Cancelling my health insurance.

Life, the universe, and everything.
Forum rules
- No personal attacks against players or staff members - please be civil!
- No posting of mature images/links, keep content SFW. If it's NSFW, don't post it on these forums.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: Cancelling my health insurance.

Postby Kifle » Fri Jul 31, 2009 7:56 pm

Ashiwi wrote:Kifle

Odd, I don't remember such restrictions being placed on this before other examples were given. I believe I was replying to Sarvis's uncalled-for and overly melodramatic accusation, and while there is a very narrow window for the particular condition you're referring to, the "strawman" stands. If you're arguing about tests that save lives, then you'd best decide which lives you're willing to save and which ones you're not. Is the two week window your cut-off? Or can we extend that to a month? Two months? If it's not diagnosed within a year should they be allowed to die?

If the argument is "you would rather let people die than spend money on them" then do feel free to tell me exactly which ones you think deserve to live. Go ahead, set up specific criteria for which people you think deserve to have their conditions diagnosed in time to save their lives.


No, Kelly, the strawman doesn't stand... mainly because it is a strawman and doesn't really apply. You're making it seem entirely too black and white: either we pay for all tests that save lives or none. Sure, we could give everyone an AIDS test which will save lives. We can give everyone MIRs, CAT scans, x-rays to find early stages of cancer, but we are talking about one thing in particular: Kiryan's pro-life stance on abortion which is diametrically opposed to his economic stance on this ONE particular test, which, unlike the other tests you mention or allude to, are not in the same category. This is where the argument started, and I think it should stay here rather than meandering around this or that and taking a bypass into some territory that only vaguely, if at all, resembles the original debate. This is where you're taking it.

To clarify, Kiryan is pro life -- for various reasons. One of which happens to be that human life is sacred and that the destruction of the life is done with no regard to the owner of said life's wishes (if they do have any). There is little difference in the situations; however, I feel I must explain further. In the case of the test, there is hardly a way other than the test to prevent certain death. There is hardly a possibility to recognize the symptoms as being this certain disorder due to them either not showing or them being masked by other normal baby behaviors. The window to catch this disease is insanely small (talking days/weeks at most); for cancer you have years at times; there is nothing you can do about AIDS except prevent the spread (but a baby isn't sexually active). I can list very good reasons why this test is entirely different than the ones you are proposing. In other words, this disorder/disease is invisible without either the test, or if the child(ren) were to have Dr. House as a father -- assuming he would pay attention to anybody but himself. So, in short, we are talking about necessary prevention. The key word here being "prevention."

In the case of abortion, we also have the existence of a "prevention." By outlawing abortion you are again preventing the deaths of children who have no say in the matter -- except these children do not necessarily have all the "things" that make one a "real" person. I say this to show the argument of when a child becomes a child or when a fetus becomes a child. In essence, the test prevention removes this argument which the pro-lifers use so often -- that a life is a life at conception. Regardless, though, none of this seems to matter in the arena of testing to Kiryan, yet it is the driving factor behind his pro-life position.

In both cases, we see a prevention of death. In both cases we see the loss of value of life per se. To a man who rests his abortion position on a foundation of this sanctity of life and the inability for the child to choose for him/herself whether or not to live, it is contradictory by nature to also be against this certain test. I am not arguing for all tests, mind you, but this one in specific and others which mirror the criteria this also meets: certain death without it with no other avenue of preventing said death. In most other tests, there are other avenues and the test is not even remotely as important to the child as this. And I would also like to draw attention to the criteria of this being on newborn babies -- the closest thing you can get to an abortion situation as possible. THIS is why this test is being argued and why a test for MS, CP, Huntington's, etc. are not being argued -- because those tests do not mirror the same criteria that abortion does. Lastly, this is why your argument I quoted was a strawman, and I hope I answered your question/statements up to the bold markers. Anything else, again, becomes peripheral to the actual argument.

Kiryan, you say the test is not necessary or shouldn't be done. I would like you to clarify your position on this. Is the cost to lives saved ratio too large? At what percentage of lives saved to cents does the ratio need to be in your mind to be "worth" saving the life? When you took this stance on this test and others like it, were you factoring in that abortions are "unwanted" babies, put in environments that are disastrous to the well being (both mental and physical) to the child, and most likely will not get the care and nurturing that a baby whose parents didn't want to have an abortion; yet, the test is naturally on babies that were wanted and were, probability-wise, opposite to the living conditions of the other abortions? Also, did you factor in how much you save on taxes from all of these abortions due to the strain on healthcare, social security, job loss, over population, welfare, etc. that these aborted babies would have drained from the coffers of the government over the span of their lives? For someone who is fiscally responsible enough to allow innocent children to die because the test is an extra $.50, you would think you would not only be pro-choice, but you would be doing backyard abortions for free with a sign on every major highway in a 50 mile radius.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Cancelling my health insurance.

Postby Ashiwi » Fri Jul 31, 2009 8:39 pm

Kifle, great points, and in your argument that would make perfect sense if the sanctity of life applied only to newborns. Now, let me reiterate...

Quoting Sarvis:
"How about "as many as we can?""
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!
Alta
Sojourner
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:52 pm

Re: Cancelling my health insurance.

Postby Alta » Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:09 pm

Kiryan,

Are you actually against this test based on waste? I thought you said you didn't want to cause any more stress on our baby by poking her foot and taking her blood for "genetic testing" as we thought it was? Until we found out what it was for and we did the test because it was such a small window of time. You aren't actually against it, are you?
Sarvis
Sojourner
Posts: 6369
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Contact:

Re: Cancelling my health insurance.

Postby Sarvis » Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:12 pm

Ash, you keep asking how I choose who to save and who not to. Aren't you the one making this choice? Aren't you saying "this disease is rare and we shouldn't have to pay, so let's let them die?"

I ask again, if you were Bill Gates would you get this test done on your newborn? If yes, why should your average factory worker not have the same privilege?

As someone here explained once our current healthcare system is about rationing. The problem is it rations based on wealth, rather than need or merit.
<a href="http://www.code-haven.com">Code Haven</a> - For all your programming needs.

I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write. - Some Guy Who Paraphrased Voltaire
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: Cancelling my health insurance.

Postby Kifle » Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:24 pm

Ashiwi wrote:Kifle, great points, and in your argument that would make perfect sense if the sanctity of life applied only to newborns. Now, let me reiterate...

Quoting Sarvis:
"How about "as many as we can?""


I'm not sure where that quote comes from specifically or what exactly it refers to. Is that lives in general? In that case, I think we're debating two different things, and that's probably mostly my fault. I'm really just targeting those without the the ability to choose life for themselves. If we are broadening the scope to adult lives, then my points really don't apply, and I apologize if I made it seem that way. I'm really just looking for an honest reply from Kiryan on the contradiction between his two stances on what boils down to the same dilemma.
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: Cancelling my health insurance.

Postby Kifle » Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:43 pm

Alta wrote:Kiryan,

Are you actually against this test based on waste? I thought you said you didn't want to cause any more stress on our baby by poking her foot and taking her blood for "genetic testing" as we thought it was? Until we found out what it was for and we did the test because it was such a small window of time. You aren't actually against it, are you?


Do not question Kiryan, Vena. He's a man and you are but a woman. :)
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Alta
Sojourner
Posts: 130
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 4:52 pm

Re: Cancelling my health insurance.

Postby Alta » Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:50 pm

Kifle wrote:
Alta wrote:Kiryan,

Are you actually against this test based on waste? I thought you said you didn't want to cause any more stress on our baby by poking her foot and taking her blood for "genetic testing" as we thought it was? Until we found out what it was for and we did the test because it was such a small window of time. You aren't actually against it, are you?


Do not question Kiryan, Vena. He's a man and you are but a woman. :)


At least I didn't pretend to be a woman.
Kifle
Sojourner
Posts: 3830
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2002 6:01 am
Location: Huntington, IN USA
Contact:

Re: Cancelling my health insurance.

Postby Kifle » Fri Jul 31, 2009 10:09 pm

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!
Fotex group-says 'Behold! penis!'

Kifle puts on his robe and wizard hat.

Thalidyrr tells you 'Yeah, you know, getting it like a jackhammer wears you out.'

Teflor "You can beat a tank with a shovel!!1!1!!one!!1!uno!!"
Ashiwi
Sojourner
Posts: 4161
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2001 5:01 am

Re: Cancelling my health insurance.

Postby Ashiwi » Sat Aug 01, 2009 2:01 am

Alta wrote:At least I didn't pretend to be a woman.


Things that make you snort milk out of your nose. This is one of them.
Gormal tells you 'im a dwarven onion'
Gormal tells you 'always another beer-soaked layer'

Inama ASSOC:: 'though it may suit your fantasies to think so, i don't need oil for anything.'

Haley: Filthy lucre? I wash that lucre every day until it SHINES!
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Re: Cancelling my health insurance.

Postby kiryan » Sat Aug 01, 2009 5:31 am

Well said kifle, the part about Vena. also, she is my wife and i am the king of my castle

The problem with abortion is not that life is sacred... its that thou shalt not kill, that is a sin. There is no commandment thou shalt save every life possible. Saving people is a good thing and its biblical, but not saving people is not necessarily a sin. It may never be a sin, but I'm not going to say that based on what I understand at this point in time.

If I thought abortions were moral, I would fully support abortion from a fiscal and a "responsibility / family planning" point of view. Unfortunately, thou shalt not kill is very clear and my understanding is that life starts at conception.

From a fiscal point of view, I'm not sure at what point "tests" are not worth it. Definitely would depend on what it would cost to take care of someone who developed the condition (assuming the state was responsible for this care). If the condition resulted in death, I would look at the deaths per capita and then compare it to other things like obesity, car accidents, violent crime... and figure out where you get the most lives saved per buck. I'd also look at the total # of deaths... if its 1/10,000 or less, frickin just don't worry about it. thats an acceptable rate of death if you ask me and not worth trying to prevent, at least from a government point of view.

We must hire hundreds of thousands of cops to write billions of dollars in tickets every year at school zones to save how many kids lives? a dozen? Yes its super sad, but how much are we spending directly and indirectly to save these dozen? Millions of parents had to buy car seats for their 6 year olds to save how many lives, 1000? We keep making it more and more expensive to have a basic life all in the name of protecting some innocent from a minute risk... thats a problem. Laurel has to go to the doctor a dozen times before the baby is born and a dozen times afterwards to make sure everyone is healthy... that has a cost that you all pay for because we've made it the basic standard of care. Its quite ridiculous... except maybe not because of the costs that could be avoided if you find something, but each of these needs to be evaluiated. some people should be allowed to die, sometimes shit happens and it sucks.

I worked in healthcare. the standard of care is basically... do everything you possibly can to have positive outcomes no matter what the cost. Case in point, you can buy this radio frequency tagging system for "sponges" used in operations. It bumps the cost of sponges up a ton, I forget the #s but maybe from like $5 a piece to $30 a piece. But hospitals are buying them... because the people in control are about improving outcomes. (also because they save money by not having to reoperate when someone makes a mistake and not getting sued). If a hospital can determine that 3 more nurses per procedure results in a reduction of bad outcomes by 50% (mind you we are going from 0.5% bad outcomes to 0.25% bad outcomes) they'll do it all in the name of quality. Meanwhile, your bill just went up by $1,000 which drove the cost of health insurance up at your company by $10 a month.

At some $$ figure and "rarity" you need to just stop and call it acceptable losses. if someone wants to pay to protect themselves fine, but don't make the rest of us pay for it.

Return to “T2 General Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest