SPONSORED BY:

The Case for Killing Granny

Rethinking end-of-life care.

Dana Neely / Getty Images
 

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

Separate multiple addresses with commas

SPONSORED BY
 

My mother wanted to die, but the doctors wouldn't let her. At least that's the way it seemed to me as I stood by her bed in an intensive-care unit at a hospital in Hilton Head, S.C., five years ago. My mother was 79, a longtime smoker who was dying of emphysema. She knew that her quality of life was increasingly tethered to an oxygen tank, that she was losing her ability to get about, and that she was slowly drowning. The doctors at her bedside were recommending various tests and procedures to keep her alive, but my mother, with a certain firmness I recognized, said no. She seemed puzzled and a bit frustrated that she had to be so insistent on her own demise.

The hospital at my mother's assisted-living facility was sustained by Medicare, which pays by the procedure. I don't think the doctors were trying to be greedy by pushing more treatments on my mother. That's just the way the system works. The doctors were responding to the expectations of almost all patients. As a doctor friend of mine puts it, "Americans want the best, they want the latest, and they want it now." We expect doctors to make heroic efforts—especially to save our lives and the lives of our loved ones.

 
PHOTOS
Grace Before Dying

Inside a remarkable hospice program for prison inmates.

 

The idea that we might ration health care to seniors (or anyone else) is political anathema. Politicians do not dare breathe the R word, lest they be accused—however wrongly—of trying to pull the plug on Grandma. But the need to spend less money on the elderly at the end of life is the elephant in the room in the health-reform debate. Everyone sees it but no one wants to talk about it. At a more basic level, Americans are afraid not just of dying, but of talking and thinking about death. Until Americans learn to contemplate death as more than a scientific challenge to be overcome, our health-care system will remain unfixable.

Compared with other Western countries, the United States has more health care—but, generally speaking, not better health care. There is no way we can get control of costs, which have grown by nearly 50 percent in the past decade, without finding a way to stop overtreating patients. In his address to Congress, President Obama spoke airily about reducing inefficiency, but he slid past the hard choices that will have to be made to stop health care from devouring ever-larger slices of the economy and tax dollar. A significant portion of the savings will have to come from the money we spend on seniors at the end of life because, as Willie Sutton explained about why he robbed banks, that's where the money is.

As President Obama said, most of the uncontrolled growth in federal spending and the deficit comes from Medicare; nothing else comes close. Almost a third of the money spent by Medicare—about $66.8 billion a year—goes to chronically ill patients in the last two years of life. This might seem obvious—of course the costs come at the end, when patients are the sickest. But that can't explain what researchers at Dartmouth have discovered: Medicare spends twice as much on similar patients in some parts of the country as in others. The average cost of a Medicare patient in Miami is $16,351; the average in Honolulu is $5,311. In the Bronx, N.Y., it's $12,543. In Fargo, N.D., $5,738. The average Medicare patient undergoing end-of-life treatment spends 21.9 days in a Manhattan hospital. In Mason City, Iowa, he or she spends only 6.1 days.

Maybe it's unsurprising that treatment in rural towns costs less than in big cities, with all their high prices, varied populations, and urban woes. But there are also significant disparities in towns that are otherwise very similar. How do you explain the fact, for instance, that in Boulder, Colo., the average cost of Medicare treatment is $9,103, whereas an hour away in Fort Collins, Colo., the cost is $6,448?

Label

Newsweek Top Stories
Gone Rogue
Gone Rogue

How Sarah Palin hurts the GOP … and America.

The Decade's Best Quotes
The Decade's Best Quotes

NEWSWEEK's 20/10 Project recalls the lines we'll never forget.

Best Celebrity Mugshots
Best Celebrity Mugshots

10 unforgettable arrest photos from the 2000s.

An Evolutionary Edge
An Evolutionary Edge

How grandmas may play favorites.

Discuss

Sponsored by

Member Comments

  • Posted By: AnJo1 @ 11/14/2009 3:41:55 PM

    Your posting is exactly why I don't trust Advance Directives. Doctors don't all read very well. You, for instance, misread my post as saying that "doctors only want to pull the plug." My post clearly specified that "some" of his doctors wanted to do that. Others fought very hard to respect his wishes and aid him in his fight. But it only takes one (1) doctor to mis-read an Advance Directive and there goes that plug!

    A living will is a legal document. If you are advising your patients to get one, you should consdier whether you really understand the legal significance of the document and how it will be used. I don't practice medicine without a license; where are you licensed to practice law?

    At the hospital where my father was treated, a stamp was visible on the front of the patient's chart, in red, indicating whether the patient had or had not signed an advance directive. Dollars to donuts, nobody ever read the actual directive unless there was a family conflict, they just relied on the existence of that stamp to tell them that the patient did not want extraordinary measures. Look at your own patient history form. I'll bet it has a box to check on whether the patient has a living will/advance directive. Does it also give an option to check whether the pateint wants to "go gently" or "put up a fight"? I thought not.

  • Posted By: liara @ 11/10/2009 10:35:50 AM

    This author admits that Medicare/caid is by far the #1 factor behind rising health care costs. Blaming it on too many hypochondirac grandmas is beyond ridiculous. It is because the whole structure is over-regulated, legislated, and controlled by the government. We are no longer the clients; the insurance companies and the government are. Health Care is now more expensive for seniors than it was BEFORE Medicare!! And they're telling us that EXPANDING these programs is now going to fix this cost black hole? It amazes me that these people can figure out which way to put on their pants in the morning, much less run our country.

  • Posted By: TimJanezic @ 10/02/2009 10:39:41 PM

    I fear the real problem is that both major parties are too entrenched in the establishment to make anything useful happen. The insurers would love to have mandated new customers, and I bet the new regulations will be written with them in mind and be weighted in their interest. The Republicans are hopeless in this situation because a true conservative solution doesn't really jive with many of their big biz connections. We see physicians Ron & Rand Paul on TV a lot making lots of sense with their suggestions about lowering costs by reducing the involvement of the insurance and government "middlemen." The media people nod at everything the Paul's say, and then go back to the phony 2 party paradigm for the rest of the week. If the only solutions to our problems now and in the future have to mesh with the wants of the most powerful and the government itself, this country is utterly doomed. Thus, I wish the mainstream media was a little more "outside the bos," but they know that if the sinking ship does continue down, they have a lifeboat reserved. So, why would they look for real, independent solutions? Looks like we're on our own.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse

My Take

Customize the NEWSWEEK homepage
to feature your favorite columnists.

Customize Now