Nice try Platt, to sneak death panel propaganda under the guise of a
serious moral question.
Every organisation engaging in health and safety risks makes this
decision every minute of every day. Think drilling for oil in the gulf.
As far as health care goes US & UK are identical in nature - ie mixed.
Basic minimum socialized care limited by tax budgets plus private care
limited by insurance budgets limited by personal choice and ability to
pay. The balance is different, the socialized downside is lower in the
US, but the private upside is identical. Read my lips - identical.
Neither is imune from the difficult decision. Both have to conserve
budgets as opportunity to spend on alternatives. Only one has to hold
back funds for shareholder profit dividends.
Now, what was the question ?
Ian
Sent from my iPhone
On 13 Sep 2010, at 16:35, [email protected] wrote:
All:
In a conversation reported in the Guardian.uk scientists David
Attenborough and
Richard Dawkins were asked, "What is the most difficult ethical
dilemma facing
science today:?
"DA: How far do you go to preserve individual human life?
RD: That's a good one, yes.
DA: I mean, what are we to do with the NHS? How can you put a value
in pounds,
shillings and pence on an individual life? There was a case with a
bowel cancer
drug -- if you gave that drug, which costs several thousand pounds, it
continued life for six weeks on. How can you make that decision?"
How would the MOQ make that decision? There's no direct answer that
I can find
in Pirsig's writings. I presume that if the patient was of sound
mind and, from
his past history, could potentially offer something of intellectual
value
during the remaining six or so weeks of his life, he should receive
the drug.
Otherwise, the social value of his life would rule which, as the
Giant would
judge, isn't worth a pence. Biologically the poor soul would be best
recycled.
What's really horrendous about the question is that in the NHS and now
potentially in the U.S. such questions are all too real with life
and death
decisions in the hands of a government committee, i.e., a death
panel. I don't
know about you, but the thought of my government determining whether
I live or
die makes me sick. It's as if Joe Stalin was resurrected.
When you surrender such personal decisions to the government, not
only is your
life threatened, but DQ, the creative force of evolution, dies, too.
Perhaps,
the MOQ answer is just that -- take responsibility for your own life
so DQ can
flourish.
The interview is at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/sep/11/science-david-attenborough-
richard-dawkins
Regards,
Platt
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html
