Obama Admin Fires Back At Right Wing With Detailed Rebuttal Of “Death Book” Claim

[babylonsister]

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/political-media/obama-admin-fires-back-at-right-wing-with-detailed-rebuttal-of-death-book-claim/

Obama Admin Fires Back At Right Wing With Detailed Rebuttal Of “Death Book” Claim


In a sign of real concern about the right wing’s latest lurid health care tale, the Obama administration’s veterans agency is hitting back at conservative media with a detailed factual rebuttal of the claim that government is giving veterans a “death book” that urges them to hurry up and die.

The rebuttal includes a detailed fact sheet and a timeline, both of which were sent my way by an administration official and may be sent widely to reporters later this morning.

Haven’t heard the “death book” tale? It got started with this Op ed piece in The Wall Street Journal by a former Bush official claiming that a manual distributed by the Department of Veterans Affairs sends veterans a “hurry-up-and-die message.”

The claim — the right’s latest effort to frighten the vulnerable about Obama’s health care intentions — is that the manual steers veterans towards “predetermined conclusions” about “end-of-life choices.” It’s gotten tons of right wing and even traditional media play.

The rebuttal points out that the manual, which is called “Your Life, Your Choices,” is not an “advance directive” and “does not promote limitation of life-sustaining treatment, assisted suicide, or euthanasia.” Rather, its goal is to help veterans “consider the types of health care they would want to receive if they were unable to make decisions for themselves” and to “think about and discuss their preferences” with family, friends, and doctors.

The fact sheet does note that the manual was determined under Bush to be in need of revision, and that it may be “too negative in tone and not sufficiently sensitive” to pro-life or disabled veterans. But the rebuttal strongly contests the core “death book” claim, and notes that the author of the original Op ed has offered a competing book, which is for sale.

The Obama administration’s detailed rebuttal is yet another reminder of how aggressively the conservative media is targeting the frail and vulnerable with its outlandish health care tales — so much so that real government resources are required to combat them.

[pinto]

1. This is such a shame. Doctors, RN's, hospice specialists, etc. have *always* advocated

advanced directives for health care in the event a person is unable to voice a decision. It usually includes some end of life treatment choices and appoints one or more people to act on the person's behalf - usually a spouse, family member or close friend.

This "death panels", "death book" crap is really some of the cheapest politicial manipulation I've ever seen.

[babylonsister]

2. It's so cheap, and people are so gullible, I'm constantly amazed.

Why don't these people have any independent thought processes? Or curiosity? If something sounds 'so bad', it'd behoove them to research imo. But no, they take what the r/w talking heads say as gospel.

Very disheartening.

[Qutzupalotl]

4. Some people want to believe the worst about their political opponents

so badly that they'll latch onto any information (or disinfo) that supports what they already believe. It's easier than changing.

I'm afraid I did that with Bush, frankly. Not all of the things I criticized him for were supported by hard evidence; some were flimsy suppositions of his motives. My opinions of him were skewed by having started from the premise that he's wholly evil, when he was probably more of an unwitting tool of Machiavellian oligarchs.

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. You all could have been a week ahead of this story if Skinner had

answered my e-mail.

[PVnRT]

5. Even veteran's groups that generally despise the VA

praise their end-of-life and geriatric care efforts. Not that I expect any kind of consistency from the right-wing jackasses when it comes to listening to veterans.