Outrage Leads to Reversal of ObamaCare
Regulation That "Nudges" Elderly to Reject Lifesaving Treatment
Part Two of ThreeBy Dave
Andrusko
A mere three days after it went into
effect, a Medicare regulation that funded end-of-life planning has been
abruptly pulled.
The final statutory version of ObamaCare authorizes Medicare coverage of a
yearly "wellness visit." But under the new regulation, surreptitiously
entered into the Federal Register in November, the annual visit would cover
"voluntary advance care planning" to discuss end-of-life treatment as of
January 1.
However, on January 4, the New York
Times' Robert Pear reported that the Obama Administration had deleted
references to end-of-life planning as part of an annual physical exam.
Administration officials told Pear they didn't want the debate to become a
"distraction" as Obama and Democratic congressional allies gear up to defend
ObamaCare against determined Republican efforts to repeal and replace the
law.
"The danger is that subsidized advance
care planning will not just discover and implement patient treatment
preferences but rather be used to nudge or pressure older people to agree to
less treatment because that is less expensive," warns Burke Balch, director
of NRLC's Robert Powell Center for Medical Ethics.
The abrupt change "shows that our
opposition can and will make a difference," Balch said. "Clearly the
Administration is nervous about how the public perceives the law," he added.
"We must redouble our efforts to expose to all the rationing inherent in the
ObamaCare."
However, Pear's story also contained
hints we may not have heard the last of this. "The decision to drop the
reference to end-of-life care upset some officials at the Department of
Health and Human Services," Pear reported. He also added that (supposedly)
"many doctors and providers of hospice care had praised the regulation."
Thus, while the Obama Administration has beaten a hasty retreat, there is no
reason to believe they won't revisit the question.
The regulation was issued quietly in
November in the Federal Register by Dr. Donald M. Berwick, administrator of
the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. In a foreshadowing of what
is coming to pass, he took office courtesy of a recess appointment, rather
than be grilled by the Senate on his controversial views. At the time NRLC
described Berwick as a "one-man death panel."
Part of the ObamaCare legislation in
the House was the now famous Section 1233 (eventually eliminated) which
would have reimbursed doctors for discussing advance directives with their
Medicare patients. NRLC and others feared that these directives might
include authorization to withhold lifesaving medical treatment, food and
fluids.
The Medicare regulation would have
accomplished administratively what supporters failed to win legislatively.
Worse yet, the Medicare regulation was stronger--worse--than Section 1233.
Berwick's fingerprints were all over
the regulation. A December 26 New York Times story by Pear noted that
Berwick has said, "Using unwanted procedures in terminal illness is a form
of assault. In economic terms, it is waste. Several techniques, including
advance directives and involvement of patients and families in
decision-making, have been shown to reduce inappropriate care at the end of
life, leading to both lower cost and more humane care."
Almost worse was the manner in which
supporters went about their business. "Several Democratic members of
Congress, led by Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon and Senator John
D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia, had urged the administration to cover
end-of-life planning as a service offered under the Medicare wellness
benefit," according to Pear.
Blumenauer, who authored the original
end-of-life proposal (Section 1233), praised the rule as "a step in the
right direction." But not enough to actually alert the public, according to
the Times' story.
Evidently, Blumenauer and others
learned of the Obama Administration's plans back in November. In an email
sent out to other like-minded folks at the time, Blumenauer wrote, "While we
are very happy with the result, we won't be shouting it from the rooftops
because we aren't out of the woods yet."
Why? "This regulation could be
modified or reversed, especially if Republican leaders try to use this small
provision to perpetuate the 'death panel' myth." According to Pear,
the e-mail continued: "Thus far, it seems that no press or blogs have
discovered it, but we will be keeping a close watch and may be calling on
you if we need a rapid, targeted response. The longer this goes unnoticed,
the better our chances of keeping it."
Please send your comments on
Today's News & Views and National Right to Life News Today to
daveandrusko@gmail.com. If you
like, join those who are following me on Twitter at
http://twitter.com/daveha.
Part
Three
Part One |