The admission sounded like something out of “Logan’s Run” or other dystopian sci-fi movie, not an explanation one would expect to hear from legal associates. Nancy Scott and others who joined her in a peaceful prayer vigil for her mother’s life on Tuesday, August 20, were stunned when representatives from the court-appointed guardian’s office explained that the reason that retired Alabama schoolteacher Marian Leonard was on hospice was because she was old.
According to Medicare.gov, hospice care is supposed to be for people who are certified by a hospice doctor and the patient’s regular doctor that they are terminally ill with a “life expectancy of 6 months or less.” Hospice care is palliative, or “comfort” care, rather than curative care, and it is supposed to be a choice that the patient makes, not a decision thrust upon them without their consent.
That is not what has happened with Marian Leonard. When the state seized guardianship of Mrs. Leonard in February 2018 at the request of St. Vincent’s Hospital and the Department of Human Resources (DHR), she was forced into a nursing home, Diversicare of Riverchase, and forced onto hospice care, against her will and that of her designated Power of Attorney, her daughter Nancy Scott. More
All that Nancy Scott has wanted was for her mother, retired Alabama schoolteacher Marian Leonard, to be able to live out her final years surrounded by the love and support of her family. Nancy never dreamed that such a simple wish could be thwarted by lawyers and judges and doctors. Now, it appears that time has run out for her to get her mother closer to her home in the Wiregrass area of southern Alabama.
A Hospice staff member called Nancy Scott Wednesday morning and told her that she needs to return to Birmingham as soon as possible, because the end is near.
A year and a half ago, retired Alabama schoolteacher Marian Leonard was taken from her family, placed under state guardianship, and forced onto Hospice, all against her will.
Marian Leonard assigned her daughter Power of Attorney, but all of her documents were set aside by probate judge Alan King. She is in solitary confinement, though she has committed no crime. See story: More
The new Medicare for All bill (H.R. 1384) has come and hopefully will go the way of the pet rock.
But as usual, bills contain hidden gems
The focus on palliative care and lowering costs by reducing “aggressive” end-of-life treatment is one more incremental under-the-radar step along the road to government control over life and death. A culture of hastening death has gradually evolved, disguised as “death with dignity.”
Subtly devaluing life primes the pump for rationing of medical care at all stages by a government-run program that is the exclusive purveyor of medical “benefits.”
This year, legislators were not so subtle. It is bad enough that our elderly are pushed into hospice, but now the compassionate legislators have set their sights on newborns. New York passed, and Virginia floated laws that permit the killing of babies after birth.
Starting in the 1970s, the federal government clearly saw a need to protect medical personnel from the tyranny of the government mandates that could violate religious or moral convictions.
We must not let the government bury our conscience and beliefs under layers of bureaucracy. Medicare for All may mean independent thought for none.
The new Medicare for All bill (H.R. 1384) has come and hopefully will go the way of the pet rock. Everybody now knows the basics: the government will take care of all medical, dental, vision, pharmacy, and long-term care services with no out-of-pocket expenses. The bill prohibits parallel private insurance, and has the glaring absence of a financing mechanism.
But as usual, bills contain hidden gems. Section 104 of the bill tracks the Affordable Care Act’s “anti-discrimination” rule, making it clear that no person can be denied benefits, specifically including abortion and treatment of gender identity issues “by any participating provider.” The bill does not correspondingly reaffirm the federal laws protecting conscience and First Amendment religious freedom rights of medical personnel. Such protections relate to participation in abortion, sterilization, assisted suicide, and other ethical dilemmas.
Most sane individuals agree that we do not want our government to control any aspect of our individual lives—particularly not our religious beliefs and moral codes. When the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) sought to clarify such conscience protections, thousands of commenters offered evidence of discrimination and coercion to violate the tenets of the Oath of Hippocrates and their own ethics. Some left their jobs or left the medical profession entirely when their conscientious objections were not honored. More
We are already there! any time a bill is entitled “an ACT” it is a clear signal that what congress is about to do will violate individual rights by FORCE! the ACT will violate your protections under the Constitution and will be enforced by law enforcement and agency personnel who are more than willing to participate in violating your rights. These are Americans turning on other Americans for reasons I will never understand.
