Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The 5 year limitation you tool. Limitation and requirement are separate words with different meanings.
If it said requirement, it would mean that if you had a physical which you talked about end of life processes, you would have to talk to a practioner about end of life processes at some other point.
Of course, it says limitation, which in this context means if you shoot the shit about EOL processes with a doctor during a physical, you could go see a doctor in that same 5 year period to talk about EOL and have it covered by medicare.
B...E...A....UTIFUL. LOL HAHA
I don't think it can be spelled out any better.
I wonder if he will get it?
The limitation is that you cannot go more that 5 years without meeting Dr. Kevorkian
B...E...A....UTIFUL. LOL HAHA
I don't think it can be spelled out any better.
I wonder if he will get it?
The limitation is that you cannot go more that 5 years without meeting Dr. Kevorkian
LOL You are reading into it what you want it to say and ignoring what it actually says. You are WRONG but you are either too ignorant understand it or too dishonest to admit it.
So which is it? I will let you decide.
Is English your second language?
LOL I was about to ask you the same thing because no where in what you listed does it say anything about it being mandatory.
The things I posted say:
You HAVE to meet every 5 years with either a doctor, physician assistant or nurse practitioner to discuss how much of a burden you are on the Health care system, regular visits to your doctor don't count.
Actually NO, that may be what you wish to believe it says but the fact remains that it doesn't say that and you can't show where it does.
It's a complete waste of electrons, but here it goes again:
20 (3)(A) An initial preventive physical examination
21 under subsection (WW), including any related discussion
22 during such examination, shall not be considered an
23 advance care planning consultation for purposes of applying
24 the 5-year limitation under paragraph (1).
See, if was optional or just about reimbursement, there's no reason for the Bill to mention that you cannot go longer than 5 years without meeting Kevorkian.
You see that, right?
The limitation is that you cannot go more that 5 years without meeting Dr. Kevorkian
LOL You are reading into it what you want it to say and ignoring what it actually says. You are WRONG but you are either too ignorant understand it or too dishonest to admit it.
So which is it? I will let you decide.
I've decided that you've never read anything for yourself, especially anything as complicated as a House bill.
It's moot anyway because the Bill's dead
and the provision is not added to the Senate version because they don't want the mandatory 5 year visits with Kevorkian
To me, 'purely voluntary' means 'not unless the patient requests one.' Section 1233, however, lets doctors initiate the chat and gives them an incentive -- money -- to do so. Indeed, that's an incentive to insist.
Who said she did anything unconstitutional? Lying and scaring old and/or sick people into giving up their ability to decide if they want to be kept alive for months wired up to a machine or die on their own time coherently isn't unconstitutional.What is the problem with what Sarah Palin did? It did not violate the Alaskan constitution. It did not violate the Constitution of the United States.
If people can't understand the difference between federal mandating and funding versus state involvement, that has nothing to do with the federal government, there is no real point in debating what can't be understood.
I am no Sarah Palin fan. This appears to be a bash Sarah thread just because we can thread. Go team and all that mindless partisan hack drivel.
Who said she did anything unconstitutional? Lying and scaring old and/or sick people into giving up their ability to decide if they want to be kept alive for months wired up to a machine or die on their own time coherently isn't unconstitutional.What is the problem with what Sarah Palin did? It did not violate the Alaskan constitution. It did not violate the Constitution of the United States.
If people can't understand the difference between federal mandating and funding versus state involvement, that has nothing to do with the federal government, there is no real point in debating what can't be understood.
I am no Sarah Palin fan. This appears to be a bash Sarah thread just because we can thread. Go team and all that mindless partisan hack drivel.
Just skanky.
It's moot anyway because the Bill's dead
Still doesn't change the fact that you were WRONG,
and the provision is not added to the Senate version because they don't want the mandatory 5 year visits with Kevorkian
and continue to be WRONG. LOL
It's not mandatory and yet you continue to believe what your masters told you to believe. LOL
Who said she did anything unconstitutional? Lying and scaring old and/or sick people into giving up their ability to decide if they want to be kept alive for months wired up to a machine or die on their own time coherently isn't unconstitutional.What is the problem with what Sarah Palin did? It did not violate the Alaskan constitution. It did not violate the Constitution of the United States.
If people can't understand the difference between federal mandating and funding versus state involvement, that has nothing to do with the federal government, there is no real point in debating what can't be understood.
I am no Sarah Palin fan. This appears to be a bash Sarah thread just because we can thread. Go team and all that mindless partisan hack drivel.
Just skanky.
Is English your second language?
LOL I was about to ask you the same thing because no where in what you listed does it say anything about it being mandatory.
The things I posted say:
You HAVE to meet every 5 years with either a doctor, physician assistant or nurse practitioner to discuss how much of a burden you are on the Health care system, regular visits to your doctor don't count.
Actually NO, that may be what you wish to believe it says but the fact remains that it doesn't say that and you can't show where it does.
It's a complete waste of electrons, but here it goes again:
20 (3)(A) An initial preventive physical examination
21 under subsection (WW), including any related discussion
22 during such examination, shall not be considered an
23 advance care planning consultation for purposes of applying
24 the 5-year limitation under paragraph (1).
See, if was optional or just about reimbursement, there's no reason for the Bill to mention that you cannot go longer than 5 years without meeting Kevorkian.
You see that, right?
It's moot anyway because the Bill's dead
Still doesn't change the fact that you were WRONG,
and the provision is not added to the Senate version because they don't want the mandatory 5 year visits with Kevorkian
and continue to be WRONG. LOL
It's not mandatory and yet you continue to believe what your masters told you to believe. LOL
I read it myself, dickweed. Try it sometime
LOL I was about to ask you the same thing because no where in what you listed does it say anything about it being mandatory.
Actually NO, that may be what you wish to believe it says but the fact remains that it doesn't say that and you can't show where it does.
It's a complete waste of electrons, but here it goes again:
20 ‘‘(3)(A) An initial preventive physical examination
21 under subsection (WW), including any related discussion
22 during such examination, shall not be considered an
23 advance care planning consultation for purposes of applying
24 the 5-year limitation under paragraph (1).
See, if was optional or just about reimbursement, there's no reason for the Bill to mention that you cannot go longer than 5 years without meeting Kevorkian.
You see that, right?
But it doesn't say that. Jesus fucking christ, its like debating with a ficus. The "5-year limitation" is saying that you are limited to a end of life appointment that is reimbursed every five years. So unless you have major changes in health, Medicare wouldn't pay for you to visit your doc three times a week to talk about End of Life procedures.
There is nothing about requiring it. I don't know how to explain to you in any simpler terms than this.
Alaska Governor Sarah Palin
WHEREAS, one of the principal goals of Healthcare Decisions Day is to encourage hospitals, nursing homes, assisted living facilities, continuing care retirement communities, and hospices to participate in a statewide effort to provide clear and consistent information to the public about advance directives, as well as to encourage medical professionals and lawyers to volunteer their time and efforts to improve public knowledge and increase the number of Alaskas citizens with advance directives.
