Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Forum > Open Discussion
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Open Discussion Discuss Forced medical treatment at the General Forum; We are all aware of stories where a minor has been forced into receiving medical treatment against the wishes of ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2010, 09:47 AM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 10,528
Thanks: 1,084
Thanked 3,819 Times in 2,587 Posts
Default Forced medical treatment

We are all aware of stories where a minor has been forced into receiving medical treatment against the wishes of the parents. In most cases, this is due to the religious beliefs of the parents.
That however, is not the discussion I want to have in this thread.

What I am wondering is if the government could force an adult to receive medical treatment. If they can pass a law that requires you to purchase health insurance, can they also force you to receive medical treatment against your wishes? Can they force you to use that medical insurance that you were forced to purchase?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2010, 01:37 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,439
Thanks: 163
Thanked 540 Times in 451 Posts
Default Re: Forced medical treatment

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pat View Post
We are all aware of stories where a minor has been forced into receiving medical treatment against the wishes of the parents. In most cases, this is due to the religious beliefs of the parents.
That however, is not the discussion I want to have in this thread.

What I am wondering is if the government could force an adult to receive medical treatment. If they can pass a law that requires you to purchase health insurance, can they also force you to receive medical treatment against your wishes? Can they force you to use that medical insurance that you were forced to purchase?
If they can do the former they could certainly do the latter.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Stinger For This Useful Post:
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2010, 02:43 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,794
Thanks: 7,173
Thanked 11,051 Times in 6,531 Posts
Post Re: Forced medical treatment

I would think Roe v Wade would have essentially addressed this.

If the government cannot RESTRICT a person's medical liberty by forbidding abortion, then logically they could not REQUIRE a person submit to a medical procedure either.

Surely we've seen enough history on the issue.
People can forbid medical treatment if they are dying.
I'm not sure what hypothetical case could broach the issue which hasn't already been seen.
__________________
"The issue is not the size of government. The real issue is who the government is working for."
- Robert Reich
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2010, 03:33 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,439
Thanks: 163
Thanked 540 Times in 451 Posts
Default Re: Forced medical treatment

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
I would think Roe v Wade would have essentially addressed this.
I don't think it has anything to do with it.

Quote:
If the government cannot RESTRICT a person's medical liberty by forbidding abortion
RvW is based on an asserted right to privacy not medical liberty. Can government restrict my medical liberty by outlawing certain medicines or procedures, yes it can. Can it restrict my medical liberty by preventing me from buying an organ from some in a private transaction, yes it can.

"In its ruling on Gonzales vs. Carhart last month, the U.S. Supreme Court provided new ammunition for those in favor of mandatory ultrasound viewings prior to abortion. The court held that the government could prohibit medical procedures, in this particular case partial-birth abortion procedures, "in furtherance of its legitimate interests in regulating the medical profession in order to promote respect for life, including life of the unborn." "
When an Ultrasound Becomes Political | Sigrid Fry-Revere | Cato Institute: Commentary

Quote:
, then logically they could not REQUIRE a person submit to a medical procedure either.
Logically if they can force you to purchase medical insurance based on policies and prices that they dictate they can require you to submit to certain treatments.


Quote:
People can forbid medical treatment if they are dying.
And soon government will be able to forbid it.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Stinger For This Useful Post:
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2010, 03:52 PM
MrLiberty's Avatar
professional curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,139
Thanks: 14,983
Thanked 14,082 Times in 9,296 Posts
Default Re: Forced medical treatment

If the government can force you to buy medical insurance they can certainly force you to maintain a certain life style, and from there the leap to forced medical treatment is only a few steps away.

We know that Oliver Wendell Holmes saw nothing wrong with forced sterilization of the mentally handicapped so I think we might some day see the government forcing themselves into all sorts of mandates that are unConstitutional.
__________________
I see a whole army of my countrymen, here in defiance of tyranny. You've come to fight as free men... and free men you are. What will you do with that freedom?

William Wallace
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MrLiberty For This Useful Post:
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2010, 05:35 PM
Michael1's Avatar
Godfather
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Greensboro, NC
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,538
Thanks: 1,136
Thanked 1,502 Times in 1,033 Posts
Default Re: Forced medical treatment

Even if they can't 'force' one to undergo a particular medical procedure, they can certainly coerce. If you want your child to go to school, you are essentially forced to undergo medical treatments as it is. So to the extent that you want to be a functioning member of society, there is precedent already. Look how close we got to forcing everyone to get a swine flu shot if you don't think we're prepared to go into full hysteria over a simple 'perceived' crisis that never materialized. Don't hear much about that anymore, do we? Do you really think we simply 'prevented' something? I dunno, but we certainly scared enough people to spend oodles preventing Americans from getting it even though so many countries spent nothing and no epidemic occurred anywhere...

Just like they technically aren't 'forcing' you to buy health insurance, they won't force you to take high blood pressure medicine. If you refuse, they will not 'force' you too, they will simply 'coerce' you to with the threat of higher premiums under the guise that you may down the road need treatments that will be of higher cost (not that you may want them either). That slippery slope leads you to being 'coerced' into things like chemotherapy or xanax or whatever the cheapest treatment the government regulations for whatever ailment you have today 'prescribes'.

So yes, it seems you can be compelled to comply already to medical procedures by the government and there's really nothing, other than crazy liberal (in the classic sense of the word) judges who respect the Constitution stepping in for the rights of the individual rather than the power of the federal government.

Right now we have such a slow justice system that it's virtually assured that you'll be dead before you're free to refuse a treatment that government regulators deem 'necessary'.

Future generations may one day look upon our government as so incredibly intrusive and archaic for forcing procedures that really had no hope of cure but assured pain and suffering upon patients.

Today's cancer treatments may/will be seen in the same light as we now see forced labotomies on autistic patients. We're going to be looked at as butchers one day.
__________________
Dudes ... you're just NOT THAT MUCH ****ING SMARTER than all of us. GET OVER YOURSELVES!
-- Me, to President Obama and the rest of his self-loving amateur staff.


Last edited by Michael1; 04-11-2010 at 05:42 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Michael1 For This Useful Post:
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2010, 06:39 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 10,528
Thanks: 1,084
Thanked 3,819 Times in 2,587 Posts
Default Re: Forced medical treatment

Quote:
Originally Posted by foundit66 View Post
I would think Roe v Wade would have essentially addressed this.

If the government cannot RESTRICT a person's medical liberty by forbidding abortion, then logically they could not REQUIRE a person submit to a medical procedure either.

Surely we've seen enough history on the issue.
People can forbid medical treatment if they are dying.
I'm not sure what hypothetical case could broach the issue which hasn't already been seen.
In the past, health insurance was not a government requirement, now it is. That makes things different.

Roe V Wade was battled in the courts as a right to privacy issue and not a medical issue.
Lets not turn this into an abortion debate though.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to alan For This Useful Post:
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2010, 08:39 PM
tristanrobin's Avatar
Scholar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: New Haven, CT
Posts: 2,633
Thanks: 964
Thanked 2,009 Times in 1,049 Posts
Default Re: Forced medical treatment

You're also forced to pay into social security.
There is no punishment for not accepting the payout.
__________________
"No man is happy without a delusion of some kind. Delusions are as necessary to our happiness as realities."
...Christian Nestell Bovee
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to tristanrobin For This Useful Post:
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2010, 08:54 PM
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 10,528
Thanks: 1,084
Thanked 3,819 Times in 2,587 Posts
Default Re: Forced medical treatment

Quote:
Originally Posted by tristanrobin View Post
You're also forced to pay into social security.
There is no punishment for not accepting the payout.
Good point.
Name a person that has had their SS payments stopped.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 04-11-2010, 09:20 PM
foundit66's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: California
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,794
Thanks: 7,173
Thanked 11,051 Times in 6,531 Posts
Post Re: Forced medical treatment

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger View Post
I don't think it has anything to do with it.
RvW is based on an asserted right to privacy not medical liberty.
Okay. I gotta fill in more of the blanks for you...

Right to privacy.
It's a rights issue for the government to NOT allow you to make a PRIVATE choice, right?
Ergo, it's obviously a rights issue for the government to NOT FORCE you to make a private choice as well...


See how simple that is?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Can government restrict my medical liberty by outlawing certain medicines or procedures, yes it can. Can it restrict my medical liberty by preventing me from buying an organ from some in a private transaction, yes it can.
If it presents a legitimate state interest in the restriction, the answer would probably be "yes".

For the latter case, I can see a clear interest.

But this has nothing to do with FORCING a person to undergo a medical procedure.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
"In its ruling on Gonzales vs. Carhart last month, the U.S. Supreme Court provided new ammunition for those in favor of mandatory ultrasound viewings prior to abortion. The court held that the government could prohibit medical procedures, in this particular case partial-birth abortion procedures, "in furtherance of its legitimate interests in regulating the medical profession in order to promote respect for life, including life of the unborn." "
When an Ultrasound Becomes Political | Sigrid Fry-Revere | Cato Institute: Commentary
WOW!
That's quite the stretch!

See, the MAJOR problem here is that you are ASSUMING that the CONSERVATIVE INTERPRETATION of "promoting respect for life" will somehow, automatically, be the governmental one.


We already have abortion as legal in a manner that essentially demonstrates that the CONSERVATIVE interpretation of "respect for life, including life of the unborn" is NOT the governments interpretation.


Furthermore, I find it PATENTLY HILARIOUS that you bring up "ultrasounds".
To use the logic of the conservative side, since the government can force a medical treatment (like an ultrasound), then obviously they should ALSO be able to force health insurance purchases...

After all, you guys are the ones arguing that they go hand-in-hand, aren't you?
Ergo, by your own approach, forcing the buying of health insurance is AUTOMATICALLY VALID since the conservatives have already instituted demanded health care procedures...


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
Logically if they can force you to purchase medical insurance based on policies and prices that they dictate they can require you to submit to certain treatments.
I see absolutely no logic in that.
The medical insurance has a legitimate state interest.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinger
And soon government will be able to forbid it.

Once again, a health insurance company does something and we call it righteous capitalism. Pass the communion.
If the government is HINTED at it, the conservatives call it something else...
__________________
"The issue is not the size of government. The real issue is who the government is working for."
- Robert Reich
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to foundit66 For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
forced, medical, treatment

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0