Introduction

There are many who do not want you to learn what is contained on this site. This is the most astonishing information on these issues you have ever read.

 Introduction

There are numerous books about the history of euthanasia and eugenics proposals in our society. This site is not one of those. It offers a rare glimpse from my experience within the end-of-life industry, my work as a attorney, the experience i had with my mother in her 5 year battle with cancer as her power of attorney and loving, devoted child at her bedside in the hospital for 3 months every day as the hospital decided to end her life on their own terms, the input from dozens of physicians, nurses, medical ethicists, and other pro-life leaders. It includes the revelations of hundreds and hundreds of people as they have recounted it to me. This site explains how we got where we are today and provides statements by many of our nation's leaders in health care, government and patient advocacy, that taken altogether form the pieces of the puzzle that reveal what has been hidden from the American public for decades: stealth euthanasia( in states with no legal euthanasia or even in states where it is legal but not asked for by the patient) - undeclared intentional and medical killing through a variety of methods - is being practiced throughout the United States and elsewhere.

I have many friends within the industry who confirm what I recount here on this site so I urge you to read through to the very end, as you have never heard all that I am about to share with you. Some of it may surprise and shock you. Some of it will trouble you, but all of it will without any doubt affect what happens to you personally, your family, friends, and our society in the days and years to come.

This is the story of the intentionally "below-the-radar" changes that have been aggressively pursued in our society for decades. Because these changes are not covered by the major media in any coherent, connected way, or at all, the public has difficulty "putting a finger" on what is happening and why. They see changes here and there as situations arise in their lives, especially in health care. They hear stories about what is happening and mistakenly assume they are isolated incidents.

Sometimes, they just can't believe the changes that have already been made. They seem so "foreign" to what American society is all about, and the reason they seem "foreign" is they do not arise from American Constitutional values or Judeo-Christian values. These changes violate even the most elementary understanding of basic human rights and routinely violate the clinical standards of patient care.

Some people are frightened by these changes, changes that seem to be imposed upon society without the approval of the majority of citizens. They question the wisdom of abandoning the traditional values that formed the foundation for American life. They question the declining percentages of Americans who support the traditional value of a family (husband, wife and children), marriage (husband and wife), the sanctity of life, faith in God, the value of work and the opportunity to get ahead in a free society. They wonder how we have strayed so far. They question whether we are still truly free to express our religious faith in a public setting, or even whether the dedication to "do no harm" within health care is the prevailing mindset. Shockingly, today, it most often is not! Business interests, ideological agendas, and budgetary concerns decide!

If you want to know what all that "death panel" talk is really all about, this is the site for you that explains exactly what is going on and will be going on.

However, there are no formal "death panels" yet, but there are bureaucrats in government, HMOs, and private health insurance companies whose decisions intentionally result in denied tests, denied treatments, and certain death in many cases. This has been well-documented. However, when the federal government becomes the big HMO itself, test and treatment denials will be the equivalent of death sentences for some, even many. The so-called "Affordable Care Act" created several methods that have resulted in rationed care. Even non-governmental healthcare insurance programs ration care. That's what "managed care" is all about. We are told they manage care to optimize the outcome for us, but the reality is that treatment is managed to limit costs and maximize net revenue or profit.

Politicians say, "we are not going to ration care." But they will set in motion many processes that reduce reimbursement under the guise of "limiting expenditures," or "keeping costs down," and these processes will result in rationing care. Ultimately, many services will simply not be provided, because physicians, hospitals, and others cannot afford to provide them at the steadily decreasing reimbursement levels determined by the bureaucrats who run Medicare, Medicaid and other government-controlled health services.

When hospitals and physicians are paid less than the cost of providing certain treatment options, those options are not and have not been offered. Because the government offers financial rewards for those hospitals and physicians that reduce the average cost per patient per year, they will "manage" the treatments provided to reduce costs to the government and increase the financial rewards they get. What does this have to do with the patient's individual needs at the time? Nothing. HMOs do the same.

Those on Medicare and Medicaid are already on a government-run plan and are experiencing the effects of decisions made by unelected bureaucrats in Washington, DC. We need to remember that Medicare passed into law in 1965 and is nominally a "voluntary" program. However, to assure participation by all seniors, then President Lyndon Johnson pressured all private health insurers to cancel all policies available to seniors. If seniors want to completely opt-out of Medicare, they have to give up their Social Security benefits and then pay privately for all services they receive. Only the very wealthy can do that.

Since there is no private health insurance available for seniors in the United States, we cannot say that participation in Medicare is voluntary at all. Seniors must accept whatever those running Medicare decide regarding their treatment options. Certainly, there are many who would have no health coverage without Medicare, and millions have benefited from the program. Many seniors are comfortable with Medicare the way it has been up to the present time.

What needs to be recognized is that changes are coming no matter what political party or agenda controls those changes, with or without the health care reform law or any new law Congress passes. One political party will accuse the other of threatening the well-being of senior citizens and vice-versa. But both will silently promote the stealth euthanasia already begun in this nation. The generous benefits of Medicare over the past are going to be phased out selectively to streamline the program and make it more "efficient." The idea that the future Medicare will be like what we've had till now is quite mistaken and those that trust in the promises being made by either party need to wake up to the realities.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has said, "telling America's aging population that its entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare will survive without significant changes is dishonest." The ongoing debate year-after-year about the health care reform law, or proposed changes are important, but like some demonstrations of illusion and "magic," you never see what's really happening. Misdirection and skill fool all except those trained in the art. While we focus on the public debate, drastic changes have been made already and more are quietly being implemented without fanfare. "Several years ago the Obama administration released a report saying that health reform will save $575 billion in the Medicare program over 10 years." All while the number of Medicare patients will grow exponentially. Well, if they are going to save money, and if it's not actually due to making the system more efficient and by eliminating fraud, then where are they going to pull funds from? Isn't it obvious what is happening? Utilitarians who control our government policies do not value the lives of the elderly, disabled, chronically-ill, and others! Services to these have already been cut and they are being herded into hospice while being denied acute hospital care they need.

Free coverage for abortions, sexual reassignment surgery for transgenders, birth control, and others is only made possible by increasingly pressuring senior citizens as well as the physically and cognitively-disabled into hospice where they will find that all the promised services of Medicare or hospice are not always provided and actions that shorten their lives are performed without their permission or even their knowledge. There are many thousands of families who have complained about such mistreatment in hospitals.

Patients and families are often kept "in the dark" about what the goal or agenda of a transfer to hospice really is or when a hospital keeps you against your will by using fear tactics to make you think you need to be intubated still, what medications are being administered, and what stabilizing medications are no longer provided. While it is true that many have experienced quality care over the years, many others have experienced horrendous treatment and the industry is not reforming itself. It doesn't admit the need for reform!

The health care reform law (H.R.3590) has already modified how Medicare is run. Under Section 3021, "Establishment of Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation," the Secretary of HHS "shall adjust the payments made to an eligible safety net hospital system or network from a fee-for-service payment structure to a global capitated payment model." [H.R.3590 p.205] Going from a Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement system that pays fees for each service provided to a system that has a cap on payments made for all services provided to a patient is one of the most significant changes to Medicare ever made and will certainly result in drastic changes.

Just think about how hospitals will change what tests, surgeries and treatments they provide if they know the amount they will be paid is capped for each patient they serve! And if the patient has already reached the cap amount, do you think the hospital will continue to provide services for free? If the average costs per patient are above the recommended amounts, do you think the hospital administrators will allow physicians they manage to continue to order "too many tests or procedures?" Or, will they call the physicians in and tell them, "You must reduce costs "or else!"

In addition, with the government extending its control over our nation's entire health care system under H.R. 3590, as it already has in the Medicare and Medicaid programs, it has acquired control over how care is delivered, what care is available, and who receives that care or not. It controls how much the providers are paid, and by deciding to pay providers less than service costs and capping total costs paid out, it is driving some physicians to leave the field and will discourage the young from entering the field. On average, physicians train until they're close to 30 years old, graduate with $250,000 or more in debt for their education, and are subject to being sued on any given day.

Some hospitals have already closed their doors, and more will close their doors, reducing the total number of hospital beds available to those in the community!

When the nation's supply of physicians lags behind the growing elderly population and hospitals have to serve that increasing number of patients, health care services will certainly be limited. According to the Association of American Medical Colleges back in 2014, "America will face a shortage of more than 90,000 doctors in 10 years." There is no question that, in order to keep health care costs down, patients will see mostly physician-assistants and nurse practitioners providing primary care. Actually getting to see a physician has already become increasingly more difficult. Not seeing a physician can sometimes result in missed diagnoses, failure to treat in a timely manner, and earlier deaths — which is exactly what the utilitarian secular humanists running the government want.

For example, "employment of physician assistants was expected to grow by 39 percent from 2008 to 2018." And it has grown. To cut costs even more, if patients are chronically ill with more than one diagnosis, or very elderly, and enter the hospital more than twice, those patients are being referred for hospice or palliative care services to prevent more costly acute care hospital admissions. Hospice admission nurses routinely "troll" the halls in the hospitals and sign patients up even if they're not terminal! The admission of non-terminal patients to hospice has been widely publicized by the U.S. Office of Inspector General.

You may not realize this, but leaders in government of both political parties are promoting palliative and hospice care as the destination, your destination ... the end of the road in a patient's health care journey. There is no need for a group of doctors or government officials or others to be called a "death panel." Rationed care results in certain earlier death for many of the chronically ill, elderly and disabled. Interventions and treatment options, as well as denials, can be manipulated so that death is made to happen.

Simply removing stabilizing medications for the patient who has multiple - or even one - chronic condition(s) results in acute disease complications that physicians worked so hard to control. Once the patient's disease process is out of control — and intentionally so — death is invited. But, they can say, "We didn't actively kill the patient. It just happened." Hmm. If you believe that, you would be quite naive, but that you are naive or simply unaware of what is really happening has been intentional. Almost everything in this book and almost everything really happening in the industry is censored so you have not been informed and are therefore not prepared for the reality.

There is no one place to point the finger and say, "he" alone is responsible, or "that group" or "that government department" alone is responsible. It is much more sophisticated and complicated than that. There are webs and webs of interconnected efforts that have resulted in a massive wave sweeping over our land, something that has not happened overnight, though it may seem so. It's been coming for over seventy years. Americans have been quietly "asleep" while others have made war on traditional American values that affirm the value of each citizen's life. These have sought to change our healthcare system and have achieved success after success. Strangely, the public generally believes "the system" is just as life-affirming as it once was. It is not.

You must have noticed that there is much talk about "death and dying." Why? How come? Most of us don't want to think about "death and dying" even if some have been shouting the "death and dying" talk from the rooftops. There have been thousands of news articles and speakers all across the country promoting the wonders of hospice and end-of-life care, and there is much good that can be done when dedicated professionals make their best effort to relieve suffering at the end-of-life. However, there are others who have been very busy for about eighty years working in the background, training others and teaching in the universities, and even having their ideas inserted into public school curricula.

They've written sections of textbook after textbook or controlled the slant of content used to train physicians, nurses, other health care professionals, attorneys, and therefore some of the judges who eventually serve on the courts, until they have succeeded in changing how the powerful-to-be think and act ... how they view the world from deep within. And a few generations later, the indoctrinated are the powerful. In most medical schools — contrary to what most of us have thought — the Hippocratic Oath for graduating physicians has been discarded completely. Our society and healthcare system in particular are experiencing the last stages of their grand project: changing completely how Americans live, how they view death and dying, and how they actually die. You know this, don't you? But what are the implications for you and your loved ones? What does it really mean?

When physicians, attorneys and judges as well as other leaders of our society no longer affirm the sanctity of life, and when leaders within health care no longer pledge to "do no harm," there is no obstacle to the devaluation of selected lives and the discarding of those lives. That "when" is now! And, "discarding" lives means medical killing, imposed death, manipulated death — and when not recorded as such, when not admitted at all — stealth euthanasia!

While there were very small life-affirming volunteer hospices in the America of the 1970s, before the advent of widely available government-reimbursed Medicare hospice services beginning in 1983, most Americans died in acute care hospitals in a "medicalized" environment where death, just like birth, was reserved for doctors and nurses. It was hidden from view, something that otherwise has been quite unusual over the course of human history. Effective pain management was lacking.

The original, authentic modern hospice movement with its openness to caring for the dying with family present, with its recognition of the opportunity for healing in family relationships at the end-of-life, and its focus on working to do a better job at pain and symptom management was a wonderful thing. It incorporated the very best of the latest medical advances in symptom management with a more natural atmosphere for those facing death. But this positive step has been negated in many ways due to a move from caring about the original mission to serve, to ambitious, greedy administrators who seek ever-increasing revenue with which they themselves hundreds of thousands of dollars while skimping on services to the suffering! Concerns about care have been replaced by concerns about budgets, fulfilling a utilitarian ideology, or often, adult children or others simply using the hospice setting to eliminate a vulnerable patient in order to grab whatever wealth or estate has been accumulated during their lifetime. It is distressing to even think about it.

Although many of us would like to think otherwise, there has always been a side of American society that has had a utilitarian streak. We will explore how this has affected health care and especially end-of-life care as well as what it means for you. There has been a very slick, sophisticated and well-financed campaign to completely twist the positive contributions of hospice into something the public would never openly accept and, paint the industry as utterly immune to the flaws, malpractice, or negligence that plague every other niche of healthcare. Hospice staff are painted as "angels" and some are very dedicated. But many are quite the opposite and seek to end life rather than care for lives.

Because most people in our modern society do not have the background or experience within the health-care industry, they don't have the information to understand what is really planned for us when it comes to health care reform or entitlement reform. And many of those who work within health care still do not know about many of the changes that have been put in place within the end-of-life care industry. Even among those who work in hospice or palliative care, most do not know the actual history of the industry and who and what ideology is directing its continuing development. This site contains the essentials needed to truly understand the monumental changes being planned for our society and how it is being accomplished in our time.

The issues discussed in this site will affect American society whether the health care reform law is upheld, declared unconstitutional on appeal, repealed or not, or nullified through various efforts by some of the states. Now, in 2020, ten years after its enactment into law, the fate of this un-Constitutional law is still undecided. Legal challenges through the courts continue. In any case, how health care is provided to the elderly and disabled is being modified, significantly. Efforts to supposedly make Medicare and Medicaid services more efficient and less costly will affect many.

Though Americans were promised that they could keep their own physician, insurance plan, or hospital, their worries that a government-run health care system would do away with their freedom to choose have been confirmed. Others have noted that some physicians have "opted out" of Medicare and Medicaid protesting that the reimbursement is often lower than the costs of providing services. Many physicians can no longer afford to remain in private or partnership medical practices. Many have joined large physicians' group practices or simply chosen to run their practice on a cash payment basis and avoid government reimbursement or involvement completely.

Small physician practices have mostly disappeared. Many wonder if patients will be able to find the care they need. Many have to wait months to get to see an actual doctor or have a needed surgery. With the budgetary pressures on our nation, many worry how this will impact end-of-life care for the vulnerable.

Through the years, many people have called many other patient advocacy organizations, pleading for help, and reporting problems they have encountered. They tell us about the failures of hospitals and hospice agencies to provide services as needed. They report that the staff prevented them from giving food or water to their loved one when he or she could still take them in and benefit from them. They sometimes report that their loved one was literally killed in a health care setting by overdoses of opioid medications that were not needed at all. We have listened and carefully thought about the depth of the problems. And now the problem has hit home for the founders with their mother.

Through the years, the accounts given by these family members have been and continue to be eerily similar. When family members recount what hospice staff said to them, the language and phrases used have often been exactly the same, the actions taken exactly the same, and the outcome — an untimely, hastened death — exactly the same. The reason? The staff at different agencies across the country are being trained in the same way, and the actions taken are quite contrary to what the patient and family expected or to the original life-affirming mission. The services and treatment provided are not what the American people have come to expect from hospice.

Those who report to us are not all uneducated in the ways of medicine and health care. Many of those who call in are themselves physicians, nurses, social workers, ministers and lawyers. Yet, even with their training, some of these are still unable to resolve problems encountered or to even prevent the hastened death of their own family member.

Those who are quite familiar with the standards of care in health care are often surprised at the wanton disregard for adherence to the standards by some hospice agencies and staff. They often cannot believe that the violation of the standards could ever be so knowingly and willfully done. This is not to say that all hospice and palliative care units violate standards. Certainly not! But, there are too many that do, and there is a reason for it. There is a reason why government regulators surprisingly do nothing about it as well. Healthcare corporations, hospitals, nursing homes, and physicians' groups have strong lobbying organizations and regularly contribute to the politicians' re-election campaigns. The industry is protected from vigorous enforcement of the law and regulations. In addition, the federal and state governments save billions each year when the elderly, disabled, chronically-ill, and even the unwanted newly born, are medically killed. Yes, it's shocking, but all of this is absolutely happening today.

The creation of our group is outreach to the public and is designed to bypass the media and government censorship, and that's how we have continued to work, to get information out to the people directly and to work individually with them as problems arise. Those who need information are getting it because of what we provide.

It is strange that of the thousands of websites maintained by all the hospice agencies, ours is the only one that has all the standards of care and laws set out for the public to access easily, along with easily understood explanations of what should be expected. Yet, it simply confirms what I noticed back in 1997: there was no place for the public to get complete information about what is going on in hospice and palliative care, what the standards of care are, what to do when problems arise, and what others are experiencing in this largely unregulated niche of health care. Except for our organization, there still is no place for the public to get complete access to the standards of care with easily understood explanations, honest information about what problems do exist, and what can be done about them.

Why should the realities be hidden from the patients and families that end up using these services? In 2019, about 48% of all Medicare patients now die while in hospice. The public certainly has a right to know what is really occurring! Why do the media's editors censor the truth so people are repeatedly blind-sided and taken by surprise when their loved one is medically killed in a hospice, hospital or nursing home? Why do they censor 100% of the letters to the editor complaining about the treatment their loved one received in a hospice setting? Yes, I know that if you've had a positive experience with hospitals, hospice and palliative care, you may be shocked and upset to read this, but just because you had a positive experience does not mean that all others will as well.

You might conclude that we are against hospice and palliative care, but that would be completely untrue. We care very much about the field of end-of-life care and have the greatest respect for those who work in this field and dedicate themselves to affirm the value of each patient's life, and to relieve suffering while allowing a death in its own natural timing. But it is up to a patient and if they are in pain. No one else should have this choice. We've worked hard to encourage the highest standards in end-of-life care and have worked with many in the field through the years. Yet, we believe that it's important for the public to know the hidden truth about end-of-life care as well, because each of us will be confronted with these issues sooner or later.

Whether you are a person of faith, an agnostic or atheist, this site provides a rare glimpse of the realities of health care in America that you will find nowhere else. There is much material here that you do need to know so you can see exactly what is happening, how it is happening, when it started and why.

There is a lot of material covered, but bear with me and read on, because this book explains why you have not been informed about the hidden realities in the industry, why the major media is censoring one of the most important stories of our time, and why the realities of end-of-life care are not what the media portrays them to be. This site is our way of reaching out to you directly, bypassing the big media censorship, the government's silent complicity, and the industry's own deception.

Our nation was founded upon principles that many of us still hold dear. It is true that some ridicule these principles ... such as a right to life, free speech (which Constitutionally is not limited to "politically correct" speech) and freedom from an overbearing and oppressive government. Some are rejoicing that a socialized health care system has to a large extent already been implemented, while others are absolutely horrified.

While there are court challenges to the health reform law, changes are being implemented anyway. No law is required for government administrators to modify some of Medicare and Medicaid's internal administrative rules. The Centers for Medicare Services already has authority to change many things. With the drastic changes in private health insurance, some private insurance companies have gone out of business. The insurers are making changes that drastically affect how they do business, and as the trend continues, many changes will be almost impossible to undo.

By the time some of you read this, the high court may have already ruled on new challenges, however, businesses around the country have been scrambling to try to comply with the regulations of a law that comprises thousands of pages with all the administrative regulations included. Small businesses don't know what to do and must consult attorneys, tax accountants, and other experts to plan what to do, further bogging down productivity and economic recovery. The same thing applies to the large corporations. The uncertainty of "what the federal government will do" is still like a cloud over every business in America. The certainty of changes already made is depressing business as well. The "red-tape" and paperwork — or should we say computer charting — required by the government reduce the time physicians actually spend with their patients and have exponentially increased the time they spend filling in electronic documents. In many cases, government regulations have not necessarily improved patient care at all.

We live in especially historic times. There has never been anything similar in American history. We pray that our beautiful and inspiring American experiment as a representative and democratic Republic (not a pure "democracy" which is equivalent to mob rule) will find its way back to the values that allowed it to create and maintain a stable and free society, and that assured patient care that affirmed the value of each patient's life.

When it comes to health care, there are numerous arguments about what solution can be found for the problems of rapidly rising costs, people who can't access care, and how best to distribute tax dollars for health care. Those of us who are focused on health care hear about "evidenced-based medicine" and how medical policies that are based on research will be more effective, but in the major media there is little or no discussion of the potential misuse of evidence-based medicine.

We hear about "comparative effectiveness research," but in the major media there is little or no discussion of the potential misuse of "comparative effectiveness research." Some very few have heard about the "complete lives system" of leading national health care advisors, as well as the rationing of health care, but the major media reports downplay any concerns being raised. "Don't worry!" we are all told.

Why have we not had an open dialog about the benefits of, or problems with, the ideas that are changing the way health care will be delivered? Why do most people have no idea what these three concepts involve and how they will dramatically affect their lives and those they love?

Evidence-Based medicine is:

"the conscientious, explicit and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of the individual patient. It means integrating individual clinical expertise with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research."

from: ""Introduction to Evidence-Based Practice,"," Duke Univ Medical Center Library and Health Sciences Library, UNC-Chapel Hill - Dr. David Sackett, a pioneer in evidence-based practice, 1996

Probably most physicians today want their decisions to reflect the latest medical science and the evidence. It makes sense. But anyone who knows anything about medical studies or any other scientific studies knows that differently designed studies often result in different outcomes and conclusions. That design of the studies, the number of subjects, the controls used, and so many other factors effect what conclusions are reached. Sometimes, if you want a certain result, you can be sure to get it if you design the study just so. Isn't that what has happened in the case of many new medications that were approved based upon bogus studies and only later found to be terribly harmful?

In fact, there are well-respected physicians debating the whole idea of "evidence-based medicine." A November 2008 seminar was entitled, "The Evidence Never Lies? Critical Debates in Evidence-Based Medicine" with leading physicians, bioethicists and professors of philosophy debating the pros and cons of this whole field of endeavor. Topics included: "What's right and what's wrong with evidence-based medicine?" "What is the role of clinical research evidence in medical practice?" and "What is the patient's role in medical decision-making?"

If evidence-based medicine is used to ration care and decide what treatments are offered citizens under Medicare, Medicaid or a possible national health system, who decides what evidence and what studies are used? Who decides what the conclusions should be? Will the physician and patient decide or will a bureaucrat somewhere in the government, a PPO, HMO or other managed care company decide? Will those who design and interpret the studies be those who care about the patients? Will they be dedicated to assuring that research is conducted with integrity? Will they, or will they not, be beholden to some corporation or governmental bureaucracy that has a pre-determined outcome in mind?

When it comes to the care of the elderly, disabled and chronically ill, many questions remain. Even among those who respect and value life, there is a lack of information about what is going on in the end-of-life care arena, what the hospice leadership is doing, what the successor organizations of the Euthanasia Society Of America are doing, who the major players are and how they operate. I'm sorry to say that many leaders of the culture of life, pro-lifers, have no idea what is going on, really, even if many of them think they do. They have been misinformed or intentionally kept in the dark completely. Having contacted several of them through the years, I've found that many of them don't really want to know about the end-of-life problems people are experiencing. It has been a real eye-opener for me! I realize that this may offend some, but our role at Hospice Patients Alliance is to serve and inform and provide complete information so that citizens like you can influence the nature of our healthcare system and our society.

Many supporters of the sanctity of life simply do not know how deep this all goes and how successful the heirs of the original Euthanasia Society of America have been in our nation. They do not know how the Euthanasia Society is connected with the largest segment of the hospice industry in America, and when some have finally understood it, they have been shocked. Most of those who affirm the sanctity of life view hospice as the rightful alternative to euthanasia and assisted suicide; they would be correct in some cases, but wrong in many others! Those who affirm the value of each life have been outmaneuvered by those who hold a utilitarian worldview, and when some of them encounter a hospice that does not respect the sanctity of life and hurries death along, they realize bitterly that they have been betrayed.

Did you know that the largest hospice organization in our nation - the only national hospice trade group - is the successor organization to the Euthanasia Society of America? Did you know that according to the most prominent hospice leaders in the world, many hospices in the United States today have no reservations about hastening death through a method called "terminal sedation," (also labeled "palliative sedation" or "total sedation")? Did you know that the federal regulations governing hospice are far fewer in number than those protecting patients in nursing homes or hospitals, or that state agencies inspect hospices less frequently than nursing homes or hospitals? Did you know some hospices may go years without being inspected at all? Did you know that because of the HIPAA privacy regulations, nobody interested in researching what is actually going on in hospice can get access to the data, so hospice administrators and staff that have an agenda can act without any outside interference or supervision?

For example, this is how one surviving family member's, Robin Love's, father — who was not terminal — was hauled off to hospice, deprived of food and water and was given large doses of morphine and sedatives. He died shortly thereafter. Wendy Ludwig, RN reports that a Catholic priest she knew was hastened to his death as well. Some hospices have gone eight years without ever being inspected, except for the initial inspection when they opened their doors! What the public thinks about hospice is a carefully constructed Public Relations image. In some cases, that image is fulfilled in practice, but sad to say, in many cases, it is not. We have reports of young infants being hastened to their death in peri-natal hospice because they didn't die "soon enough!"

You could say that our society has been manipulated, maneuvered, even "conditioned" to think in ways that are completely contrary to the way Americans thought for the past two centuries. And millions and millions of dollars have been spent to achieve this. The proverbial example of the frog in the pot of water applies here. Although there is debate about what really happens, if you put the frog in lukewarm water, he won't jump out. If you put him in hot water (not boiling), he will jump out, and will definitely notice that he's in "hot water." Our society is like that. Slowly, but surely, the "temperature has been turned up" toward "culture of death" thinking and we don't even notice how "hot" it is anymore.

You may be surprised but today, many people have adopted the "quality of life" ethic where it's "ok" to end someone's life because they are "seriously disabled," "very elderly," have dementia, are suffering, or for any number of other reasons. For these, to end their life by killing them is a good thing! It ends their suffering.

In a very real sense, many of us have become numb to the killings so that we accept an increasingly larger category of lives that may be ended in a medical setting. And many times, we don't call them "killings." We say, "We let him go." "It was time." "He's in a better place." And, to "let go" is certainly appropriate when someone is truly at the end-of-life, but when someone is not imminently dying and they end up dead, it really is a "medical killing."

If there were no medical murders, books like Caring To Death: A Discursive Analysis of Nurses who Murder Patients (by John Field, PhD; where over 50 cases of nurse killers from around the world are discussed) would not be written. That book is about the sensational cases that leaked out into the media and the killer nurses were apprehended and convicted. Articles like, "Angels of mercy: The dark side" would not exist.

This site,  is about the policies and actions that result in imposed death and are not leaked out into the media and are given the government's complete stamp of approval: death on demand, or "stealth euthanasia." In stealth euthanasia, policymakers, nurses, doctors and others, whose actions or decisions cause death, are not apprehended and they certainly are not prosecuted. The death certificates are all falsified to indicate that the patient died of their terminal illness, even if they didn't have one!

Not so very long ago when sanctity of life was the mainstream ethic for our healthcare and our society, we recognized that we are here to care for each other, not to kill each other. Now many articles — even physician organizations — promote hospice and assisted-suicide as the "other way" to make someone die on demand.

Bobby Schindler, Jr., Terri Schiavo's brother, reminds us all when he says,

"Terri and others like her should be a constant reminder to all of us that caring for the disabled is never a burden, but is instead an act of God's unconditional love."

["The dehydration death of a nation," by Bobby Schindler March 30, 2007]

We've been conditioned to think otherwise. We've been conditioned to think that caring for the disabled is an exercise in foolishness, that the disabled and very elderly are "better off dead." Over and over, we hear stories about the suffering of the disabled who are dependent on others, but rarely do we hear about the loving interaction between the disabled and those around them who care for them. We hear less and less about the blessings that come to those who serve and care for the severely disabled and dependent, the changes brought about in those who serve, or the blessings to those who are served.

Whether openly conveyed or subliminally imprinted upon us, the message for decades has increasingly been, "Let them die." That they are "better off dead." "Let go!" or "Kill them." The message may not be conveyed openly in those words, but that's the message ... from health care facility staff, newspaper articles, TV shows, or wildly successful movies like "Million Dollar Baby" (about the woman boxer who becomes a quadriplegic and wants to be killed) or the highly successful television series, "House." The show's main character Dr. House is portrayed as an obnoxious, arrogant, but strangely likable genius who serves as a platform for promoting the quintessential secular bioethical view; he is a skeptic and a utilitarian who ridicules people of faith, denies God, and casually approves abortion and euthanasia. He exalts in his own intelligence without giving credit to anyone else for his abilities. The secular devaluation of life pervades our society and its messengers are getting shriller and less tolerant of other views each day. The major media outlets do promote hastened death in many ways.

Our society is almost "schizophrenic" when it comes to how it approaches these issues. On the one hand, almost everybody openly praises the Special Olympics — that includes individual competitors who have Down Syndrome, cerebral palsy, and others — and applauded how actor Christopher Reeve fought to regain function through rehabilitation therapy after he became a quadriplegic due to a horseback riding accident. Yet, there are many who would say that Reeve should have committed assisted-suicide or that those competing in the Special Olympics should have been aborted at birth and never been born!

Killing a congenitally disabled baby before birth is applauded as the "right decision" by leaders and especially many doctors in our society. Under current laws in many states, if you do something to kill a baby at any time up to and even at birth, it is a crime, but if a physician kills a baby before birth in an abortion facility, it's legal. Now, in some states it's legal for the abortionist to kill the baby at birth or after birth laying their on the table! This is unthinkable to anyone who cares about the lives of other human beings!

However, many in our society view the killing of a severely disabled baby or child, or a very elderly disabled person as a "mercy killing." We have organizations like Final Exit Network with its euthanasia proponents selling "helium hoods" and other devices for people to kill themselves, and promoting the "right-to-die." In 2011 they started putting up billboards all over the country with the message, "My Life. My Death. My Choice."

Many praise those who care for the disabled but hide their wish that many of the disabled not be alive at all. Some openly state that the disabled and elderly would be better off dead and should be eliminated. They often try to soften the impact of these statements by suggesting that the medical killing would be voluntary or that it would be a "compassionate" medical killing/euthanasia like in Belgium, the Netherlands, or Canada, for example, where medical killing/euthanasia is legal.

Health care reform has had life-changing and life-ending effects, and we will see, and are seeing, exactly how. Many disability advocates favor government-provided health care, universal health care, but like pro-lifers looking to hospice for an alternative to euthanasia, they will be disappointed when the government uses a heavy hand to limit expenditures for the disabled, elderly and chronically-ill. Their vision of a utopian government-run healthcare program is just that, utopian — something that does not and never will exist.

We can get a taste of what is coming by looking at the United Kingdom's socialized National Health Service where the disability rights group, "Scope, found that 70 percent are 'concerned about pressure being placed on other disabled people to end their lives prematurely'" if assisted-suicide is legalized there.

Anyone who has read the book, To Kill A Mockingbird, by Harper Lee, knows it is a modern classic dealing with race relations. It portrays the struggle of attorney Atticus Finch who heroically defends a falsely-accused black man in an actually racist society. Yet, there is a parallel theme considering the societal attitudes toward the mentally-ill or disabled. The mentally-ill but good-hearted character, Boo Radley, shuns any public interaction, but manages to watch over and save Atticus' children from harm. Author Harper Lee says that Atticus is a model for Christian honor and conduct who treats the town recluse Boo Radley with kindness and gentleness. Her message is that we all do the same. People like Atticus Finch still exist, however there are some today who are less tolerant of the mentally-ill. Some view the mentally-ill as less than fully human and less worthy to even be here. Members of our society are quite divided in how they regard the disabled, the mentally-impaired or ill, and about how they should be treated. Not all would look upon Boo Radley with the same loving-kindness of an Atticus Finch.

The vulnerable are among us, but are often not so visible. I have written this to help us remember what it means to be a humane society, to save the vulnerable and re-establish a just society, to make a difference in your life and the lives of your friends and family even if they will die of cancer soon. If it is not shared widely with others, then it will not have satisfied my goal to alert people throughout our nation.

We are distributing this info online so that all can benefit from the information being shared, and our hope is that the info will be posted on your own websites, social-networking sites, blogs, or printed out and shared with those who do not have access to the internet. Some tell me that people won't appreciate this book if we give it away. Some tell me that I should not mention much about abortion ("it's too controversial") or have too many religious quotes in here ("people will get turned off"), and I've thought, "well, they're right, some people won't appreciate this because it's free. And some people won't read this because I have faith and share it a little here and there.

I can't promise to please all the people, and I know if it's the truth, it will really offend some. Some people oppose euthanasia and assisted suicide yet approve of abortion. It seems that I can't help offending some. I have to "call it the way I see it." Take what you can from it, and leave the rest, as they say. I do promise to give you the truth, and give it freely as the dear Lord has given so much to me. I never set out to be where I am today, sharing this information which is so troubling to me and so many others. I just couldn't turn away and say "no" to those who were and are now suffering. I knew that I had to do something, and this book is part of that effort.

There is no question about the direction our nation's health care is being taken. Ezekiel Emanuel, MD, who former President Obama appointed Health Advisor, promotes the "Complete Lives System" that is being implemented to ration care. Donald Berwick, who Obama appointed administrator of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, is a strong proponent of Comparative Effectiveness Research which will also be used to ration care.

Under the new law, "Accountable Care Organizations" are set up which will force very aggressive rationing practices by medical groups. Cass Sunstein, who former President Obama appointed "Regulatory Czar," stated that unless you specifically record your wish not to donate organs, doctors should be able to harvest your organs (should you be declared "brain dead" after a car accident or other reason) for donation on the basis of "presumed consent," even if you never actually give consent. He also has stated that an economic crisis can be "used to usher socialism into the United States." Susan Rice, who Obama appointed Ambassador to the United Nations stated that we must increase the role of the United Nations in world affairs.

To top it off, former President Obama appointed John Holdren "Science Czar." Holdren is the co-author of the 1977 book, Ecoscience, that promotes ideas like forced sterilizations and abortions to limit population growth, compelling single mothers to give up their children to others, putting chemicals in water supplies to prevent births, and a planetary world government that would implement these ideas for the good of the world. Although Holdren is a man-made global warming alarmist in the present (necessitating dramatically increased government-imposed regulations), in the late 1970s he was warning about disastrous global cooling (necessitating dramatically increased government-imposed regulations). It is not a mistake that these specific leaders were chosen to shape our society and our nation's policies. Each of them has at one time or another stated that he is not what the record shows him to be: an advocate of a much bigger government role in our lives. Their public reassurances and denials of the obvious are not credible.

Regarding end-of-life care within the health care system, as we shall see, the nation's most prominent hospice and palliative care physicians (such as Joanne Lynn, MD, Ira Byock, MD, and others) have openly spoken about using terminal sedation to hasten death (though they won't phrase it that way). Leftist Willard Gaylin, MD, co-founder of the Hastings Center is a proponent of euthanasia who applauds the efforts to expand the definition of "death" - such as brain "death" - in order to overcome obstacles to legally performing euthanasia. Gaylin is widely accepted in the mainstream media and policymaking circles, and the Hastings Center is one of the organizations that has a very significant effect on the modern American healthcare and hospice industry to betray its original mission to care, not kill.

Taken all together, it is certain that increased government-control of our lives and health care based upon a utilitarian philosophy is being promoted. America will certainly be changed by their collective efforts. The new health care reform law has created agencies such as Patient-Centered Outcomes Research institute (PCORI), whose main activities will result in rationed care. PCORI can serve a positive role if its mission is accomplished with integrity. However, whatever changes have arised and will arise, the role of secular culture-of-death hospice and palliative care within the health system has and will be expanded even more dramatically.

So, it is right to be wary about the changes being proposed: we are swiftly moving toward a utilitarian-controlled and callous society that will victimize many. It is already happening to many at the end-of-life. This site will explain exactly what is happening, how it's being accomplished, who is responsible, and why it is being done. The site will also explain what must be done to truly reform the health care industry, our government and how to restore the American respect for life. We cannot rely on the government to respect the sanctity of life at any stage of life, even though respect for an individual life is central to traditional American values and our Constitutional system. Respect for life is central to preventing harm to patients — patients who will be your loved ones or you.

Health care professionals who have a reverence for life view their work as a mission and an opportunity to express their love for each patient. Those with faith, view their work as an opportunity to glorify the Giver of life through service to those who are most vulnerable.

However, federal law and Congressional budgetary expenditures approved by the Presidents (current and past) encourage abortion, eugenics and stealth euthanasia. You will understand exactly how after reading this book. The simple truth is that we are entering an extremely dangerous period in American history ... dangerous for those who are the most vulnerable of all and dangerous for our society as a whole. If people contemplate and really see the sanctity of life, their quality of life arguments fall away and they will understand that we are here to care for each other, not to kill each other. Caring, and not convenience, is the sign of a civilized and just society, and all healthcare must be pro-life — life-affirming — otherwise it is not healthcare!