Visitors Now:
Total Visits:
Total Stories:
Profile image
Story Views

Now:
Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:
Total:

Un(?)Intended Consequences: Deathwatch edition

Monday, October 24, 2016 10:26
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.

(Before It's News)

Last spring, we noted a new Golden State law essentially legalizing assisted suicide. At the time, we remarked only that it served as a convenience for those so inclined to save the airfare to Switzerland.

But of course, slippery slopes are, well, slippery, and now we have an insurance carrier who took the new law to its logical (if macabre) conclusion:

[O]ne young mother says her insurance company denied her coverage for chemotherapy treatment after originally agreeing to provide the fiscal support for it, but indicated it would be willing to pay for assisted suicide instead.”

This really shouldn’t come as any great surprise: after all, it’s simply the logical outcome of the ObamaTax’s IPAP provision. How’s that, you ask?

Well, as we’ve noted before, that feature is really just our version of the MVNHS©’s Liverpool Pathway. Admittedly, that’s actually the heavy hand of government implementing the law as written, but is it demonstrably different in this case? After all, the insurer is simply following the guidelines set forth by the state as to whom is worthy of life-extending treatment.

O Brave New World, indeed.

[Hat Tip: Ace of Spades]

Original content copyright © InsureBlog

Report abuse

Comments

Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Top Stories
Recent Stories

Register

Newsletter

Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.