Live data from Hacker News

How Doctors Die (2011)

zocalopublicsquare.org

51–60 of 99 posts

Re: How Doctors Die (2011)

#51
post #7

As a 26 year old American, my experiences with the US hospital system have been so abysmal that I would consider not even seeking treatment for many serious conditions unless I knew the solution would be straightforward. Abysmal in terms of having good medical outcomes, and being treated respectfully by hospital staff (who tend to be extremely overworked). Plus, it's degrading to have no control over how much you wil…

Strongly agree. Last year, I had the misfortune of being sent to the ER for lightheadedness and confusion while hiking. All different doctors ran a battery of very expensive tests, none of which I was in any condition to consent to. They discovered nothing. Most of the time I spent on a bed in the hallway under piercing lights, being ignored, surrounded by such chaos that I had PTSD from it for months. Nobody was able to provide any form of tangible help. I got better on my own just resting for a few days.

That was only the beginning. I received dozens of singleton bills for the co-pay amounts for dozens of separate procedures and tests, which each arrived in my mailbox over a period of seven months. Seven months of surprise bills for various different things they did in a period of a couple of hours. The charges totalled in the thousands. And of course, for each separate charge, I got mail from both the insurance company and the hospital.

The net effect being that I received nothing except doctors saying "we see nothing wrong" and being sent home. But I had to endure finding surprise bills in the mail, and doing the paperwork to pay and file them, randomly for the next seven months. Every one a reminder of how a system took advantage of me while I was down and couldn't answer for myself.

I felt betrayed, like could not one person have the sensitivity and take the time to let me rest somewhere and feed me food and gatorade or something? And no matter how much I wanted to move on from it and get on with my life, I still had to face the bills streaming in like randomized salt rubbed into the wound.

Lesson: Take outstanding care of yourself at all times without fail. Don't have medical problems. If you do, have amazing health insurance.

Re: How Doctors Die (2011)

#52
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree; government regulatory practice is mainly taking some of the worse edges off the inherently broken model of "healthcare as insurance". I'm thinking particularly of major conditions. I think regular office visits could probably be paid for out of pocket, but the real money is going towards hospitals, and that's also where free-market solutions don't work at all. In particular, I don't see how an unregulated…

Risk pooling is supposed to happen at the insurance company level, not at, e.g., the corporate level. i.e. the insurance company is pooling risk across a lot of individual clients. That this only sort of happens now is an offshoot of the regulatory system. Of course, a large company will always be able to negotiate slightly better rates. In a free market, whenever it is financially rational to insure someone, it woul…

Ah, well that's where we disagree. I can't control what genes I'm born with, and I don't think there's anything wrong with socializing those risks across the population. Let's say there's a 1% risk of me being born with some condition. I think it's perfectly fair for me to pay 1% of the cost of treating that condition, whether I'm born with it or not. I don't see why I should pay 100% the cost if I get unlucky in the genetic lottery, or 0% if I get lucky. That's just upping the ante on a bet I wasn't even around to make. And that's the kind of pooling insurance usually does, but the mechanics of this particular risk are very hard for insurance to pool, because it happens to take place before I'm sentient enough to purchase insurance, unlike a tree falling on my house.

If anything, it strikes me as exceptionally petty and greedy for people who have the misfortune not to need to undergo surgery for a congenital heart disease to be angry about having to pay for their 1/risk chance of it.

I mean, I'm not even arguing anything particularly leftist here: F.A. Hayek made basically this argument.

Re: How Doctors Die (2011)

#53

I don't see any statistics, just a very well-written article with some anecdotes.

Not everything needs statistics to ring a bell.

I've seen two grandfathers of mine on which absurd medical care was given: one was seriously ill and maintained as a living mummy for months (he did look as bad as people who were rescued from extermination camp at the end of WWII) and another who, while in coma, had a leg cut off although everyone knew he wouldn't wake up. Who the heck wants to wake up with only one leg when one know you'll die in the next few hours / days of terrible cancers that spread throughout the whole body?

It's precisely what this article is talking about because it's really what's going on.

People dying in an environment they're not familiar with, experienced things they never experienced during their whole life: broken ribs due to overzealous CPR, one leg cut off, tubes everywhere.

I've had a girlfriend who was a doctor and the sheer number of crazy situation like this she was describing were insane.

Believe me: this is very real and you probably don't want the statistics.

Because the probability that you will notice, the day your day has come, that you're missing one leg while feeling your ribs being broken is very far from zero.

Re: How Doctors Die (2011)

#54
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree; government regulatory practice is mainly taking some of the worse edges off the inherently broken model of "healthcare as insurance". I'm thinking particularly of major conditions. I think regular office visits could probably be paid for out of pocket, but the real money is going towards hospitals, and that's also where free-market solutions don't work at all. In particular, I don't see how an unregulated…

Risk pooling is supposed to happen at the insurance company level, not at, e.g., the corporate level. i.e. the insurance company is pooling risk across a lot of individual clients. That this only sort of happens now is an offshoot of the regulatory system. Of course, a large company will always be able to negotiate slightly better rates. In a free market, whenever it is financially rational to insure someone, it woul…

In a free market, whenever it is financially rational to insure someone, it would happen.

Which is why healthcare-as-insurance is so perverse.

So, someone probably couldn't get insurace that covers their preexisting condition (which wouldn't be fair to the insurer), but they could get coverage for other things.

Would you perhaps like to volunteer at a hospital some time? Maybe you could explain objectivist principles to parents with children born with 'pre-existing conditions' like spina bifida or taysach's syndrome? Explain that they'll have to deal with a child's debilitating illness without financial aid? Maybe you could read Atlas Shrugged during storytime at a children's cancer ward? You could explain to all of those little 'Takers' how unfair their treatment is to their parent's insurance companies?

Re: How Doctors Die (2011)

#55
The following is my point of view. I understand some people have a different point of view, and I don't have a problem if they make it known, and their families and health care providers respect their wishes.

But from where I sit, the dying doctors' point of view, as presented in this article, struck me as irrational.

Axiom: Being dead is better than being alive. Under all circumstances.

I personally believe this axiom, very strongly. I'd rather spit in the eye of death with my last breath than go quietly into the night.

It logically follows, then, that a treatment that has a 1% chance of working is better than doing nothing, if the latter has a 0% chance of working, no matter how extreme the treatment is.

Living longer, even in a state of constant extreme pain, is better than dying. Well, maybe dying peacefully would be less painful for my relatives, but again, I personally place a much higher value on my own life than my family's feelings of sadness or whatever.

The only question which remains is the validity of the Axiom. If this world is all there is, if when you die there isn't an afterlife or reincarnation or whatever...then the Axiom is clearly true.

If you have strong religious belief, then perhaps your afterlife is better. But only a perfect belief that you are headed to a better place makes it rational to give up. If you have a little bit of doubt -- if you're 99% sure you're going to Heaven but 1% of you whispers that maybe there's nothing and you'll turn into dust instead -- you still want to put off rolling that die as long as you can. Ditto if you're 100% sure there's an afterlife and 99% sure you've been good enough to get into Heaven, but 1% of you says that maybe Hell is where you're headed.

If your religion forbids suicide, and there's a chance that the Judge who will weigh your life will interpret not opting for the best available medical treatment as equivalent to suicide, then that affects your decision too. Although, to be fair, this cuts both ways: The suffering you cause your family by lingering beyond your time on Earth might count against you too. Literally "Damned if you do, damned if you don't." It's unclear enough that there should really be a few more commandments or something, to address all the corner cases.

Re: How Doctors Die (2011)

#56
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree; government regulatory practice is mainly taking some of the worse edges off the inherently broken model of "healthcare as insurance". I'm thinking particularly of major conditions. I think regular office visits could probably be paid for out of pocket, but the real money is going towards hospitals, and that's also where free-market solutions don't work at all. In particular, I don't see how an unregulated…

Risk pooling is supposed to happen at the insurance company level, not at, e.g., the corporate level. i.e. the insurance company is pooling risk across a lot of individual clients. That this only sort of happens now is an offshoot of the regulatory system. Of course, a large company will always be able to negotiate slightly better rates. In a free market, whenever it is financially rational to insure someone, it woul…

Having been denied insurance because of a procedure that I underwent to make me considerably more healthy, I call bullshit. How do you "not cover" the result of a procedure that impacted every aspect of my life while covering everything else?

Naked capitalism and healthcare can't work together (and this coming from somebody who strongly believes the government has way too many fingers in way too many pies). The priorities are too far out of whack; but that doesn't mean capitalism shouldn't have a significant role to play.

I do think government regulation (in particular, the tax benefit for companies providing insurance) have made the situation far worse than it needs to be. I talked to an insurance broker after the Obamacare vote. He told me every insurance company in my state was dropping policies for 19 year olds, since they had no say who they covered. Talk about incentivizing good behavior...

In the end, it's an incredibly complex problem that should not be handled in at the Federal level, if for no other reason than there are too many competing needs.

Re: How Doctors Die (2011)

#57
post #55

The following is my point of view. I understand some people have a different point of view, and I don't have a problem if they make it known, and their families and health care providers respect their wishes. But from where I sit, the dying doctors' point of view, as presented in this article, struck me as irrational. Axiom: Being dead is better than being alive. Under all circumstances. I personally believe this axi…

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion, of course, but you would really choose six months in a hospital bed, puking your guts out over three months of a reasonable quality of life? It's one thing if fighting means a 50% or greater chance of making it five years; it's quite another if fighting it means a matter of months.

Re: How Doctors Die (2011)

#58
post #55

The following is my point of view. I understand some people have a different point of view, and I don't have a problem if they make it known, and their families and health care providers respect their wishes. But from where I sit, the dying doctors' point of view, as presented in this article, struck me as irrational. Axiom: Being dead is better than being alive. Under all circumstances. I personally believe this axi…

My wife is a doctor. For her, seeing people die horrible deaths is not an abstract possibility. It is something that she's seen far more of than she wants, and is likely to see in the future again more than she wants.

Despite having no particular religious views, she would disagree with your "axiom" in the strongest of possible terms. So would I. I am not religious, but my preferences include not suffering horrible pain. I also am against causing severe emotional and/or financial distress for people I care about. Those preferences lead to there being situations where I am literally better off dead than alive, and I have made sure that my wife is aware of what those situations are so that she can make that decision for me if I am incapacitated and it needs to be made.

Re: How Doctors Die (2011)

#59
post #55

The following is my point of view. I understand some people have a different point of view, and I don't have a problem if they make it known, and their families and health care providers respect their wishes. But from where I sit, the dying doctors' point of view, as presented in this article, struck me as irrational. Axiom: Being dead is better than being alive. Under all circumstances. I personally believe this axi…

How old are you? Have you ever been hospitalized? Have you ever had a family member hospitalized?

It's easy to sit back and pontificate that you'd choose heroic medical treatment over whatever the alternative might be if you've never actually seen what that entails. It's a lot harder when you see that for most people, especially older people, it's an experience akin to being imprisoned and then tortured to death. A hospital is an awful place to spend the last moments of your life.

Re: How Doctors Die (2011)

#60

"someone breaking their ribs in an attempt to resuscitate them with CPR (that’s what happens if CPR is done right)" Is that always necessarily true...?

I once applied enough force to cause a rib to puncture a lung :( I did it wrong.

What happened to the person?
Post reply on HN