lesson will be learned soon enough by people with hopeless forms of cancer, heart disease, etc.
Unfortunately I believe that financial means will be usurped by the "official queue" and bureaucracy. This is especially true for patients awaiting transplant. My friend with CF came from a family of tremendous means. Those means were no match for bureaucracy.
The secretary or anyone in government having the power to decide one way or the other is a death panel. This is one BIG example of why government should stick to paving roads, running a military, enforcing contracts and property rights, and virtually nothing else. That people are hazy on this point is very disturbing.
This is very true. It should be those in the medical field who are making this decision. Even if government is making the correct decision, they really shouldn't be making medical decisions for anyone.
Forget the specifics of this one case, and apply the broader lesson we are learning. Even with the "compassionate" ObamaCare mandate in place, people will still not get the healthcare they need unless they have endless monetary resources at their disposal.
This lesson will be learned soon enough by people with hopeless forms of cancer, heart disease, etc.
This is a very valid point, Obamacare does very little to solve the health care problems in this country. It was a major waste of time and a bandaid on a wound that requires a tourniquet.
Unfortunately I believe that financial means will be usurped by the "official queue" and bureaucracy. This is especially true for patients awaiting transplant. My friend with CF came from a family of tremendous means. Those means were no match for bureaucracy.
I don't disagree, finding a donor is a tough one, but we will soon see that "no limits" on the upper end of dollars spent for care doesn't really mean "no limits" -- unless of course they are YOUR OWN dollars.
This is a very valid point, Obamacare does very little to solve the health care problems in this country. It was a major waste of time and a bandaid on a wound that requires a tourniquet.
Well, it was (is) government manipulation of a market designed to fix problems created by government manipulation of a market.
Freedom, of course, is too scary to be even considered as a solution.
The truly saddest part of it all is that we already seeing reduced expenditures in medical R&D (particularly because of the medical device tax).
The world won't even know what medical advances it WILL miss out on in order to quash that icky profit motive.
GeorgiaBoy
06-05-13, 16:43
The secretary or anyone in government having the power to decide one way or the other is a death panel. This is one BIG example of why government should stick to paving roads, running a military, enforcing contracts and property rights, and virtually nothing else. That people are hazy on this point is very disturbing.
Are you saying that you don't like that the actual secretary can "decide", or that the regulations of the organ transplant network exists?
needed to be a medical decsion - if the surgeon said "I can do it but the law won't allow me" then I'd back it.
However, you can't blame the parent for trying to save their child. If it were my daughter (now 12), I'd move heaven and earth for her (including one of my own lungs) to try and save her.
http://vitals.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/05/18779741-judge-orders-girl-added-to-adult-lung-transplant-list?lite
Looks like a judge just end-ran HHS.
A valid point, one duly noted...However, is not Obama lord of the land? Is not U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius his appointee? Is it not Sebelius who turned down little Sarah? Is it not in her considerable power to override the established protocols, which in this instance are stupid, and intractably bureaucratic? Are these not the very same people who have seized absolute control of American health care by rendering the greatest tax in human history?
I would ask you, at what point are you willing to finally hold these people accountable?
I'm trying to wrap my brain around this.
We want the Feds to stay the hell out of individual healthcare decisions...until we do?
We can't have it both ways.
Moose-Knuckle
06-05-13, 17:21
I'm no expert but isn't the actual issue the fact that an adult lung in a child has a significantly higher rejection rate? Isn't she basically waiting on a child lung (rare) so that adult lungs aren't wasted on her that could be used to save the life of an adult?
Well not only is there the issue of the child's body rejecting the adult lung but the fact that it physically cannot fit. However an adult lung from a smaller person could work now in theory due to recent advancements in the medical world. This is the whole reason this girls family is raising the alarm about it. Their doctors are telling them that they could save her.
Moose-Knuckle
06-05-13, 17:26
During a House hearing on HHS’ FY 2014 budget request, Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) urged Sebelius to intervene in the case of Sarah Murnaghan, who suffers from cystic fibrosis and could die within weeks without a lung transplant, but is considered too young for one according to rules adopted in 2005 by transplant doctors.
“The reason she’s unable to receive that right now is because of an arbitrary rule that says if you’re not 12 years old, you aren’t eligible to receive an adolescent or an adult lung,” he said.
“Madame Secretary, under section 121.4 D, you have the opportunity. It says, ‘Unless the Secretary directs otherwise based on possible risk to the health of patients for public safety.’ Madame Secretary, I would urge you this week to allow that lung transplant to move forward,” Price said.
“Dr. Price, I appreciate your input. First as a mother and a grandmother, I can’t imagine anything more agonizing than what the Murnaghans are going through, and I talked to Janet Murnaghan, the mother of Sarah about this case. What I have also done is look very carefully at the history of the rules around lung transplant and organ transplant,” Sebelius said but was cut off mid-sentence.
“With all due respect Madame Secretary, I’m going to reclaim my time. It simply takes your signature … a study I know you have ordered, and I appreciate that, but a study will take over a year. This young lady will be dead,” Price said.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/sebelius-won-t-intervene-10-year-old-s-fight-lung-transplant
I don't disagree, finding a donor is a tough one, but we will soon see that "no limits" on the upper end of dollars spent for care doesn't really mean "no limits" -- unless of course they are YOUR OWN dollars.
It won't even work with your own dollars. The bureaucratic machine is not swayed by personal wealth.
PA PATRIOT
06-05-13, 18:34
This will open the flood gates for every person who needs medical care were insurance or regulation declines the procedure to just hit the courts and have a judge reverse the decision.
This is a whole new can of worms.
But I think we will see this over turned in the higher courts.
I'm no expert but isn't the actual issue the fact that an adult lung in a child has a significantly higher rejection rate?
Rejection rate has nothing to do with adult vs child. It is based on matching immunogenic markers. Very similar to blood typing, but with more immune markers that must be matched. Rejection is the result of the recipient's body recognizing the donor organ as "foreign" and attacking it.
PA PATRIOT
06-05-13, 18:42
Can a person donate a single lung say a mother to a daughter?
This most likely would be the closest match the child could receive right?
The_War_Wagon
06-06-13, 05:50
Too bad she lives in PA. Der Kommissar ObamassarKare should compassionately fly her to AK, and compassionately place her on an ice floe there... :rolleyes:
Can a person donate a single lung say a mother to a daughter?
This most likely would be the closest match the child could receive right?
Yes, but only if the donor is a proper match for the patient. A family member is not necessarily a proper match, similar to how most family members will not have the same blood type.
In a truly Free Market she should be able to buy a lung from a perfect donor.
In a truly Free Market she should be able to buy a lung from a perfect donor.
But only by outbidding everyone else looking for that lung.
This ruling is complete an utter bullshit. I've been a part of the organ transplant community for over 11 years and cannot tell you how pissed off I am right now. I was actually considering resigning my position in protest, but have calmed down a bit. These policies (not laws) were put together by surgeons, clinicians, transplant receipients, and other experts in the field to maximize life expectancy for each and every recipient. These policies were in place well before Obama, and have nothing to do with any so called "death panels". The only thing this accomplished was moving this young lady ahead of other kids who are sicker than her and who also need lungs. This precedent can only diminish the faith in a system that up until yesterday was as equitable as possible.
This ruling is complete an utter bullshit. I've been a part of the organ transplant community for over 11 years and cannot tell you how pissed off I am right now. I was actually considering resigning my position in protest, but have calmed down a bit. These policies (not laws) were put together by surgeons, clinicians, transplant receipients, and other experts in the field to maximize life expectancy for each and every recipient. These policies were in place well before Obama, and have nothing to do with any so called "death panels". The only thing this accomplished was moving this young lady ahead of other kids who are sicker than her and who also need lungs. This precedent can only diminish the faith in a system that up until yesterday was as equitable as possible.
Concur.
brickboy240
06-06-13, 11:17
Take a good look at this Kathleen Sebilius woman.
She is one cold, uncaring chilling witch of a woman. A total icy cold autocrat of a person. Typical of leftist women in those positions of power.
She is a ghoul of a human being....chilling to the bone how she has literally zero sense of feelings or compassion.
That ought to also be a factor that people find disturbing.
-brickboy240
But you can't really blame the parents for trying to move heaven and earth to save their daughter...just thinking another Pandora's box has been opened.
The judge should have ruled the law unconstitutional, no matter how well intentioned it may be.
The judge should have ruled the law unconstitutional, no matter how well intentioned it may be.
How exactly is it unconstitutional?
The judge should have ruled the law unconstitutional, no matter how well intentioned it may be.
There is no law to rule against. It is a policy that has been in place for the better part of a decade. The policy was created by the medical community and representatives of the patient community based on decades of data collected on transplant outcomes. Something tells me this judge isn't qualifed to say a damn thing.
This ruling is complete an utter bullshit. I've been a part of the organ transplant community for over 11 years and cannot tell you how pissed off I am right now. I was actually considering resigning my position in protest, but have calmed down a bit. These policies (not laws) were put together by surgeons, clinicians, transplant receipients, and other experts in the field to maximize life expectancy for each and every recipient. These policies were in place well before Obama, and have nothing to do with any so called "death panels". The only thing this accomplished was moving this young lady ahead of other kids who are sicker than her and who also need lungs. This precedent can only diminish the faith in a system that up until yesterday was as equitable as possible.
Concur.
Interesting, my understanding is that this little girl had but two weeks of life remaining her, which begging your pardon, leaves me somewhat perplexed as to just how much sicker then that one must be, in order to qualify for a transplant, according to your 'clinical" standard?
There is no law to rule against. It is a policy that has been in place for the better part of a decade. The policy was created by the medical community and representatives of the patient community based on decades of data collected on transplant outcomes. Something tells me this judge isn't qualifed to say a damn thing.
Although I'm not trying to cast a wide blanket over all physicians, clinicians, and otherwise upstanding medical field personnel who put patients first but this is the same medical in bed with big pharm and the likes soooo color me slightly skeptical when some experts call for some things to be done certain ways.
I agree with the policy insofar that limited resources should by directed to those who need them in a fair manner but what I and a lot of other people in this thread have issue with is the fact that Obamacare was sold to us POTUS's god approved gift to humanity that cease the suffering of the poor and children while cascading milk and honey over the land.. Now anyone ignorant to have believed that deserves no sympathy but just the same this case goes to show again how bad government involvement in most anything can be.
Interesting, my understanding is that this little girl had but two weeks of life remaining her, which begging your pardon, leaves me somewhat perplexed as to just how much sicker then that one must be, in order to qualify for a transplant, according to your 'clinical" standard?
This highlights just how dire it is for some kids out there. Suffice to say there are kids on the list who were (and should still be) ahead of this young lady. I can't blame the parents for what they are doing in using the media to their daughters advantage, but what people should be taking away from this is the importance of being an organ donor
brickboy240
06-06-13, 12:47
Even if the girl only had 2 weeks left to live...the initial reaction and words of Sebilius was chilling to the bone.
Her coldness leaves no doubt how govts can conduct Cambodia styled genocides or build camps and ovens.
...chilling.
-brickboy240
This highlights just how dire it is for some kids out there. Suffice to say there are kids on the list who were (and should still be) ahead of this young lady. I can't blame the parents for what they are doing in using the media to their daughters advantage, but what people should be taking away from this is the importance of being an organ donor
My understanding is that young Sarah, was "medically approved" as compatible for an adult lung, the only snag being her age, which propelled her into conflict with a policy decision.
Regardless, once ones prognosis degrades down to a week or two of life expectancy, its hard to visualize a more dire set of circumstances, which is why Sebelius initial response was so grotesquely inappropriate, offering the family nothing but her promise of initiating a study...
Its rare, but in this instance, a judge did exactly what he should have done...
The policy was put in place to maximize the life expectancy of everyone. What could very well happen, correct me if I'm wrong, is that she dies anyway because statistically people her age don't do as well. Then another person dies who was also waiting for that exact organ and was bumped lower by a judge.
Now two people have died instead of one. Justice? At least we tried right?
There is no law to rule against. It is a policy that has been in place for the better part of a decade. The policy was created by the medical community and representatives of the patient community based on decades of data collected on transplant outcomes. Something tells me this judge isn't qualifed to say a damn thing.
If there's no law what exactly was the judge reviewing? If its just a policy couldn't it just be ignored based on her doctors recommendation, and why was the HHS secretary appear to be testifying in front of a committee?
The_War_Wagon
06-06-13, 17:06
This precedent can only diminish the faith in a system that up until yesterday was as equitable as possible.
Didn't Larry Hagman and Mickey Mantle both 'buy' their way to the head of the line for new livers, respectively? I know that INSINUATION was made about both at the time...
I understand there is not another one...
The transplant rules may not be perfect for every case, but they were designed for the most positive outcomes by science and not emotion. How many people will die when every donor organ ends up in a court battle?
And as long as I am going to end up with the bill I strongly support "death" panels. We spend far too much on procedures with very low positive outcomes. That is fine if you want to pay out of pocket for it, otherwise it just burdens the system (private or public insurance) with little gain.
If there's no law what exactly was the judge reviewing? If its just a policy couldn't it just be ignored based on her doctors recommendation, and why was the HHS secretary appear to be testifying in front of a committee?
Not sure what he was reviewing that is the mystery. Hospitals could theoretically ignore the policy but that would put their entire transplant programs in jeopardy meaning they would no longer be able to put patients on the transplant list and would not have access to donor organs from other facilities.
but what people should be taking away from this is the importance of being an organ donor
Had this not occurred no one would be taking that notice.
There is no law to rule against. It is a policy that has been in place for the better part of a decade. The policy was created by the medical community and representatives of the patient community based on decades of data collected on transplant outcomes. Something tells me this judge isn't qualifed to say a damn thing.
Absolutely true. The judge has no qualification, nor he has had enough time to get an expert opinion. Sebelius is absolutely correct in her position; more so, I find it very disturbing that she has even theoretical power to override established transplant protocols. She should get a credit for her action, not be vilified. It upsets me that so many people in this thread posted out of their personal dislike of her/what she represents, rather than insight or simple logical analysis.
This poor girl has lived with CF all her life. It is a slow progressive disorder with known outcome. There has been no advances in adult-to-pediatric transplant recently, it is still plaqued by a mismatch and poor outcomes. The family should've taken this issue to transplant community 6 or 12 months ago, not make a show out of it.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.