Another modest proposal...

[Onlyserious]

Another modest proposal: Ration the growing shortage of ICU hospital beds and now in a manner that takes into account the personal behavior of Covid19 patients.

Lung transplants are generally not performed on patients that have not ceased smoking for six months. Likewise, being on the list for a liver transplant require sobriety for at least six months. Tragic as it is, necessary transplants are subject to a limited supply of organs. Personal behavior is and should be a factor in who gets the organs.

As ICU beds are becoming limited, shouldn't risky behavior be considered in determining who gets the beds and the accompanying critical care?

Folks that believe Covid19 is all a "hoax" or that attend "super spreader" events like the 95% maskless, crowded Georgia Trump campaign rally AFTER the election, (a record setting day for infections), or teen parties put on by parents to "stick it to the libs" or even small town non-compliant city councils, and non-distancing shoppers--Shouldn't these folks be at the back of the critical care line?

Enforceable? Probably not. In a perfect world, there wouldn't be a need for transplants or ICU's.

My modest proposal doesn't even touch on the "moral hazard" issues of the introduction of vaccines--that, of course, first went to elite, risk ignoring politicians.

S. H. Tulsa

[CaptainTruth]

1. Not long ago folks on the right were saying they "didn't want to pay for my healthcare"...

...because they said my health problems were all the result of "my choices" & "my behavior." (Sorry, I was born with my health problem.)

Will they apply that same reasoning to themselves when they get COVID due to their choices & their behavior?

[Chemisse]

2. Those policies are defendable because they predict future behavior,

which put the new organ in jeopardy, and therefore if it would have been wasted.

Not so with Covid. These individuals would not likely ever be in this exact situation again, either by a new awareness and caution or simply by a long-lasting immunity.

So the rationing based on behavior would be entirely punitive.

Tempting though that is at this time, deciding upon medical treatment based on the moral fitness of the patient is a pretty dangerous precedent to set. What a slippery slope that would be! In addition, we would lose any moral high ground in arguing for equal treatment where we see inequities currently.