Federal Health Programs and Those Who Cannot Care For Themselves: What Are Their Rights And Our Responsibilities?
FEDERAL HEALTH PROGRAMS AND THOSE WHO CANNOT CARE FOR THEMSELVES: WHAT ARE THEIR RIGHTS AND OUR RESPONSIBILITIES?
HEARING before the SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE, DRUG POLICY, AND HUMAN RESOURCES
of the COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
Ms. Norton. I am sorry I won't be here for much of this
hearing, I have two other hearings going on at the same time. I
am intrigued that the Criminal Justice Subcommittee would be
having this hearing today. I am trying to fathom that in light
of the areas in which you have traditionally concentrated.
I certainly don't have any objection to the hearing. I
think the Schiavo case raises issues that ought to be discussed
in precisely this kind of setting as opposed to a setting
forced upon us in the past.
I very much regret, though, that this hearing did not
become the opportunity as well to correct some of the
impressions that were left in the wake of the Schiavo hearings.
It questions the maligning of compassionate care at the end of
life by hospices by members and others repeatedly talking about
people being starved to death and people being deprived of
water to their death when you don't have to be a professional
to understand that hospices are embraced by Americans precisely
because they help people avoid a painful death. They are
regulated by the States, sharply regulated. I thought they did
a huge disservice to allow stand. It would have been good to
have someone here to speak to that issue.
It would have been good if we were going to have this
hearing to have some witness come forward to testify about
living wills. Everywhere I go people virtually come up to you
and say, make sure I have told you, now you know it and most of
them are saying they don't want to continue to live under those
circumstances but the point is, and perhaps one of the most
important points driven home by the Schiavo case is the living
will point. I would like to know more about that as long as we
are having this hearing. I regret there is no witness who can
testify as to that.
Finally, I regret that there is not some expert there who
could tell us the extent to which, and it is a huge extent, of
families making precisely the decision that the Schiavo family
made with respect to Terri. That is to say every day of the
week, feeding tubes, if you will, are given up because either a
court intervenes or because the family makes that decision. No
family would ever make that decision if a dying person starved
to death and experienced starvation or if a dying person
experienced the need for water and was denied it. When
virtually the entire neurological profession said that those
feelings were impossible in a woman whose brain had dissolved
to the extent that her brain had dissolved, it seems to me that
the kind of fairness you are known for in this hearing would
have required some witnesses to come forward to speak to at
least some of those issues which are also involved.
I note and I asked when I came in were there any other
witnesses and they said there was a witness that could not
attend and that the minority was given but I just raise these
issues because I think the kind of discussion you have started
here is an important one and I congratulate you for starting
it. That is exactly what we need but I think we need to have
all the elements brought into the discussion and they do not
seem to be included in the witness list.
I have two other hearings going on, literally, important
hearings and I cannot stay for this hearing but I certainly
have staff here so that I can begin to understand whether some
of these issues were discussed.
I thank you again, Mr. Chairman, for starting this
discussion in the Congress, a vital discussion indeed.
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_house_hearings&docid=23407.wais