Fox News uses "death book" lie to revive "death panels" lie
Following several days in which Fox News promoted the smear that an educational booklet on end-of-life decisions used by the Veterans Health Administration is a "death book," Fox News host Megyn Kelly and Fox News contributor Jonah Goldberg used a discussion about the booklet to revive the falsehood that Democratic health care reform legislation would institute "death panels." Kelly also falsely claimed that the booklet encourages veterans to "hurry up and die" and that VHA officials are "required" to refer patients to it.
Kelly, Goldberg connect VHA booklet to "death panels" smear
From the August 24 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:
KELLY: Well, just as the White House says that people's fear about so-called "death panels" is baseless, critics now claim the administration is actually pressuring certain disabled veterans to, quote, "hurry up and die" -- that's the accusation. Asking physicians at the nation's VA hospitals to refer to our nation's veterans to a pamphlet called "Your Life, Your Choices."
Title sounds innocuous enough. However, inside, this booklet asks veterans to decide whether their lives are worth living if they are, for example, in a wheelchair, in a nursing home, or if they have become, quote, "a financial burden to their families."
[...]
GOLDBERG: And I think, you know, the problem here is the defense that [Assistant Veterans Affairs Secretary Tammy] Duckworth offers, saying, "Oh, well, this wasn't put forward by the Obama administration." She's sort of saying this sort of burbled up from the bureaucracy, which no one really disputes. That is not all that helpful. Because one of the points that critics of Obama's plan make is that this -- once you get the structure for it, it'll be on autopilot, and the bureaucracies will naturally tend towards exactly this kind of thing and death panels may, in fact, be not too far off on the horizon because of the very nature of how socialized medicine and rationing works. [America's Newsroom, 8/24/09]
"Death panels" smear has been widely debunked
Media debunk "death panels" lie dozens of times. Numerous media outlets have now debunked right-wing claims that the House health care reform bill would encourage euthanasia of the elderly, including Sarah Palin's Facebook claim -- forwarded by the conservative media -- that the bill would create a "death panel" and the related claim -- initiated by Betsy McCaughey -- that the bill would "absolutely require" that seniors on Medicare undergo end-of-life counseling "that will tell them how to end their life sooner." Indeed, Media Matters for America has identified more than 40 instances in which media outlets have reported that these claims are false.
Kelly forwards claims from "critics" that booklet tells veterans to "hurry up and die"
From the August 24 edition of America's Newsroom:
KELLY: Well, and it becomes a little bit more scary, doesn't it, Jonah, when you've got the government, in case of the VA -- or, perhaps, in the case of our new health care system, if it goes through -- the government is in charge of paying the bills for the person who's in the wheelchair or in the nursing home or so on. And so when the government is coming to that person and saying, "You really need to take stock about whether life is worth living under your current conditions. Ask yourself if you're a financial burden." It puts a layer of pressure, is the argument, on those people to basically, as I said in the intro -- this is from the critics -- quote, "hurry up and die," you know, for these veterans who've come back from war.
"Your Life, Your Choices" does not tell veterans to "hurry up and die." The booklet emphasizes that "your wishes will direct future health care decisions" and presents preserving one's life "using any means possible" as an option to consider. An August 23 post by VoteVets.org blogger Richard Smith criticized former Bush administration official Jim Towey's assertion in The Wall Street Journal that "Your Life, Your Choices" presents "end-of-life choices in a way aimed at steering users toward predetermined conclusions," writing: "Really, if the document was really trying to get veterans to pull the plug on themselves, then first suggesting to them that their life should be prolonged at all costs is a pretty stupid way to do it" [emphasis in original].
Kelly falsely claims VHA doctors are "required" to show patients the booklet
From the August 24 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:
KELLY: Let me ask you about that, because Tammy Duckworth said, "Look, it hasn't" -- she maintains it hasn't been in effect. Now, the facts appear to belie that, because this has been up --
GOLDBERG: Right.
KELLY: -- on their website since July 2, and it requires physicians at VAs to at least refer their patients to this booklet. So, put aside that fact. Shouldn't the Obama administration just take this down? Maybe they inherited it from the Bush administra-- shouldn't it just come down off the website -- end of controversy?
VHA does not "require" physicians to refer patients to the booklet. A July 2 VHA document actually directs patients to " 'Your Life, Your Choices' ... or other published resources."
Fox previously cropped doc to falsely claim VHA doctors "told to refer all veterans" to booklet. On Fox News Sunday, host Chris Wallace repeatedly cropped quotes from the document to support his false claim that under the document, "VA health practitioners were told to refer all veterans -- not just end-of-life veterans, but all 24 million veterans -- to this document, 'Your Life, Your Choices.' "
Prove it.
She is willing to be called the "Death Panel Lady" with little or nothing to Gain.
Ms. Palin is what my Mother would call a Band Wagoneer.
Incapable of an Original Thought & willing to grab any issue to Cheer.
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
I find it humerous that people are attacking these "death panels" when our federal government wants to bring in 50 million new patients but tell us our quality of care will not change. Have you ever studied supply and demand economics?
One of two things will HAVE TO HAPPEN if healthcare passes:
1. Quality of Care will go drastically down and we will wait for services but everyone will have access.
2. Quality of Care will stay the same but access will be regualted. This is where "Death Panels" come into play. If you dont like the name then call it something else but it is still a regulation panel that decides where priority of services are to be placed.
Part of the reason that Healthcare is currently not available to everyone is because the supply cannot meet the demand which has raised the cost to a point that excludes those 55 million from attaining it.
I have worked for employers who didnt offer healthcare and I couldnt afford it so I went without. This was something that made me aspire to get an education and a job where benefits were offered. Liberals think there is spare healthcare sitting on a shelf and that no one is sharing. Think twice, you can have quanity or quality but not both.
I do agree that efforts can be made to bring care to more people like medical savings accounts, increasing portablitiy, and etc but scrapping a whole system in favor of a government regulated system in lunacy.
Probably when you were young and healthy. But when you went without, what if you had a catastrophic illness? You'd either be a) dead or b) deeply in debt or c) forced into bankruptcy.
So you then pulled yourself up by your bootstraps. Goody for you, boohoo. And now you look down in disdain on the people who can't afford health insurance.
Medical savings accounts? People can't afford to save a nickel these days. Fail.
Increasing portability? Under single payer, when you lose your job (unlike today), you get to keep your insurance.
Nobody has yet been able to answer this (courtesy of Rep. Weiner): What do insurance companies bring to the table in regards to health care?
As far as health care is concerened, like I said before scrapping a whole system is not the answer. Empowering and expanding government is not the way to support our citizens true entitlement of FREEDOM. This is the original and most emportant entitlement that our fore fathers shaped our whole country around and it seems that people have forgotten that.
You are simply running the typical liberal mind set that is plaquing our country right now. Major legislation is being proposed and passed without true study. Our healthcare is need of help but is not imploding so fast that we need to pass a 1,500 page legislation in a month from proposal.
Liberals have forgotten that several other solutions have been proposed. Stop believing everything Obama says for five minutes and think about the greater ramifications that sweeping legislation could have on our national debt and quality of care that our great grandchildren will be faced with if we are wrong.
The government bauked and said they needed the bailout, it has yet to be spent. I thought that was an emergency. They couldnt even get accurate numbers on a simple program like Cash for Clunkers and you want to hand the single largest service to them, our Healthcare. Can you say USPS, Cash for Clunkers, Medicare, Medicade, Social Security, hell even the DMV doesnt work.... NO THANK YOU.
So you're saying that the "reward" for hard work is having quality health insurance so you aren't one of the 18,000 people who die every year? You do realize that in every society since the dawn of time there have been and will be poor people.
And you're another one of the "government never works" crowd. That's a canard. Get over it. The government is YOU. Last time I checked, granny gets her SS check every month and gets to see a doctor when she's sick and every time I mail a letter it gets to its destination in 2-3 days for 44 cents.
And I see you didn't bother to answer my question. I'll pose it again:
What do insurance companies bring to the table in regards to health care?
The bailout is working by most accounts with alot of the money yet to be spent, what has it been since it's passage 3-4 months? Most economist are saying that we averted the Great Depression II,sorry if the whole economy is not turned around in a few months but it will take a little longer to recover from 8yrs of outright plunder and blunder from the Bush administration. I mean President Obama didn't inheret a surplus like his predecesor. You know we could've paid for this whole healthcare bill if we hadn't been lied into the war in Iraq, which was never placed on the budget(I guess GB was looking out for your childrens future by hiding the cost)and the medicare prescription bill which was passed with cost on all but no yelping from the teabaggers who now see their liberties being stripped away by. Excuse me if I note a bit of hyprocrisy in your present concern over cost, and whose children will foot the bill. Cash for Clunkers...really, are you that simple minded? There are many government programs run very well,many run so well you take them for granted.
I find it curious that you criticize the government programs that have faced cutbacks from conservatives,yet it was not the government programs that caused the present financial meltdown on Wall St., that needed government money for rescue! Oh well so much for the myth that private business can do it better.
I don't know what your beef is with SS,no one is forbidden from buying into 401'ks etc.,and it's creation has provided a safety net. to keep seniors and retirees from depending on their families and from living in the gutter. SS has provided many seniors with independence and a greater quality of life than they would have if it was not there. Maybe if YOU conservatives would stop raiding it every chance you get(your real goal is to abolish it)it would be in a better position, but to ridicule it as a government program that does not work is ridiculous. I also find it ridiculous your objection to improving and lowering cost of Medicare and Medicaid which would make them more solvent and improve quantity and quality of life for society as a whole. I'd like to see you try and take take SS,Medicare or Medicaid away and see the fight.
In almost every instance when government has turned things over to the privite sector cost has increased, access and quality diminished. Enron,Halliburton,Blackwater come to mind right off the top of my head, and you want to leave our health to private insurers who place profits ahead of me! NO THANK YOU!
boohoo what exactly are you arguing for,"death panels?"
What don't you understand about their being regulation right now,...except it's called who can pay . You said it yourself" I couldn't afford it." So you leave the choice to private insurance companies who are more concerned with profits than your health as to what they will cover or who they will cover and you don't call that regulation?
Do you even see the absolute ridiculousness of your argument? You argue that the public option will call for "death panels" yet accept the fact that healthcare should be rationed because if too many people have it the quality will will go down. You accept the fact that healthcare should be rationed to those who can afford it,and that supply cannot meet demand, so tooo bad if you didn't do like boohoo too bad. Your the one calling for "death panels." Shzzz, i'am scared of you!
What you don't understand boohoo is that the present rate of growth of healthcare premiums is out of hand. A Kaiser P. family policy in 1999 was roughly around $5,500 per/yr. today that same policy is close to $13,000. at the present rate employers will drop coverage or increase deductibles and less people will be able to afford insurance. 14,000 people lose their coverage per/day. 18,000 people die per/year due to lack of health insurance. Many of those who presently have coverage are finding their insurance lacking when they really need it. Regardless of whether you realize it or not this situation is unacceptable and unsustainable. Cost have to come down and coverage and access to care must be increased. Despite your belief that you can live in a bubble, their is nothing that can keep disease or illness from jumping from rich to poor or vice or versa. Cancer strikes both classes, which brings me to my final point. Many illnesses we suffer from today due have a socio-economic aspect to it. We've found that with proper diet, exercise, and regular doctor visits we could reduce heart disease, diabetes,and many forms of cancer, three of the cuases for the most premature deaths and cost. Survial rates flutuate with age and general health but go up with early detection,contrary to lowering quality by increasing access we would be catching diseases earlier thus increasing quality of care and quality of life. Treatments would be less intensive and less costly and others could be prevented entirely. What would be lunancy boohoo is to continue down the same path you advocate of rationed care increased cost for less coverage.
He's one of the "I've got mine, screw everyone else" crowd even though he spent a lot of typing trying to say that he's not.
I have no insurance because, after my divorce, I developed two rather expensive auto-immune conditions. Fortunately, one is the result of an on-the-job injury so I have lifetime medical for that condition. However, due to this condition and another condition with my eyes, insurance companies don't want me. I can't get insurance. I'm not whining about it . . . but it would be nice to be able to go to the doctor without worrying about how much it's going to cost.
As for the rest of your post, it's HOGWASH. I have a 29 year old friend who was recently diagnosed with a bone marrow cancer . . . it's treatable, but his insurance company has been sitting on approval for his medication for two weeks because he went to a specialist who wasn't "pre-approved." He was sent there by his regular doctor because he was so ill. So, he ended up in the hospital this weekend. His doctor finally just GAVE him as much of the medication as he could find. He could DIE before the insurance company finally approves the medication . . . IF they approve it.
Keep believing the BS, I'm sure it will serve you well someday.