# The new target is... hospice? Wha? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 30, 2009, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730 "2009-07-30T00:59:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/21 "2009-07-30T02:57:09Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > My parents, staunch conservatives, donated a hefty enough chunk to the local hospice to have a room named after them. I wonder if they knew what evil plot they were forwarding? Hospice isn’t evil if it’s voluntary. It’s only evil when it’s forced upon people by a so-called government health care system that can’t or won’t be arsed to spend the bucks to save them. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/22 "2009-07-30T03:01:32Z")
This argument is idiotic on its face, considering that the overwhelming majority of the people we’re talking about (those with serious illnesses for whom hospice would be an option) already have their health care financed through the government, because they’re over 65 and on Medicare. So if this were going to be a problem, it would already be a problem, wouldn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/23 "2009-07-30T03:02:09Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > A lot of people regard the Social Security system to be unfeasable, and woe betide any politician who tries to do away with it. Too many people are too heavily invested in it for too long, and the same would be the case with UHC. Yea, but old people like SS, you’re positing that the UHC will force them into hospice-care against their will (which again, would loose the gov’t money, so why are they doing it?), but they won’t vote against it anyways. And I was correct, [85% of patients in hospice](http://www.nhpco.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3367) now are over 65 and thus presumably already receiving gov’t healthcare. > [@](#): > > Hospice isn’t evil if it’s voluntary. It’s only evil when it’s forced upon people by a so-called government health care system that can’t or won’t be arsed to spend the bucks to save them. But it costs the gov’t more money. And they’re already paying for it. Please read the thread. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/24 "2009-07-30T03:07:06Z")
Healthcare in the US is already rationed. Me? I’m a 55-yr-old asthmatic without a job. My healthcare is either $4 prescriptions from Target or what I can afford to pay for with cash, which ain’t much more. My insured inhaler was $250 under my LAST policy ($20 under the previous one), so my doc prescribed a less effective one I used to be able to get for $25, but without insurance it’s jumped to $125. “Government largesse?” Kindly suck my dick. I work my job search around positions where I won’t be required to walk much because I’m nursing my last inhaler until I get insurance, and it’s been SEVEN FUCKING MONTHS! Asshole, I could pay MUCH MORE in taxes, but my condition requires me to be a semi-invalid because of the government’s health policy. And **Tomn** , this is a case where I don’t care if I crossed the line. ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/25 "2009-07-30T03:08:35Z")
> [@DoctorJ](#): > > This argument is idiotic on its face, considering that the overwhelming majority of the people we’re talking about (those with serious illnesses for whom hospice would be an option) already have their health care financed through the government, because they’re over 65 and on Medicare. So if this were going to be a problem, it would already be a problem, wouldn’t it? There’s a big difference between having the government subsidize a small group of people and having it subsidize everyone. It’s the difference between being a rich corn/ethanol farmer and a Social Security recipient, even before the latter goes bust. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/26 "2009-07-30T03:16:53Z")
I’d very much appreciate if people could make a tiny effort to talk about hospice in this thread dedicated to, you know, hospice. If you just want to throw tantrums about UHC, I’m sure you can find another thread. ---
**Author:** ![Simplicio](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c37758/32.png) [@Simplicio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Simplicio)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/27 "2009-07-30T03:18:08Z")
> [@athelas](#): > > There’s a big difference between having the government subsidize a small group of people and having it subsidize everyone. Err…that’s certainly true in a general case, but what does it have to do with this thread? Something like 85% of the population that will need to decide whether or not to go into hospice are already under a gov’t health plan. That’s already more or less “everyone”. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/28 "2009-07-30T03:23:29Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > I’d very much appreciate if people could make a tiny effort to talk about hospice in this thread dedicated to, you know, hospice. If you just want to throw tantrums about UHC, I’m sure you can find another thread. But it felt GOOD, and isn’t that what UHC is all about, people feeling good? Or not so bad? (signed) **drop** , who first thought the thread was about the pitfalls of providing cheap shelter to European teens and twenty-somethings.) ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/29 "2009-07-30T03:27:24Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Hospice isn’t evil if it’s voluntary. It’s only evil when it’s forced upon people by a so-called government health care system that can’t or won’t be arsed to spend the bucks to save them. Hospice isn’t evil if it’s voluntary. It’s only evil when it’s forced upon people by a free market health care system that can’t or won’t be arsed to spend the bucks to save them. So what is difference? ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/30 "2009-07-30T03:39:47Z")
> [@DoctorJ](#): > > This argument is idiotic on its face, considering that the overwhelming majority of the people we’re talking about (those with serious illnesses for whom hospice would be an option) already have their health care financed through the government, because they’re over 65 and on Medicare. So if this were going to be a problem, it would already be a problem, wouldn’t it? Please do not try to divert the argument by inserting actual facts into it. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/31 "2009-07-30T03:45:19Z")
> [@](#): > > There’s a big difference between having the government subsidize a small group of people and having it subsidize everyone. It’s the difference between being a rich corn/ethanol farmer and a Social Security recipient, even before the latter goes bust. We’re not talking about a small group of people. We’re talking about pretty much everybody over 65. My clinic population tends old and poor, so most of them get either Medicare or Medicaid. I can’t remember a single patient ever denied proven life-sustaining treatment or forced into hospice. My other big population is a VA nursing home, for God’s sake–if the government wanted to force people they cover into hospice, that would be the place to do it. But I’ve never seen it happen. I don’t think you’re going to get much argument about hospice itself, because it isn’t something reasonable people have a problem with. ---
**Author:** ![elfkin477](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/a9a28c/32.png) [@elfkin477](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfkin477)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/32 "2009-07-30T03:50:25Z")
> [@DoctorJ](#): > > We’re not talking about a small group of people. We’re talking about pretty much everybody over 65. What % of people over the age of 65 depend on medicaid/care as their sole source of medical insurance? I know disabled people who are eligible for medicaid, but have private insurance through their spouses. Wouldn’t this be true of some significant portion of the elderly as well? ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/33 "2009-07-30T03:52:52Z")
> [@elfkin477](#): > > What % of people over the age of 65 depend on medicaid/care as their sole source of medical insurance? I know disabled people who are eligible for medicaid, but have private insurance through their spouses. Wouldn’t this be true of some significant portion of the elderly as well? I haven’t hit upon the correct search string to find out this info. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/34 "2009-07-30T03:53:34Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Well, it’s pretty clearly to tax all the rich and spread their wealth to people who haven’t earned it. > > And while the purpose of ObamaDemCongressCare isn’t specifically to kill old people (or younger ones unfortunate enough to need care the government decides it can’t or won’t pay for), that will certainly be the result. Okay, so let’s make sure I have this straight, especially the “or younger ones unfortunate enough to need care the government decides it can’t or won’t pay for” part. Right now, tens of millions of people have no health insurance. If they get a life threatning illness, and cannot afford treatment, they die. (Or they receive some sort of local government assistance and/or emergency room care, but that’s ultimately an inefficient form of socialized medicine.) Okay - so the danger is that these people, who don’t currently have health insurance and hence can’t get any treatment - may one day get treatment through a government program, but then may be denied specific treatment. This is apparently worse than their previous condition than NOT GETTING ANY TREATMENT AT ALL. Please explain this one. You know the current proposal for the US is to have a government-run insurance program, rather than moving to single payer, right? > [@](#): > > Why do Democrats and liberals always want to drag everything down to its lowest workable level? Why not work to come up with adequate plans to lift up those who don’t have health care coverage and find productive ways to provide it, rather than drag everyone else down and force them into an inadequate UHC plan that provides the least care for the most people. This is their attempt to better society by making medical care more widely available - a laudible goal, but perhaps their plans would lead to a flawed system. Why is it that conservatives on the other hand seem to believe that our current system is somehow optimal and sancrosanct and untouchable? Where are the proposals from the other side that better align health care with free market incentives to increase availability and reduce costs? So you have one side promising change of some sort, and the other side declaring that the obviously broken statuos quo is sacrosanct. People who want to see the medical system improved only have one route to support. Where are all the conservative improvements to the medical system? > [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > I think I’d prefer to live in a society where I at least had the opportunity to obtain coverage, either through a job offering adequate health insurance, earning enough with a second job or whatever to pay for my own and my familie’s coverage, or through charitable means to get the care I need rather than have one and only one source of access to health care, and that one source being an uncaring government bueaurocracy continually plagued by inadequate resources and long waiting lists. You are aware that the current system is in place because of government intervention in the markets, right? By that I mean that there’s nothing inherently natural or correct about employer-based health care coverage. It comes from an accidental of history - the government massively intervened in the markets in WW2 to enact wage freezes across the board. So businesses reacted by trying to offer other benefits to attract the best and brightest - among them, health insurance. And so the notion of employer-based health insurance was created by massive government intervention in the market. And it was maintained by similar intervention. Tax incentives for businesses providing health care hide the true cost of health care from the employers and effectively act as a government subsidy for that particular method of providing insurance. Why is it that you’ll defend this substantial government market-distorting intervention which causes job lock and creates all sorts of problems, but you’ll fight tooth and nail over other types of government intervention? I would imagine it’s an illogical adherence to the status quo, and unstated assumption that where we’re starting from is somehow ideal and requires knee-jerk defense. Otherwise why aren’t you and your ilk out promoting reforms that would reduce government role in health care, detach health insurance directly from employment, and allow free market incentives to better affect the health care market? > [@](#): > > You have got to be kidding me! You don’t like having to call your insurance company to okay a test and you think government health care will make that easier? Have you ever tried to accomplish anything through a major government agency? Just trying to find out what you’re entitled to and how to get it can be a maze from which it seems there is no escape, and then you’re left with whatever they say you get, which can vary depending on who you talk to and which most likely won’t be nearly enough. How is it exactly do you think it works in socialized medicare countries? Patients and doctors have to call some Office Of Medical Approval for each and every treatment like they currently call insurance companies? No, in that case the power of rationing and determinations about treatments are put in the hands of doctors. They control the resources. ---
**Author:** ![Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/try2b_comprehensive/32/65_2.png) [@Try2B\_Comprehensive](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Try2B_Comprehensive)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/35 "2009-07-30T03:59:30Z")
I worked in a number of hospice settings, and I’m actually reasonably certain that they are not used as a way to kill unwanted people. People might live longer in more well-funded hospice settings, but not always. You can’t stop people from dying. What is bringing this up? I say who cares- focus on things that make sense. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/36 "2009-07-30T04:02:58Z")
> [@elfkin477](#): > > What % of people over the age of 65 depend on medicaid/care as their sole source of medical insurance? I know disabled people who are eligible for medicaid, but have private insurance through their spouses. Wouldn’t this be true of some significant portion of the elderly as well? Here’s something. Page 28 of [this pdf from Kaiser](http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/Key%20Medicare%20and%20Medicaid%20Statistics.pdf). Sources of supplemental coverage among Medicare beneficiaries, 2002: > [@](#): > > \*\*Employer sponsored plan: 35% > > Medigap: 21% > > Medicaid: 17% > > Medicare HMO: 15% > > None: 12%\*\* ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 4:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/37 "2009-07-30T04:08:07Z")
> [@EddyTeddyFreddy](#): > > Which of course is the REAL purpose of ObamaCare – to kill all the old people and tax all the rich and spread all their wealth to lazy illegal aliens! > > ETA: In other words, the hospice scare-mongering is designed to whip people into a fearful frenzy so that nothing is done to reform the health care system, leaving the insurance companies comfortably ensconced in their current profitable position. Track the donations going to politicians of both parties – 'tis quite illuminating. Yes, I’d be interested to see what the private insurance industry will do when it is conceivable to prolongue one’s life for hundreds of years. I wonder how they will respond to life extension care for a centenarian. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/38 "2009-07-30T04:20:16Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Yes, I’d be interested to see what the private insurance industry will do when it is conceivable to prolongue one’s life for hundreds of years. I wonder how they will respond to life extension care for a centenarian. I’ve read in the past that they’ve lobbied against government funded research into life extension for just that reason. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/39 "2009-07-30T04:21:33Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Here’s something. > > Page 28 of [this pdf from Kaiser](http://www.kff.org/medicaid/upload/Key%20Medicare%20and%20Medicaid%20Statistics.pdf). Sources of supplemental coverage among Medicare beneficiaries, 2002: Medicare supplemental insurance is a very different animal than it was in 2002, because that was before Medicare Part D (the prescription drug plan). The main function of supplemental insurance these days is to cover the “gaps” in Medicare, namely the deductibles and copayments and charges once limits are reached. Not that it makes any difference to the main point, which is that the government is paying the lion’s share of the health care costs for the population in question. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 30, 2009, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730/40 "2009-07-30T04:30:04Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > I’ve read in the past that they’ve lobbied against government funded research into life extension for just that reason. I’d be interested to read this. Do you have a cite? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-new-target-is-hospice-wha/504730.md?page=3)