Forced Healthcare

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
the average Joe isn't so great either.

Ah yes, there's that leftist disdain for the common man.

Ah yes, there's that libertarian disdain for common humanity. Help people? Not on my watch!

:roll:

This is why I hate modern liberals. They're going to "help" people whether those people want it or not.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
the average Joe isn't so great either.

Ah yes, there's that leftist disdain for the common man.

Ah yes, there's that libertarian disdain for common humanity. Help people? Not on my watch!

:roll:

This is why I hate modern liberals. They're going to "help" people whether those people want it or not.

Well hey, I don't give a crap if you don't want help, I won't bother helping you if you don't want it. So there goes your weak justification for hatred of the "evul liburlz".

Do you people not understand that this "forced health-care raid" wasn't the creation of some nutty liberal team, but rather, a mixture of overbearing pricks from every part of the political spectrum? Get over yourselves, jesus fucking christ.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
the average Joe isn't so great either.

Ah yes, there's that leftist disdain for the common man.

Ah yes, there's that libertarian disdain for common humanity. Help people? Not on my watch!

:roll:

This is why I hate modern liberals. They're going to "help" people whether those people want it or not.

Well hey, I don't give a crap if you don't want help, I won't bother helping you if you don't want it. So there goes your weak justification for hatred of the "evul liburlz".

Do you people not understand that this "forced health-care raid" wasn't the creation of some nutty liberal team, but rather, a mixture of overbearing pricks from every part of the political spectrum? Get over yourselves, jesus fucking christ.

Great, you can start by not helping yourself to so much of my paycheck.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
the average Joe isn't so great either.

Ah yes, there's that leftist disdain for the common man.

Ah yes, there's that libertarian disdain for common humanity. Help people? Not on my watch!

:roll:

This is why I hate modern liberals. They're going to "help" people whether those people want it or not.

Well hey, I don't give a crap if you don't want help, I won't bother helping you if you don't want it. So there goes your weak justification for hatred of the "evul liburlz".

Do you people not understand that this "forced health-care raid" wasn't the creation of some nutty liberal team, but rather, a mixture of overbearing pricks from every part of the political spectrum? Get over yourselves, jesus fucking christ.

Great, you can start by not helping yourself to so much of my paycheck.

Just answer this, what exactly do you think of our other already socialized systems? Police, Firefighters, military, etcetera. Are those cool with you?

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: Siddhartha
I personally would have an ethical problem with not trying to save a child's life

If I knew of a situation where a parent was endangering their child or anyone was endangering a child and I did not do anything and the child died I would live with that on my conscience for the rest of my life.

Some of you need to check your ethics, doing the right thing, on this one.

so you are saying the raid was justifiable even though the kid was in no danger? his dad was a medic in vietnam and im pretty fricken sure he would know the difference between a bruise and a fractured skull with a "huge hemotoma"

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
the average Joe isn't so great either.

Ah yes, there's that leftist disdain for the common man.

Ah yes, there's that libertarian disdain for common humanity. Help people? Not on my watch!

:roll:

This is why I hate modern liberals. They're going to "help" people whether those people want it or not.

Well hey, I don't give a crap if you don't want help, I won't bother helping you if you don't want it. So there goes your weak justification for hatred of the "evul liburlz".

Do you people not understand that this "forced health-care raid" wasn't the creation of some nutty liberal team, but rather, a mixture of overbearing pricks from every part of the political spectrum? Get over yourselves, jesus fucking christ.

Great, you can start by not helping yourself to so much of my paycheck.

Just answer this, what exactly do you think of our other already socialized systems? Police, Firefighters, military, etcetera. Are those cool with you?

Firefighters are about the only group in that list that I'm pleased with.

I don't trust the police, they're just tools for a corrupt system. Cancel the War on Drugs and fire half the cops. Make those donut eating bastards do something useful for a change.

The military is the same thing. Our standing army doesn't need to be anywhere near the size it currently is, and shouldn't be used to invade sovereign nations that pose no threat to us.

As for the police and fire departments, at least they're local and are somewhat accountable to the people. I can go to a city council meeting and complain about the police. What the odds of me speaking in front of congress to register a complaint? Have you ever written a letter to your congressman? I have, and gotten a nice form letter in reply. Yeah, that's accountability. :roll:

 

[Firebot]

Unbelievable. SWAT teams go over their bounds due to a gross overreaction, and American Republicans in their infinite wisdom attribute this to social healthcare and actually use this as a reason why to avoid socialized healthcare?

Do you nuts think that SWAT teams go around in Canadian homes and force healthcare on people (that can speak for themselves, I know of the Jehova's Witness child case)? Last I checked, this incident happened in a country with privatized healthcare, not social. The amount of logic on this forum is baffling at times. It's hillarious how the right (and in some cases the extreme left, looking at you Dave) on these boards are so brainwashed by partisanship that they must attribute everything which is wrong with the country, to the other camp (I'm conservative btw).

Never mind that the guy probably would NOT have refused healthcare if it was socialized to begin with.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: Fern
OK, this sounds so extreme and stupid there must be more to the story.

Why, or how, for example were case workers visiting this family etc.

If they judge issued an order for further treatment, why did the clerk of court etc not just call or have it served the normal way?

Etc.

Fern

I saw that, too - I was wondering how the court system even found out that the son had been injured. I'd also like to know just how much medical training these caseworkers had.

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Siddhartha
What do you think would be the appropriate actions if the child had a life threatening head wound?

Do nothing and let the child die?

WTF? the child DID NOT have a life threating head wound.

Exactly. He was treated with Tylenol and ice. OOooooooo, wow, that's even more advanced than an MRI and emergency brain surgery. Maybe he was even prescribed a Snoopy Band-Aid.

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Let the parents deal with it? Why must nanny staters like you insist that government hover over every living being ready to pounce?

Come on, you know the answer to that. For all the rhetoric about the wisdom of the common man, surely you must realize that people aren't always perfect and always responsible. The function of government is chiefly to make sure that the bad decisions people inevitably make don't affect everyone else. If you're injured and you don't want to go to the hospital, that's your choice. But you don't have the right to choose not to get your child medical care in a life or death situation any more than you have the right to drive 120 mph down the highway. If people are being irresponsible parents, you're damn right I think the government should step in.

Far right libertarianism is just as stupid as far left socialism. While it's dumb to complete trust the government, the average Joe isn't so great either. "Letting the parents deal with it" is a great idea in theory, but what about the parents that DON'T "deal with it"?

IF it truly is a life threatening injury, then perhaps intervention would be justified.
The kid fell over and bumped his head. If this guy is really the medic he says he is, he probably would have recognized signs of a concussion, and taken appropriate action, such as a hospital visit.
IF not, then the state might be justified in taking the kid to a hospital. A blood blister isn't a sign of severe injury, at least in my experience. They just look really gross.

Either way, as Fern suggested, there's probably way more to this story that's not being told in this article.

Originally posted by: Firebot
Unbelievable. SWAT teams go over their bounds due to a gross overreaction, and American Republicans in their infinite wisdom attribute this to social healthcare and actually use this as a reason why to avoid socialized healthcare?

It's the same sort of stupidity that you get when a politician says, "I want to declare English the official language of the USA!" Then people start screaming that he hates everyone who's not a white American, and he's going to start putting everyone else into gas chambers next.

Or, "No amnesty for illegal immigrants." Ignorant response: "This politician hates all immigrants!!!" No, this politician doesn't like those who are here illegally, that's the key word. People can be very ignorant when they put their minds to it.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Firebot
Never mind that the guy probably would NOT have refused healthcare if it was socialized to begin with.

Wait, I thought socialized health care was going to bring costs down? Now you're saying that under a socialized system he would have brought his kid in for care even though it only required ice? That sounds like we're increasing the burden on the system, which will drive costs up.

You people need to make up your minds.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: Firebot
Unbelievable. SWAT teams go over their bounds due to a gross overreaction, and American Republicans in their infinite wisdom attribute this to social healthcare and actually use this as a reason why to avoid socialized healthcare?

Do you nuts think that SWAT teams go around in Canadian homes and force healthcare on people (that can speak for themselves, I know of the Jehova's Witness child case)? Last I checked, this incident happened in a country with privatized healthcare, not social. The amount of logic on this forum is baffling at times. It's hillarious how the right (and in some cases the extreme left, looking at you Dave) on these boards are so brainwashed by partisanship that they must attribute everything which is wrong with the country, to the other camp (I'm conservative btw).

Never mind that the guy probably would NOT have refused healthcare if it was socialized to begin with.

QFT

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Firebot
Never mind that the guy probably would NOT have refused healthcare if it was socialized to begin with.

Wait, I thought socialized health care was going to bring costs down? Now you're saying that under a socialized system he would have brought his kid in for care even though it only required ice? That sounds like we're increasing the burden on the system, which will drive costs up.

You people need to make up your minds.

But he was brought in for care and at what cost?

 

[Firebot]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Firebot
Never mind that the guy probably would NOT have refused healthcare if it was socialized to begin with.

Wait, I thought socialized health care was going to bring costs down? Now you're saying that under a socialized system he would have brought his kid in for care even though it only required ice? That sounds like we're increasing the burden on the system, which will drive costs up.

You people need to make up your minds.

A socialized system does cut cost down. Bringing the child to a hospital for what ended up being a mild head injury costs a heck of a lot less then calling a whole SWAT team over...

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Firebot
Unbelievable. SWAT teams go over their bounds due to a gross overreaction, and American Republicans in their infinite wisdom attribute this to social healthcare and actually use this as a reason why to avoid socialized healthcare?

Do you nuts think that SWAT teams go around in Canadian homes and force healthcare on people (that can speak for themselves, I know of the Jehova's Witness child case)? Last I checked, this incident happened in a country with privatized healthcare, not social. The amount of logic on this forum is baffling at times. It's hillarious how the right (and in some cases the extreme left, looking at you Dave) on these boards are so brainwashed by partisanship that they must attribute everything which is wrong with the country, to the other camp (I'm conservative btw).

Never mind that the guy probably would NOT have refused healthcare if it was socialized to begin with.

QFT

QFBS

Kids have accidents. They're kids, they hurt themselves all the time. Do you think every parent should be required by law to bring their kid to the doctor every time they get a bump on the head? I still fail to see how this will lower costs.

 

[Firebot]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Firebot
Unbelievable. SWAT teams go over their bounds due to a gross overreaction, and American Republicans in their infinite wisdom attribute this to social healthcare and actually use this as a reason why to avoid socialized healthcare?

Do you nuts think that SWAT teams go around in Canadian homes and force healthcare on people (that can speak for themselves, I know of the Jehova's Witness child case)? Last I checked, this incident happened in a country with privatized healthcare, not social. The amount of logic on this forum is baffling at times. It's hillarious how the right (and in some cases the extreme left, looking at you Dave) on these boards are so brainwashed by partisanship that they must attribute everything which is wrong with the country, to the other camp (I'm conservative btw).

Never mind that the guy probably would NOT have refused healthcare if it was socialized to begin with.

QFT

QFBS

Kids have accidents. They're kids, they hurt themselves all the time. Do you think every parent should be required by law to bring their kid to the doctor every time they get a bump on the head? I still fail to see how this will lower costs.

France best, US worst in preventable death ranking

WASHINGTON, Jan 8 (Reuters) - France, Japan and Australia rated best and the United States worst in new rankings focusing on preventable deaths due to treatable conditions in 19 leading industrialized nations, researchers said on Tuesday.

If the U.S. health care system performed as well as those of those top three countries, there would be 101,000 fewer deaths in the United States per year, according to researchers writing in the journal Health Affairs.

...

The research was backed by the Commonwealth Fund, a private New York-based health policy foundation.

"It is startling to see the U.S. falling even farther behind on this crucial indicator of health system performance," Commonwealth Fund Senior Vice President Cathy Schoen said.

"The fact that other countries are reducing these preventable deaths more rapidly, yet spending far less, indicates that policy, goals and efforts to improve health systems make a difference," Schoen added in a statement.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Firebot

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Firebot
Never mind that the guy probably would NOT have refused healthcare if it was socialized to begin with.

Wait, I thought socialized health care was going to bring costs down? Now you're saying that under a socialized system he would have brought his kid in for care even though it only required ice? That sounds like we're increasing the burden on the system, which will drive costs up.

You people need to make up your minds.

A socialized system does cut cost down. Bringing the child to a hospital for what ended up being a mild head injury costs a heck of a lot less then calling a whole SWAT team over...

Are you saying that the SWAT team should be the expected outcome if you don't bring your child to the doctor under your system? Should parents have any say in their children's care? What if they disagree with the government? SWAT team time?

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: CitizenKain

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Rainsford
the average Joe isn't so great either.

Ah yes, there's that leftist disdain for the common man.

Ah yes, there's that libertarian disdain for common humanity. Help people? Not on my watch!

:roll:

This is why I hate modern liberals. They're going to "help" people whether those people want it or not.

Well hey, I don't give a crap if you don't want help, I won't bother helping you if you don't want it. So there goes your weak justification for hatred of the "evul liburlz".

Do you people not understand that this "forced health-care raid" wasn't the creation of some nutty liberal team, but rather, a mixture of overbearing pricks from every part of the political spectrum? Get over yourselves, jesus fucking christ.

Great, you can start by not helping yourself to so much of my paycheck.

Just answer this, what exactly do you think of our other already socialized systems? Police, Firefighters, military, etcetera. Are those cool with you?

Firefighters are about the only group in that list that I'm pleased with.

I don't trust the police, they're just tools for a corrupt system. Cancel the War on Drugs and fire half the cops. Make those donut eating bastards do something useful for a change.

The military is the same thing. Our standing army doesn't need to be anywhere near the size it currently is, and shouldn't be used to invade sovereign nations that pose no threat to us.

As for the police and fire departments, at least they're local and are somewhat accountable to the people. I can go to a city council meeting and complain about the police. What the odds of me speaking in front of congress to register a complaint? Have you ever written a letter to your congressman? I have, and gotten a nice form letter in reply. Yeah, that's accountability. :roll:

Heh, I totally agree.

So where do you think I'm trying to take money out of your pocket? With socialized health-care? Did you think that perhaps I'm kind of playing devils advocate for people less similar to you? (meaning the hypocrites who don't mind paying tax dollars for other, very poorly implemented socialized systems, but hate the idea of actually helping people live longer, with less money out of pocket no doubt!)

Edit: "Kind of" being the key phrase, here.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Firebot

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Firebot
Unbelievable. SWAT teams go over their bounds due to a gross overreaction, and American Republicans in their infinite wisdom attribute this to social healthcare and actually use this as a reason why to avoid socialized healthcare?

Do you nuts think that SWAT teams go around in Canadian homes and force healthcare on people (that can speak for themselves, I know of the Jehova's Witness child case)? Last I checked, this incident happened in a country with privatized healthcare, not social. The amount of logic on this forum is baffling at times. It's hillarious how the right (and in some cases the extreme left, looking at you Dave) on these boards are so brainwashed by partisanship that they must attribute everything which is wrong with the country, to the other camp (I'm conservative btw).

Never mind that the guy probably would NOT have refused healthcare if it was socialized to begin with.

QFT

QFBS

Kids have accidents. They're kids, they hurt themselves all the time. Do you think every parent should be required by law to bring their kid to the doctor every time they get a bump on the head? I still fail to see how this will lower costs.

France best, US worst in preventable death ranking

WASHINGTON, Jan 8 (Reuters) - France, Japan and Australia rated best and the United States worst in new rankings focusing on preventable deaths due to treatable conditions in 19 leading industrialized nations, researchers said on Tuesday.

If the U.S. health care system performed as well as those of those top three countries, there would be 101,000 fewer deaths in the United States per year, according to researchers writing in the journal Health Affairs.

...

The research was backed by the Commonwealth Fund, a private New York-based health policy foundation.

"It is startling to see the U.S. falling even farther behind on this crucial indicator of health system performance," Commonwealth Fund Senior Vice President Cathy Schoen said.

"The fact that other countries are reducing these preventable deaths more rapidly, yet spending far less, indicates that policy, goals and efforts to improve health systems make a difference," Schoen added in a statement.

There was no risk of death here. The child had a bump on the head. The parent already determined it did not require a doctor, yet social services and the SWAT team were dispatched anyway. Can you imagine what the response would be if it had been a real injury?

"Sorry General, we need to pull your division out of Baghdad and redeploy to St. Louis. There's a child with a paper cut and the parents won't cooperate."

If SWAT is government's response to a bump on the head, you're goddam right I don't want more government. We have too much already.

 

[Firebot]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Firebot

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Firebot
Never mind that the guy probably would NOT have refused healthcare if it was socialized to begin with.

Wait, I thought socialized health care was going to bring costs down? Now you're saying that under a socialized system he would have brought his kid in for care even though it only required ice? That sounds like we're increasing the burden on the system, which will drive costs up.

You people need to make up your minds.

A socialized system does cut cost down. Bringing the child to a hospital for what ended up being a mild head injury costs a heck of a lot less then calling a whole SWAT team over...

Are you saying that the SWAT team should be the expected outcome if you don't bring your child to the doctor under your system? Should parents have any say in their children's care? What if they disagree with the government? SWAT team time?

The SWAT team got called under your precious privatized healthcare system due to a man refusing to pay to go through your system, not Canada's bud.

 

[fskimospy]

This thread is funny to watch. Anyone who is trying to bring socialized medicine into this argument is an idiot. This was about defiance of a court order, not about health care. If you really think that in a socialized system the government is going to train up legions of new SWAT teams to make sure kids go to get their measles shots, you are stupid.

Not ignorant, not crazy, but stupid.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
This thread is funny to watch. Anyone who is trying to bring socialized medicine into this argument is an idiot. This was about defiance of a court order, not about health care. If you really think that in a socialized system the government is going to train up legions of new SWAT teams to make sure kids go to get their measles shots, you are stupid.

Not ignorant, not crazy, but stupid.

Whatever you say, dipshit.

Yeah, and I'm sure before prohibition people thought there was no way the government would be sending in armed thugs to stop them from drinking alcohol.

It is you who is ignorant, and crazy, and stupid if you believe that socialized medicine will not turn into mandated health.

 

[Firebot]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: eskimospy
This thread is funny to watch. Anyone who is trying to bring socialized medicine into this argument is an idiot. This was about defiance of a court order, not about health care. If you really think that in a socialized system the government is going to train up legions of new SWAT teams to make sure kids go to get their measles shots, you are stupid.

Not ignorant, not crazy, but stupid.

Whatever you say, dipshit.

Yeah, and I'm sure before prohibition people thought there was no way the government would be sending in armed thugs to stop them from drinking alcohol.

It is you who is ignorant, and crazy, and stupid if you believe that socialized medicine will not turn into mandated health.

I'm sure you have hundreds upon hundreds of examples to show us about healthcare being forced upon the poor subjects in Soviet Canuckistan to prove your point right?

And FYI, prohibition = drinking is against the law = cops will come after you if you drink...

I don't see how socialized healthcare can even remotely be compared to prohibition or even how you came up with such a ridiculous example.

 

[CitizenKain]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: eskimospy
This thread is funny to watch. Anyone who is trying to bring socialized medicine into this argument is an idiot. This was about defiance of a court order, not about health care. If you really think that in a socialized system the government is going to train up legions of new SWAT teams to make sure kids go to get their measles shots, you are stupid.

Not ignorant, not crazy, but stupid.

Whatever you say, dipshit.

Yeah, and I'm sure before prohibition people thought there was no way the government would be sending in armed thugs to stop them from drinking alcohol.

It is you who is ignorant, and crazy, and stupid if you believe that socialized medicine will not turn into mandated health.

Hmm, on the other hand, recorded history.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: CPA
I heard this on the Michael Savage show last night. You socialist, power-hungry, universal healthcare whiners just got a glimpse of what it will be like with the government in control of your health.

I'd also like to know what credentials these nazi socialworkers have they qualify them to make a diagnosis of a "huge hematoma".

I hope this guy sues the bejeezus out of the state and the police department.

<cchecks Canada for SWAT team entries to force them into socialist acceptance of treatment>


Nope, don't see any, I think its more your fascist state.

 

[StageLeft]

It's possible this was just a midunderstanding and overblown. We may have a kid who bumped his head and not severely (initial prescription for service doesn't sound like it was a big deal) and info fell through the cracks to the point they felt the kid was seriously in risk of major harm, so he was taken, in the same way if a parent had a kid with his guts hanging out and said he'd deal with it, we'd expect somebody to step in.

I am against what i've heard about socialized medicine for this country, but using this as an example of what will happen in the future is overboard. As pointed out, Canada hardly has teams of SWAT compelling people against their will to treatment.

 

[Moonbeam]

On the one hand we have swat teams taking people by force and on the other parents with wacko beliefs using the force of their stupidity to let their kids die.

I would favor a system that truly educates parents before they become parents.

Other people won't stand by and let your kids die because you are stupid and they won't have police forcing them to take cures that aren't needed.

Oh, and nothing is perfect when it comes to human or state action.