The Brainwashing of an Unsuspecting People: Continuing to Deny Death Panels

President Barack Obama briefs with speechwriters and advisors in the Oval Office prior to a health care statement on July 17, 2009. (Credit: Pete Souza)

The headlines are amazing, as the denial continues on, suggesting that any claim of a death panel is a myth created by either lying right-wingers or lying special interest groups, who are uninformed or, for selfish reasons, trying to wrongly destroy the health care reform that some think will be a wondrous blessing to all. No, it simply couldn’t be that there is reason for concern.

No matter what they call themselves, or who they work for, there are in fact “death panels” in existence at this very moment and have been for quite some time now. How can anyone dare write, or believe, that “death panels” are merely a myth?

Andrea Clark was sentenced to die under Texas’ Futile Care Law, though she was aware and fighting for her life. She was, after all, deemed by the so-called ethics committee to be hopeless and therefore unworthy of continued effort. Never mind that she was fully aware — it was deemed time to put her down and out of her misery.

In Andrea’s case, her family obtained an attorney and was able to get a stay (delay), while they fought for her. During this period, Andrea did die, but she died because of natural causes and not because she was made to die. There is a very big difference between the two.

The family was not expecting the medical staff to create a miracle that was not within their power to create. All the family wanted was for Andrea to have the chance to survive, if it was possible. She had, after all, been a survivor all her life. Perhaps she would beat the odds again.

Andrea was aware! Andrea was fighting for her life! So what do you call it, when someone decides that in spite of the fact that you are aware and fighting for your life, your life support is going to be removed and you will die? Worse — that you are aware of the decision and that you are going to die because of that very decision and you didn’t even commit a crime beyond becoming ill or injured.

Ted Stith, Sr. had a stroke while in Florida on vacation in 2006. Without even a hint of time to recover, he was moved to a hospice and starved and dehydrated to death. This was in spite of the fact, his friend (that had flown down to be with him) reported that Ted was aware and had reached for water. She further reported that she was removed from visitation because they believed she might have been feeding him. Apparently there was no interest in what Ted Stith, Sr.’s wishes were. He was denied the water he desperately reached for. He had, after all, been sentenced to death by the new rules put into place and readily carried out by the hospice.

What type of decision-makers do you call the ones that recommended hospice and the immediate starvation and dehydration of a stroke victim that didn’t even get a chance to recover?

What type of decision-makers do you call those who ignore that a person is aware of being dehydrated and reaching for “life-sustaining” water and prevent the person from receiving it?

Then we have Gary Harvey from New York, whose wife is fighting both for his life and the right to take him home.

“This is a case where a 55 year old man had a heart attack, fell down the basement stairs, and ended up severely brain damaged. It is a case where still another so-called ethics committee felt it had some sort of god-like wisdom and right to determine life or death for a stranger. It is a case where a so-called ethics committee decided, behind closed doors, that it was perfectly okay to starve and dehydrate this man — Gary Harvey — to death by termination of his Total Parenteral Nutrition (TPN) feeding tube.”

Thankfully the request has been dismissed for now, but just what title should be given to those, who wished to starve and dehydrate Gary Harvey to death?

No such thing as “death panels?” Just what “nice” term is being developed for these people, who make decisions that kill off living human-beings, who may not have otherwise died, especially at that scheduled time? Or, is “ethics committee” suppose to be the “nice” term that we relate to as the “good” committee doing “good” things like removing hope from families and those fighting to survive an illness or injury?

Regardless of any name given, any time a group of people make a decision to kill off, let-go, allow-to-go or help-to-go anyone — they have made a decision for someone to die and therefore the title is accurate — they are a panel that decides death and therefore properly titled — “death panel”. It is no myth! It is real! It is very real!

So, what is it with the flood of denials and attacks on those who suggest that what is real is very, very real? What is the propaganda suggesting there will be no such thing as a “death panel”, and people are hysterical, irrational, paranoid or in pursuit of a personal agenda to even be hinting at the possibility of one becoming reality? Yes, what is it? An attempt to brainwash an unsuspecting people?

Perhaps it is believed that if the lie is said over and over and over again, it will finally take and people will finally believe what they are told, rather than what they know to be the truth. And when it happens, we shall have become a people of zombies, rather than “we the people”, who once had a choice to make the right decisions when it counted. We will be the brainwashed, even if not “unsuspecting.” We have been warned!

Carrie Hutchens is a former law enforcement officer and a freelance writer who is active in fighting against the death culture movement and the injustices within the judicial and law enforcement systems.

Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.