New Sop for Lawyers

New Lawyers SOP or-
New Issue for Money!

Posted on June 22, 2013

We can’t say we weren’t warned! Sarah Palin and others warned us that Obamacare would lead to ‘Death Panels’, whereas the decisions about treatments for catastrophic illness would lie in the hands of bureaucrats.

Legal action against the bureaucratic rulings is the only recourse left to distraught families to try and save their loved ones. The case of little 11 year old Sarah Murnaghan, desperately ill with cystic fibrosis, clearly demonstrates a developing need for lawyers who will specialize in challenges to the rulings by bureaucrats. Those cold dispassionate rulings are the result of the guidelines set forth in Obamacare.

Little Sarah’s plight is just the tip of the iceberg. It is not the fault of the lawyers, they didn’t write the laws, but they will be the beneficiaries of it. Although it sounds unfair to the lawyers, it doesn’t leave any doubt as to why the majority of them support the Democrats. Democrats love passing laws. They like tinkering with the mechanics of our society and in so doing set the stage for legal wrangling over their handiwork. It’s a win-win for lawyers to support Democrats.

The stage has now been set for armies of lawyers, on behalf of grieving families because of Obamacare, to challenge the bureaucratic rulings foisted upon us by the Democrat’s idea of universal healthcare. The lawyers will siphon millions of more dollars from us while doing their part in trying to help distraught families.

Where is the justice? Absolutely no rocks being thrown at the lawyers, it is clear by the example of little Sarah Murnaghan that somebody has to rescue those imperiled by an unwise Liberal codified policy. Just bear in mind that even though the healthcare law itself was well intentioned – that the road to Hell is paved with good intentions. It is far better to fix problems than to create new ones.

The following quotes are from the internet about Sarah Murnaghan from various news sources. Apologies to these sources, but I failed to copy the URL’s that provided them. However, all can be found with a Bing search of Sarah Murnaghan’s lung transplant and her family’s fight to save their daughters life.

Cheers,
-Robert-

Sarah Murnaghan’s Family Hires Law Firm to Fight for Lung Transplant

Law firm Pepper Hamilton LLP wrote a letter to Sebelius on Monday calling the policy “unfair, arbitrary and capricious” and saying that Sebelius’s failure to make an exceptions is a violation of Sarah’s constitutional rights to “due process” and “equal protection,” according to a family statement.

On June 5, federal Judge Michael Baylson in Philadelphia ruled that Murnaghan and 11-year-old Javier Acosta of New York City should be eligible for adult lungs.

The Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network says 31 children under age 11 are on the waiting list for a lung transplant.

The network added Murnaghan to the adult waiting list after Baylson's ruling. Her transplant comes just two days before a hearing was scheduled on the family's request for a broader injunction.

Critics warn there could be a downside to having judges intervene in the organ transplant system's established procedures. Lung transplants are difficult procedures and some say child patients tend to have more trouble with them than adults.

The national organization that manages organ transplants this week resisted making emergency rule changes for children under 12 who are waiting on lungs but created a special appeal and review system to hear such cases.

The United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) manages the nation's transplant system under contract with the Department of Health and Human Services. The network, established by Congress, is officially called the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network (OPTN).

Rep. Patrick Meehan, a Republican who represents Sarah's district, sent a letter Tuesday to Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius, calling on her to convene a meeting of the network's leadership immediately "to address this tragic unfairness and act to give Sarah a chance at life and an adult lung from the next available donor. Sarah's young life literally hangs in the balance."

But, it adds, a "request to adjust the status of a patient under age 12 so that they may be included in the allocation sequence for adolescents and adults is not within the scope of the existing lung allocation policy. OPTN cannot create a policy exemption on behalf of an individual patient, since giving an advantage to one patient may unduly disadvantage others."

In their motion, the Murnaghans challenged an OPTN rule that distinguishes between pediatric and adult transplant recipients. The existing rule says that children younger than 12 can receive organs matched for size and age from other children, with sickest kids receiving top priority. But the rule also says that organs from adult and teen donors must be offered to all patients older than 12 from Sarah’s region first -- even if Sarah is sicker than the other recipients.

They said that Sebelius’ refusal to set aside the rule and allow Sarah and others in her rare situation to compete for organs based on the severity of their illness, not their age, is “arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion.”

Support Conservatism,

"Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgement." - Unknown, quoted by Jim Horning"

Unique Visitors