If any doubts remained that the Fox News channel is continuing to swerve hard left away from its conservative roots, they were erased on July 16, 2017 when Ezekiel (Zeke) Emanuel, M.D. appeared on the channel’s signature weekly program Fox News Sunday in his new role as a paid contributor. Dr. Emanuel was a principal architect of Obamacare and he is now speaking out widely in favor of its retention as the law of the land. He’s a very influential medical policy maker and also happens to be a life long, in-your-face spin doctor for the Democrat socialist left. During the Fox News program, the ever arrogant Emanuel jumped on the Resist Trump bandwagon and suggested that President Trump is worthy of being impeached. Hired last February by Fox News primarily as a health policy analyst (he is a prominent physician and professor, after all), Emanuel is now providing opinions not only on medical subjects but on political ones, as well.

The turning point in his role – and an indication of where Fox News is heading – was his appearance on the high-profile, politically-charged Fox News Sunday. In addition to the nation’s cable and satellite channels, Fox News Sunday is also broadcast on over 200 Fox network-owned or -affiliate terrestrial broadcast television stations around the country.

I believe that Emanuel deserves the nickname “Death Panel Doc” because of his contention that no one should be allowed to live – or, perhaps more accurately, no one should expect to want to live – after the age of 75 because it would adversely impact national health care costs, determined according to so-called global budgets, funded by the government. Almost two-thirds of the nation’s $3.2 trillion a year medical care costs are now paid for by the federal government.

In a highly touted article titled “Why I Hope to Die at 75,” published in The Atlantic Monthly in October 2014, Emanuel, who is 60 or 61 but looks like he is fast closing in on 75, wrote “this manic desperation to endlessly extend life is misguided and potentially destructive.” A maximum lifespan of 75 years, he added, “forces each of us to ask whether our consumption is worth our contribution.” This, from a licensed medical doctor who presumably at some point may have taken the traditional, newly-minted doctors’ oath to “First do no harm.” In another irony, Emanuel is considered a leading bioethicist and is widely quoted as a reigning expert on medical ethics issues.

Emanuel goes on for over 5,100 words in the Atlantic Monthly article trying to make his case – for exactly what, one wonders after reading it. He doesn’t appear to advocate mass killings of everyone who reaches the age of 75 – including himself.

I’m neither asking for more time than is likely nor foreshortening my life. . . Nor am I talking about waking up one morning 18 years from now and ending my life through euthanasia or suicide. . . I am talking about how long I want to live and the kind and amount of health care I will consent to after 75.

So, without exactly spelling out his prescription for old age in the New Transformed America – that as a top advisor to President Obama he helped to usher in – the renowned bioethicist appears to be recommending in his lengthy screed no medical treatment for people older than 75 other than palliative or hospice care that would help to hasten or would not impede these unfortunate geriatrics on their road to a quick death.

Rationing on Steroids

In a number of his many other writings, Emanuel has more clearly spelled out what he is advocating. It’s the “R” word, meaning in this case rationing of medical care and allocating limited health resources according to the criteria of age. In an article in The Lancet on January 31, 2009, when he was the head bioethicist at the National Institutes of Health, Emanuel and two co-authors wrote:

Unlike allocation by sex or race, allocation by age is not invidious discrimination; every person lives through different life stages rather than being a single age. Even if 25-year-olds receive priority over 65-year-olds, everyone who is 65 years now was previously 25 years. Treating 65-yearolds differently because of stereotypes or falsehoods would be ageist; treating them differently because they have already had more life-years is not.

Commenting on Emanuel’s writings in 2009, Wesley J. Smith wrote:

A lot of people are frightened that someone who thinks like Emanuel is at the center of an administration [Barack Obama’s] seeking to remake the entire health care system. Having read these two articles, I think there is very real cause for concern.

To read the complete article at American Thinker, click here.

 

 

 

Advertisement
Avatar
Peter is an author, journalist, media analyst and commentator on a wide range of issues including national politics, health care, media and popular culture. He has over four decades of experience reporting for a variety of publications and media. Since May 2017, Peter has written over 175 articles for American Thinker and his work has also appeared in several other major publications. Peter has also contributed feature articles to The Epoch Times.