Reply to thread

A good reason to consider these consultations to be a bad thing would be that there is a conflict of interest when the state both wants to hold down costs and wants to make sure that they are widely available if not manditory. When the president of our country has used as an example of a means of holding down costs the elderly person who should receive pain medication instead of treatment he has stated what side the government bias will be on.

I have read that section of the bill over and over a bunch of times now and I agree that it seems not to say it will be manditory. But it does say when they happen they must include certain things and we do know the economic motives of the gov to ration services and they have stated that they will use their power to ration to cut services just like end of life care. Even if our current administration did not abuse such a system it would only be a matter of time before another administration would abuse such a system. Or do you completely trust all future politicians to do what is most ethical and not what is most cost effective? When I tune into this forum I see countless examples of people who thought that Bush was the devil incarnate and yet the same people want to give power over their lives to the future Bush's of our country.

The history of governments all over the world is that most of them have become tyrannies sooner or later.