Comments on: Religion and Health Care Reform

By: Dottie

Dottie — Thu, 20 Aug 2009 00:49:00 +0000

Ms Campbell why in the world would you want Universal Health Care, haven”t you seen enough from other Countries. It is sad you want to take our tax dollars to fund abortion, shame shame on you

By: Jean Darc

Jean Darc — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 04:07:40 +0000

#13 said it well. It seems as though Ms. Campbell does not want to be bothered by the cost or the care of the sick and elderly. She lacks mercy and compassion as does this health care plan. It is not about universal coverage. It is about killing the vulnerable and refusing care to the elderly. Did anyone who watch that video want Ms Campbell holding their hand if they were seriously ill? Let God decide when it is time to die. Not everyone who has a will to live is afraid to die. Some people want to live for Christ and bare witness to the truth with their last breath. Don’t be so anxious to snuff out their opportunity to give others a chance to love and see the face of Christ.

By: Mary

Mary — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:37:26 +0000

Dear Sister Simone,

I write this to you with respect.

When was the last time you held the hands of a dying patient younger than thirty-five years of age or desperately compressed the chest of an eigthy four year old who had a zest for life, or intubated a patient gasping for air, or comforted family members who are shocked at the news of impending death of a loved one, or managed hysterical family members while giving nursing care to the critically ill patient?????

I always lean on the promises of Jesus Christ and not on my judgement as a human being. Life is precious, Sister, and it is up to God and the dying person to negogiate when life on earth will cease as we know it and eternity begins!!! The angels among us in crucial moments are REAL! And, Sister, as we all know, for all this talk of letting someone die, the dollars pinched, the doctors involved… it is us, THE NURSES, that witness the last breathe, listen for the silence with our stethescope, smell the sickening sweet odor of death, and grieve in an unnoticeable way. We evaluate the quality of our care, the gentleness of our words, the hope that our nonverbal body language was not insulting to family as we implement our nursing skills to keep their loved one alive. Inevitably, Sister, we find a quiet place in the hospital unit to cry. The remainder of our shift is emotionally working through the memories of the failed code.

You see, everyone has opinions of how we should die, who should die and when. But how many of you actually see the dead on a regular basis? How many of you are truely with the dying? How many of you have actually held and comforted for six languishing hours the murdered/aborted, abandoned, dying baby boy with Down’s Syndrome wrapped in bloody blankets found in the hospital laundry room??? It is always someone else who has to complete the task for the politicians and pundits surrounding life and death.

As for me and my household, Sister, we choose life!

Love,
Mary Signorino RDH, RN
VHM Associate

By: Bill Sweeney

Bill Sweeney — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 01:47:11 +0000

As a hospital chaplain, I understand from where Sr. seems to be coming. Like Brad McIntyre, I too believe that too few of us appreciate the ‘mini’ moments throughout our lives where we are given the opportunity to die to self and thus ‘practice’ for our final curtain-call.
However,the language Sr. offers is far different than Brad McIntyre (#9) and Frank Sullivan (#2)in the comments they offer. There comments seem much more well-rounded, informed and reflective of Catholic moral teaching and the rationale that holds it firmly affixed to reality.
Being a spokesperson for a ‘Cathloic advocacy(lobbying)social network’ would indicate that perhaps citing or referring to recent scholarly AND Catholic ethical dialogue may have been worthwhile.
It is unfortunate that no reference is made in this short interview to the still-relevant contribution being made to the medical world by scholarly Catholic bio-ethicists. Reference to well-formulated ethical guidelines (ERD’s)that uphold the dignity of the human person–from the cradle to the grave–would have illustrated how continued and consistent ethical principles (as a guide in addressing complex medical situations) are very possible.
If speaking about concerns such as Louis DeCou in comment(#3)go unaddressed by our ‘advocates,’ then our system(s)-Governmental and Healthcare– that do appear to be moving in a ’socialized’ direction, will have the same flaws as referenced by Frank Sullivan (essentially inaccessable specialist care–cf. the comment about Canada) and Louis DeCou regarding the proclivity toward an ‘extermination of seniors.’
Awh…what’s the difference?
Let’s just go with the Nationalized ‘everything’ approach and hope that the socialized(ism) system we adopt won’t have the component that has consistently accompanied every other model–this being LESS FREEDOM for good old hoi polloi.
None of the current administration (nor any other previous administraion)will use the program they are setting up as Frank Sullivan states. Why?
Because it is inferior to what option(s) we presently have. Essentially, this plan will ensure that the wealthy continue to purchase the necessary specialized care they or their family needs and hoi polloi will, yet again, get the shaft.
The only difference now will be that people like you and me will be FORCED to be part of this governmental healthcare system in approximately 5 years–no other options. No more having your employer pay for health coverage.
If the present healthcare proposal goes through without significant changes (and it likely will because not enough time is being permitted to consider the entire 1000 page+ document to be properly looked at)then in five years my wife and children and I will have a sorely inferior healthcare plan than we do presently.
This is the ‘change’ we hoped for? Not me.

By: Mary Ray

Mary Ray — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 00:49:22 +0000

I agree that Americans are afraid of dying, yet we do not lead a healthy lifestyle-but expect that the medical community do everything, regardless of expense to save us, ie liver transplants for the alcholic. I believe that the time has come for Americans to except responsiblity for our own health. It is a known fact that obesity can lead to hypertension, diabetes and cardiac disease but yet look at todays childrens.
Also no one has said that the elderly should just die-but when the quality of life is poor and the expectation for recovery is poor, patients and family’s need to look at what is truly in the patient best interest. I think that everyone, regardless of age should have an “advanced directive” outlining the individuals wishes should the time come. Lets face it there are only two guarantees in life Taxes and Death-you have no say with taxes but you can have a say so in how you want to die.

By: Marion Cotty

Marion Cotty — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 19:10:37 +0000

If we reverence life, we should have health care available for all human beings who live peacefully in USA. This means planning for low and high options, with freedom of choice, in a federal single payer plan (which would save the administration bureaucracy), but let all insurance companies that meet the federal care standards have the option of participating as well as having private clients.

By: Brad McIntyre

Brad McIntyre — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:03:03 +0000

As a full time hospice chaplain and a former parish pastor, I would argue that death is indeed a part of life. How so? Every illness seems to me to be a mini-death. The again process itself is about coming to terms with gradual limitations, particularly physically. I agree with the Sister that we in America are very fearful of death and ambivalent about the whole dying process. Yet all the major religions of the world face death head-on and offer ways of confronting death with courage and candor.

By: Atheists as the “chief obstacles to development” « Your religion is false

Tue, 07 Jul 2009 15:44:46 +0000

[...] their oversized presence in politics they’re getting in the way of all the religious people clamoring for nationalized health care, or perhaps they’re getting in the way of the religious people arguing against nationalized [...]

By: Guillaume Apollinaire

Guillaume Apollinaire — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 20:28:23 +0000

The French healthcare system was named by the World Health Organization as the best performing system in the world in terms of availability and organization of health care providers.

Expenses related to the healthcare system in France represented 10.5% of the country’s GDP and 15.4% of its public expenditures. In 2004, 78.4% of these expenses were paid for by the state.

Current estimates put U.S. health care spending at approximately 15.2% of GDP, second only to the tiny Marshall Islands among all United Nations member nations.
Jean de Kervasdoué, a health economist, believes that French medicine is of great quality and is “the only credible alternative to the Americanization of world medicine.” According to Kervasdoué, France’s surgeons, clinicians, psychiatrists, and its emergency care system (SAMU) are an example for the world. However, despite this, Kervasdoué criticizes the fact that hospitals must comply with 43 bodies of regulation and the nit-picking bureaucracy that can be found in the system. Kervasdoué believes that the state intervenes too much in regulating the daily functions of French hospitals.

Furthermore, Japan, Sweden, and the Netherlands have health care systems with comparable performance to that of France’s, yet spend no more than 8% of their GDP (against France’s spending of more than 10% of its GDP, or about 34 billion euros).

Forgive me for commenting twice or citing experts,but so many American’s seem so ill informed on this subject!The American system is expensive failes to cover 40 million people and is far from being the highest quality, it isn’t even close!There are faults to a Partially public system, or a regualted system, but to say that any governement intervention makes a system “Socialist” and inferior, is terribly ignorant, this is issue like most is very complex there are many different policies and programs to compare to ours some governement run, some like the Dutch almost entirely private, but all nearly universal in there coverage of their populace, the quality of these systems also vary but most in many ways exceed ours in the quality of care given.

By: Peter Gadiel

Peter Gadiel — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 02:36:52 +0000

No thanks Ms. Campbell. I will decline your attempt to force me to allow placing government bureaucrats in control of my health care.
You may wish to meet your god without a fight, most of us reject that option. You will not force your desire to die on us.
Furthermore, the “50 million” you claim are without access to health care include 10 million illegal aliens, millions more who are changing jobs and thus betweeen coverage, as well as people who because they are young choose not to buy insurance.