The Pink Flamingo :: Are You Worth Saving? Homeland Security Might Not Agree!

During the deadly flu pandemic the accompanied the Spanish Flu after World War I, actual numbers of those who died are still not known. My grandfather Froehlich was almost a statistic. Fortunately, my grandfather had a remarkable relationship with the Lord and a cast iron constitution. He was in the Army at the time, having recently graduated from the University of Maryland. Like just about everyone else in the ward, he was simply wheeled outside to die. He started praying and survived. According to family stories my grandfather was never sick another day of his life (with a virus). I never saw him with a cold, a bug, or the flu. My mother and her siblings are rarely sick with viruses. This immunity has been passed on – somewhat. We grandchildren do not come down with the flu or colds as frequently as do most people. (Today is the exception – durn it).

My point is this – the Army doctors decided my grandfather wasn’t going to live, so they simply put him outside to die.

New recommendations as to who is to be allowed to live or die during a pandemic are being codified by a council of physicians and the Department of Homeland Security. Considering the abjectly unconstitutional and basically dictatorial powers bestowed upon the Secretary of Homeland Security, the rules and the repercussions are chilling. Do we really want the people who are violating basically every Constitutional right just to build a blasted Border Fence involved in life or death situations.

Naturally this reminds me of a Star Trek episode – Conscience of the King. It is a cautionary tale about the consequences of governmental interference, deciding who is worth surviving and who isn’t.

“…The Enterprise is diverted three light years off of its scheduled course to Planet Q, lured by word of a new synthetic food which promises to ease chronic shortages on Cygnia Minor. But what Doctor Thomas Leighton actually wants to show his childhood friend Kirk is merely a traveling Shakespearean actor, Anton Karidian. Leighton believes Karidian to be Kodos the Executioner, a man who seized control of the Tarsus IV colony in 2246 and murdered half its population. Of the 4000 survivors, only nine--including the young Kirk and Leighton--ever saw the face of the revolutionary governor….”

Whenever I see discussions about governmental regulations about who is to survive and who isn’t, it reminds me of that episode. The Homeland Security guidelines are based on the “triage” method of medical care as the study group is headed by an emergency care specialist. While they are trying to work on survivability of the nation, it is obvious those who are of limited means and are not “optimal” are going to be left to fend for themselves or die. Forgot all those Constitutional values and human rights. It’s basically government enforced survival of the fittest. Considerations are being given to helping those who are ‘vulnerable’ and would fall through the cracks so to speak, but when Homeland Security is

“…list of recommendations for which patients wouldn't be treated. They include the very elderly, seriously hurt trauma victims, severely burned patients and those with severe dementia. The suggested list was compiled by a task force whose members come from prestigious universities, medical groups, the military and government agencies. They include the Department of Homeland Security, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Department of Health and Human Services. The proposed guidelines are designed to be a blueprint for hospitals "so that everybody will be thinking in the same way" when pandemic flu or another widespread health care disaster hits, said Dr. Asha Devereaux. She is a critical care specialist in San Diego and lead writer of the task force report.

The idea is to try to make sure that scarce resources—including ventilators, medicine and doctors and nurses—are used in a uniform, objective way, task force members said…. "If a mass casualty critical care event were to occur tomorrow, many people with clinical conditions that are survivable under usual health care system conditions may have to forgo life-sustaining interventions owing to deficiencies in supply or staffing," the report states. To prepare, hospitals should designate a triage team with the Godlike task of deciding who will and who won't get lifesaving care, the task force wrote. Those out of luck are the people at high risk of death and a slim chance of long-term survival. But the recommendations get much more specific, and include:

_People older than 85.
_Those with severe trauma, which could include critical injuries from car crashes and shootings.
_Severely burned patients older than 60.
_Those with severe mental impairment, which could include advanced Alzheimer's disease.
_Those with a severe chronic disease, such as advanced heart failure, lung disease or poorly controlled diabetes….

Public health law expert Lawrence Gostin of Georgetown University called the report an important initiative but also "a political minefield and a legal minefield." The recommendations would probably violate federal laws against age discrimination and disability discrimination, said Gostin, who was not on the task force. If followed to a tee, such rules could exclude care for the poorest, most disadvantaged citizens who suffer disproportionately from chronic disease and disability, he said. While health care rationing will be necessary in a mass disaster, "there are some real ethical concerns here."…”

Any thinking person understands that in a severe emergency there will be very tough decisions. Just looking at the recommendations, it is obvious my parents would be allowed to die. The threat of poorly controlled diabetes is basically a way of saying anyone who is considered “obese” wouldn’t be treated. There is an irony in the fact that a larger person has a better chance of over-all survival simply because of the stored body-fat and evolutionary ‘survival of the fittest’ – which isn’t about exercise and being thin, but survival during times of famine and disaster. (Sorry, but this was once a major part of a discussion in weight loss).

I don’t want to sound like an alarmist or a Ron Paul Bot, but the last person I want with dictatorial powers in an emergency is Michael Chertoff. He has shown a total and flagrant disregard for the Constitution and basic rights for a little thing like the Border Fence. What would he do in a real emergency.

Do we really want to find out?

Then there is this:

These past three years, because of my mother's serious cardiac problems I've become fully aware of the incredible advances of the medical community. I have also become fully aware of the limitations, many of which are psychological and are due to physician mindset. Three years ago this week, while she was in and out of ICU, being pumped full of medication to regulate her a-fibs, I begged with anyone I could to check out the possibility of a pace-maker. No one would listen to me. Finally I downloaded a study about women and the lack of proper cardiac care they receive when compared to men. (Yes, it is true - and my mother was nearly a statistic due to this same mind-set). I printed it out and gave it to my father.

He confronted her cardiologist who was ready to send her home (to die) and asked him if it were true that women were not given the same consideration for pace-makers that men do. He said of course not. Thirty minutes later he popped back in the room, to tell us he had scheduled a pace-maker procedure for the following afternoon. If my mother had not received this pace-maker she would not have survived.

The worst of it - she should have had one at least 20 years ago. She has been under the care of a cardiologist for at least 30 years. Once, while in Palm Beach, she had an attack and was rushed to an ER where they wanted to insert a pace-maker but her physician in Atlanta was out of town. His partner, a woman was on call. She said my mother's condition did not warrant it. The attending there in WPB was furious and told her she would need one.

I keep thinking about her quality of life.

(I am linking to a study about the kind of pace-makers women receive. I had a very dear friend who died because she was not given the proper pace-maker.)

I've learned that today's specialist does not know how to treat the 'whole person' or even bother about a life-story which might effect treatment. I think about such specialists determining a list of guidelines about who will live and die and I am terrified.