|
Too Hot To Handle |
 |
|
This week's topic for Too Hot To Handle: Kickbacks from care communities
Just like physicians are bombarded by pharmaceutical representatives with lunches, gifts, free samples etc. (and by the way a law was enacted to stop this), nursing homes are bombarded by hospice, home health, companion, oxygen and medical equipment representatives and more. If you are not given a choice in choosing one of these companies upon discharge ask why. It may be because the service provider has a financial relationship with the nursing home.
Pro: It is acceptable for a nursing home to recommend the services of a particular provider knowing they are going to receive a financial reward. If the patient isn't smart enough to ask it's their problem.
Con: Nursing homes should NOT benefit financially from making any type of recommendation to a patient. If a recommendation is made and a financial payment is involved, the nursing home MUST disclose the payment relationship to allow the family member to choose whether or not to accept the recommendation of the nursing home.
|
|
|
Dying Patients are NOT Starving |
|
Pro: Families believe that loved ones are hungry and should receive food and water up until the last day they are alive or they will be uncomfortable and in pain.
Con: Dying patients experience a lack of appetite and thirst and sometimes refuse food and water. Forcing food or water will only result in the possibility of choking and providing nutrition intravenously is a choice that can be made in a living will. |
|
Emotional Stress of Placing a Loved One in a Nursing Home |
|
|
Pro: When it comes time that a loved one’s care becomes too much of a burden for a caregiver, the obvious place for them to move is to a nursing home
Con: It is the responsibility of an individual NOT to move a loved one out of the home, people are not dogs to be put away or put down when their health becomes a problem
Comments? |
|
Elder Abuse By Family Members |
|
|
A mother has Alzheimer's disease, her husband, the father, expects her to manage the household and care for him because this has always been her role. Her memory is poor, she cannot even remember the day of the week and can certainly no longer manage the household. The house is filthy, dirty dishes are in the sink, food in the refrigerator is spoiled, yet the parents insist to the children that they do not need any help.
Question? It is okay for children to knowingly neglect parents who need care because they fear angering their parents who insist they do not need help or do the children have a duty to provide care regardless of anger that may result ?
National Center on Elder Abuse - Statistics |
|
|
Divorcing a Spouse with Health Issues |
|
|
One side would argue that marriage is an until death do us part agreement and that whatever care or assistance a spouse needs should be given, this is the duty and a responsibility of a spouse.
The other side would argue that they "didn't sign up for this", especially when a spouse has a debilitating disease that requires substantial care and the cost will drain all financial resources.
Comments?
|
|
Human Tagging Your Family Member with Alzheimer’s |
|
|
Pros: Technology is now available to place a small micro-chip in the arm of Alzheimer's individuals who wander to ensure a safe return home
Cons: Human tagging is an invasion of privacy and relieves society and families of responsibility of caring for our elders
There is great controversy about the safety of Alzheimer's individuals especially those who wander. If you've ever had a family member wander away from home in the middle of the night half, dead of winter half dressed, you might consider a chip to allow a safe return home. Other family members are appalled that society is treating individuals like cattle or dogs to be tracked down and feel this is only the beginning of big brother taking over our private lives. If we participate in human tagging, what's next. Post your opinions below.
Social Cultural Religiousand Ethical Implications of Automatic Identiification
Veri Chip White Paper
|
|
Treating The Untreatable |
|
|
Treating the Untreatable
Question? Should insurance companies absorb the cost of medical treatments for individuals who will not comply with medical recommendations or for whom the treatment is not a long term solution? Would individuals pay for these treatments if they had to bear the entire cost?
Example: The cost of a liver transplant ranges from $100-400,000. Should an individual with uncontrolled alcoholism receive a liver transplant when it's likely the person will continue to drink and damage the new liver - while someone who is healthy and takes good care of themselves isn't on the list for a transplant because their health is not at as critical a stage?
Example: Should an individual diagnosed with lung cancer who is receive expensive chemotherapy and radiation treatments that can cost $10-20,000 if they continue to smoke cigarettes?
|
|
|
|
|
<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
