Slashdot Mirror


Lessons of a $618,616 Death

theodp writes "Two years after her husband's death, Amanda Bennett examines the costs and complex questions of keeping one man alive. The bills for his seven-year battle with cancer totaled $618,616, almost two-thirds of which was for his final 24 months. No one can say for sure if the treatments helped extend his life, and she's left with a question she still can't answer: When is it time to quit?"

3 of 651 comments (clear)

  1. Why make the choice? by Bartab · · Score: 0, Troll

    Taxpayer bankrolled (what some call, "free") healthcare means never having to decide when spending the money isn't worth the value anymore. Spend millions on the last week of life? NO problem! Everybody -else- will pay for it, and you can still pass on your financial portfolio to your kids! Win win! Well, except for all the people paying. They're losing.

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo.
  2. Re:No, only people who put a value on life lose by ErikZ · · Score: 0, Troll

    What Americans and right wingers don't get, is that some people prefer a humane society...

    There's no such thing. You're simply paying for your "humane society" by enslaving others. You satisfy your conscious by only enslaving the most productive and telling yourself it's for the good of society.

    --
    Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
  3. Re:Mixing up advice by OeLeWaPpErKe · · Score: 0, Troll

    Don't worry about that, every European government would have let that guy die in the first year of treatment.

    You get what you pay for. Except you pay more, and get less. Furthermore, you have zero choice in the matter.