the newish japanese government is conservative in bent, and its finance minister recently raised eyebrows with the above statement.
japan, as you may know, is a rapidly aging society as the long falling birthrate bites into the demographics.. here's how the english guardian reports this tale:.
let elderly people 'hurry up and die', says japanese ministertaro aso says he would refuse end-of-life care and would 'feel bad' knowing treatment was paid for by government.
Just my HO. sammieswife
Thank you. While I may disagree with some of your proposed solutions, I appreciate that you put time and effort into trying to define some solutions instead of merely expressing 'shock and dismay' at the solutions and theories put forth by others.
the newish japanese government is conservative in bent, and its finance minister recently raised eyebrows with the above statement.
japan, as you may know, is a rapidly aging society as the long falling birthrate bites into the demographics.. here's how the english guardian reports this tale:.
let elderly people 'hurry up and die', says japanese ministertaro aso says he would refuse end-of-life care and would 'feel bad' knowing treatment was paid for by government.
I'm gobsmacked. One cannot write this without completely ignoring the concept that any sort of social contract is not merely payment for a lifetime of services (assumed to be) rendered, but a continuing compact of the future with the past. I find this line of reasoning to be quite absurd, I'm afraid.
Apparently, I missed the memo. The last I knew, the precise terms of what was included in the social contract was still being vigorously debated.
Sulla, would you be so kind as to post the memo that actually defined the "social contract" as you did above?
"lives of questionable quality" is disturbing. It is disturbing for reasons that should be obvious.
You can't see where a doctor might question the morality of what their actions that "saved" a premie only to leave it deaf, blind, unable to eat normally, with the maximum cognitive abilities of a infant, never to run, play, love? Back to the "social contract," who contracted to give that child a million dollars of medical care when other parties to the contract do not have basic care?
Second, this highlights the central problem with the social provision of health care. What you have here is as someone (who is not otherwise known for deep thinking) said, a death panel. Ultimately, you have a bureaucratic process that weighs some social criteria to determine the degree of health care. Please tell me you have at least some trepidation about this. Or are you convinced that good people like you will make the right decisions?
Very good; you've landed upon a central problem, not necessarily "the" central problem. Do you have solutions? Profound recommendations? You have clearly expressed your displeasure with what we have, but you have presented no options. You don't like the bureaucratic process. What alterantive do you propose? You don't want social criteria to determine the degree health care. What criteria would you use?
Let's put Sulla in charge, and tell us if you are very happy with that promotion. Explain to the American people your solutions. You have X amount of dollars and XX amount of need. Who loses and why?
Because right now, to me, you seem like the average American: you want to whine about the reality; you want to attack the positions and decision-making processes of those trying to make extremely difficult decisions, yet you present no alternatives.
the newish japanese government is conservative in bent, and its finance minister recently raised eyebrows with the above statement.
japan, as you may know, is a rapidly aging society as the long falling birthrate bites into the demographics.. here's how the english guardian reports this tale:.
let elderly people 'hurry up and die', says japanese ministertaro aso says he would refuse end-of-life care and would 'feel bad' knowing treatment was paid for by government.
If we deem grandma to be too costly to keep alive because she's past her 'due date', how do you justify the expense to the rest of the population in keeping disabled persons or babies alive that in many cases, don't have the potential that even old grandma had? Or still has.
I have posted before that we can no longer afford million dollar babies (extreme saving measures for premature infants). The pediatric neurologist in my class bemoans not only the money but questions the ethics and morality of 'saving' these kids to live a life of questionable quality. Yet, as I stated earlier, Westerners have come to view extreme measures as their 'right.'
These issues will need to be dealt with in your lifetime Sammielee24, and you will not like the solutions. It all reverts to the same question of how to spend limited resources. Kidney transplant and dialysis costs (related to US obesity and sequela to diabetes) alone will almost bankrupt us in the very near future.
You have articulated the tragedy of the situation, but do you have solutions? Who do you suggest should get less care because someone is going to get voted off the island.
Forgive me if I appear harsh, but I have lived with and studied these bioethical issues for almost three years now. I remember how shocking reality was to me, but I am a little numb to it now. That was driven home when my daughter told me of a conversation she had recently with a software developer who is working with a large medical research facility on software to model the next viral epidemic. The software engineers ran, and re-ran, and re-ran, and re-ran the models, and then cried. My daughter asked me if I could guess why? I said yes. They had to come to terms with the fact that hospitals/government will set up large tent cities, perhaps in stadiums, to which they will transfer people to 'treat' them, but 'treating' them means leaving them there to die. Instead of it being an abstract event, their software allowed them to see the spread and quantify the numbers, and it stilled their hearts. I felt sorry for them, but if they are going to work in the healthcare industry, they need to learn to deal with harsh realities.
the newish japanese government is conservative in bent, and its finance minister recently raised eyebrows with the above statement.
japan, as you may know, is a rapidly aging society as the long falling birthrate bites into the demographics.. here's how the english guardian reports this tale:.
let elderly people 'hurry up and die', says japanese ministertaro aso says he would refuse end-of-life care and would 'feel bad' knowing treatment was paid for by government.
Conflating abortion with the Minister’s position muddles two separate issues.
Elderly persons have (hopefully) contributed to society so the question becomes one of how much end-of-life care are they owed in return for their prior contributions. It is not a question of whether they are presently contributing. Instead, it is a resource question with moral underpinnings
Fetuses/infants have contributed nothing to society, so the question is one of pure ethics. How much respect should they be accorded, and when? This is a moral question, and resources are only tangentially linked.
I want to clarify that supporting infanticide is not my position, but I used it to illustrate the burden/contribution dichotomy.
However, Michael Tooley wrote a very persuasive and now famous article, In Defense of Abortion and Infanticide, that argued the following: individuals cannot have a right to life unless it “possesses the concept of a continuing self or mental substance.” Fetuses do not have any such concept, so they do not have a right to life. That fact that they may someday come to have the requisite concept does not itself make it seriously wrong to destroy them. Thus abortion and even infanticide shortly after birth must be viewed as morally acceptable.
Conversely, John Noonan, Jr. argues in An Almost Absolute Value in History that “personhood” begins at conception for it is at conception that the “new being received the genetic code, which determines his characteristics and makes him a self-evolving being.”
the newish japanese government is conservative in bent, and its finance minister recently raised eyebrows with the above statement.
japan, as you may know, is a rapidly aging society as the long falling birthrate bites into the demographics.. here's how the english guardian reports this tale:.
let elderly people 'hurry up and die', says japanese ministertaro aso says he would refuse end-of-life care and would 'feel bad' knowing treatment was paid for by government.
That said, the problem of what to do with a useless and inconvenient person seems to bring us full circle to the original post.
Ah...I see your point Sulla, though I disagree that the issues are the same. The aborted zygote/fetus/infant has the mere potentiality of being a full-fledged member of society, but it will need care for years afterward birth to achieve such.
The question of the elderly is what do we do with full-fledged member of society? Do we offer them the extra-ordinary medical treatments that Westerners have come to expect?
I can tell you today in my Bioethics class--and in every policy-making discussion in the civilized world--we discussed the following: Just how do we tell "we the people" that we no longer will pay $1,000 daily to feed grandma while she dies?
the newish japanese government is conservative in bent, and its finance minister recently raised eyebrows with the above statement.
japan, as you may know, is a rapidly aging society as the long falling birthrate bites into the demographics.. here's how the english guardian reports this tale:.
let elderly people 'hurry up and die', says japanese ministertaro aso says he would refuse end-of-life care and would 'feel bad' knowing treatment was paid for by government.
But the profoundly broken cultures in which many black girls -- and for that matter, a large number of white girls -- live leaves them vulnerable to exploitation from many directions. Simply put, the social capital that you provide for your daughter which enables her to make real choices does not exist for these others. The kind of choices your daughter has made -- to go to school, study hard, work, etc. -- have certainly required hard work; for these others, it would require a miracle.
Sulla: I'm trying to understand your position. As you note above, these girls are under tremendous economic and societal pressures. Do you then want to deny them abortion and force an unwanted child upon them? Or are you simply pointing out that the problem is complex and solutions earlier than abortion are necessary?
http://www.armageddonconspiracy.co.uk/sex-for-salvation-ii%282395055%29.htm.
judaism claims that the way to god is through obeying endless rules allegedly imposed by god.
the great philosopher immanuel kant claimed that judaism wasn't a religion at all, but a mere body of laws.
I do not know about Islam.
The Sufis practice Gnostic Islam. Rumi is one of their most well-known authors.
hi all, i'm new but have read an awful lot here plus jwfacts and jwsurvey over the past months, also the coc book.. i'm not a jw (and never will be) but have a wife who is a 'want-to-be' jw.
this is quite a challenge for me as i already had an idea on some of the points jws stick to, but now with everything i have learned about the high-control methods, the changing doctrines, and the cover-ups, it's a real concern.... anyway, i was putting forward the notion that jw's don't help anyone in disaster zones, except jws, or by giving out wt tracts or magazines (which would be really useful to homeless, hungry and cold families).
she didn't know, and doubted it, so i told her to ask an elder if the wt provides assistance at all anywhere.. she reported back that the elder said the wt does contribute to the red cross.
I would ask your wife to obtain from the elder proof that they donate to the Red Cross. Shift the burden to him.
some 800 people in sweden and other parts of europe have developed an incurable case of narcolepsy which is being attributed to pandemrix h1n1 made by glaxosmithkline.
30,000,000 have been vaccinated with the flu shot.
europe drug regulators say those under 20 should not take the drug.
Justita Themis, the problem seems to be with a very particular adjuvant vaccine that was used in Europe. No such correlation was found in the US. The culprit seems to be this particular brand of vaccine, not all vaccines.
I am aware of that, and I do not think that particular point has been fleshed out. I was trying (unsuccessfully) to post while in class, and I was unable to address that in my prior post.
The vaccine generating the most problems is H1N1 containing the AS03 adjuvant. South Korea used the H1N1 with the MF59 adjuvant and had no cases.
Nevertheless, not receiving a vaccine does not guarantee that one will not develop narcolepsy sequela to contracting the swine through via normal channels.
some 800 people in sweden and other parts of europe have developed an incurable case of narcolepsy which is being attributed to pandemrix h1n1 made by glaxosmithkline.
30,000,000 have been vaccinated with the flu shot.
europe drug regulators say those under 20 should not take the drug.
The authorities have already said that the incidence of narcolepsy from the shot is not acceptable.
The incidence of narcolepsy from the shot is not acceptable in some populations.
Some countries show NO link between the vaccine and narcolepsy.
No Association in South Korea
Choe YJ, Bae GR, Lee DH.
Vaccine . 2012 Dec 14;30(52):7439-42. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.10.030. Epub 2012 Oct 23.
"No increase in cases or incidence rate for narcolepsy during the A( H1N1 )pdm09 vaccination campaign was found in South Korea. Our data do not support the use of MF59-adjuvanted or non-adjuvanted A( H1N1 )pdm09 vaccine as a trigger for narcolepsy on a population level."
In those countries where there was a link, the numbers were very low. And as noted earlier, nacolepsy is a risk from H1N1 generally.
Annals of Neurology, December 7, 2012
Decreased Incidence of Childhood Narcolepsy 2 Years after the 2009 H1N1 Winter Flu Pandemic
"Studies in Sweden, Finland, and Norway have shown a 4- to 13-fold increased risk of developing childhood narcolepsy following Pandemrix (only 1 of 16,000 vaccinated children developed narcolepsy, however) These results bolster the claim that narcolepsy, an autoimmune disease caused by hypocretin cell loss, could be triggered by H1N1 vaccination or infection."
