“Deadly Doctors” Rails Against New Gov. Healthcare Ideas


Deadly Doctors: O Advisors Want to Ration Healthcare is former New York politician Betsy McCaughey’s attempt to bring attention to the views of Obama’s top healthcare advisors.

THE health bills coming out of Congress would put the decisions about your care in the hands of presidential appointees. They’d decide what plans cover, how much leeway your doctor will have and what seniors get under Medicare.

Yet at least two of President Obama’s top health advisers should never be trusted with that power…Start with Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel, the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel…Emanuel wants doctors to look beyond the needs of their patients and consider social justice, such as whether the money could be better spent on somebody else.

Emanuel…believes that “communitarianism” should guide decisions on who gets care. He says medical care should be reserved for the non-disabled, not given to those “who are irreversibly prevented from being or becoming participating citizens . . . An obvious example is not guaranteeing health services to patients with dementia” (Hastings Center Report, Nov.-Dec. ’96).

He explicitly defends discrimination against older patients: “Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years” (Lancet, Jan. 31).

Find the whole story here

McCaughey presents alternatives to Obama’s healthcare plan here.

  • Thomas

    I wouldn’t really consider this piece informative news but rather an attack, a purely political viewpoint, specifically designed to scare and mislead.

    Consider the slight of hand, referring to the perspectives of Rahm Emanuel’s brother but leading the inattentive reader to believe that these are the views of the President’s Chief of Staff.

    Consider the implication to the readers paying attention, that the Chief of Staff is either controlled by his brother’s position or that they share the same belief. The author’s primary argument is thus predicated on an overwhelming logical leap and the author provides no support for it.

    Consider that, while not a delightful topic for the laymen, everyone participating in healthcare has to make decisions about medical priority. Medical ethicists constantly wrestle with the very question of to whom to render care, when to render that care and for how long. That Emanuel’s brother is talking about these issues is not alarming in the slightest.

    Consider that the weight of the comments taken from Emanuel’s brother are out of context and well over a decade out of date.

    Consider that it uses inflammatory language to suggest the White House will control healthcare. The author gets by with generalizations but in reality the Fed will not be micro-managing healthcare. To the extent that it will be involved, the author fails to acknowledge that essentially *all* federal programs are run by agencies that ultimately report to the White House, as that is the function of the Executive Branch.

    Finally, then, consider the author’s suggestion that the Chief of Staff will somehow be responsible for direction policy under the health plan. It’s highly doubtful that the President, would involve himself in the minutia of the plan. This job will be handled by various regulatory agencies with experience in the matter.

    So with that, Drea, I’ll presume you posted this with a little tongue-in-cheek, expecting your generally educated readership to see how some really good PR people have been able to utterly confuse the public into questioning something that is actually to their benefit.