Futile Care Protocol May Soon be Law in Idaho

Since late 2002, I’ve yammered on and on about the folks who promote a ‘right to die’ being nothing more than an agenda-driven group, looking to foster an ‘obligation to die’. Though I don’t claim to be a prophet (or, particularly bright, for that matter), the state of Idaho has punctuated this in legislation that looks as likely to be passed as a stone from the kidney of a devoted Guinness drinker.

Say a fine how-do-you-do to Senate Bill 1114 of the Health and Welfare Committee of Idaho. The bit I’m having some trouble warming up to reads like this:

If the ethics committee agrees with the attending physician that the treatment requested by the patient, the patient’s advance directive or surrogate decision maker is medically inappropriate or futile, the attending physician and health care facility shall take reasonable action to assist the patient or surrogate decision maker to arrange the patient’s transfer within fifteen (15) days to another health care provider selected by the patient or surrogate decision maker who is willing to assume the treatment of the patient.

What does that bit of legalese mean? This:

If you have an advanced directive or protective medical directive that insists on certain types of medical treatment, they can be overridden by a hospital, nursing home or rehabilitation facility’s ethics committee. If you have an attorney-in-fact, guardian-in-fact or named healthcare surrogate, he or she is just as powerless as your own written directive.

The fact that they’re giving you 15 days to beat feet shouldn’t be of much comfort. Keep your eye fixedly trained on the notion purported by this legislation that “If the ethics committee agrees with the attending physician that the treatment requested by the patient, the patient’s advance directive or surrogate decision maker is medically inappropriate…”

Now, what facility would have you with an ethics committee’s committal of futile care protocol? Also, what if your condition is such that transport could be threatening to your life?

It gets better:

The health care facility shall provide reasonably necessary life sustaining treatment within the capacity and capability of the health care facility until the patient is transferred or until the expiration of the fifteen (15) day period described above, whichever occurs first.

Sounds like a tire warranty.

Well, my friends, these bullshit artists who told you the right to die movement was about personal sovereignty and choice lied in your face like the politicians who support such pernicious protocols. None of this has anything to do with your dignity, privacy or choice. Choice. That’s a word they delight in tossing around like so many beads at a Mardi Gras parade. In the end, it’s all cheap, meaningless and just plain stupid.

But, don’t take my word for it. Read the legislation for yourself. Here.
What types of care are inappropriate or futile to you? What sort of care do you consider an absolute right?

Doesn’t matter anymore. At least, not in Idaho.

This is precisely what I predicted when I wrote Means to an End in 2003. Getting people to accept healthcare rationing, the so-called ‘right to die’ and the notion that there is more dignity in being iced than dying when you’re good and bloody ready to is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt at classifying human beings as ‘worth it’ and ‘not so much’. And, you should be appalled.

If your healthcare directive states: “I want (A),” and those charged with your care declare: “We’re not giving her (A),” where’s the choice part kick in? Sounds to be like a human being getting sabotaged by a bottom-line-thinking institution. Not exactly the personal sovereignty the right-to-die people keep espousing.

This type of legislation should scare the shit out of you. Sadly, I have no solid advice, but I’ll leave you with this:

Don’t get ill in Idaho.