For America's Aged, Surgery at Any Price?

By Marie McCullough

Should a 97-year-old man undergo an expensive, dangerous open-heart operation to repair a lethal tear in a main artery of his heart?

No, concluded the patient, Michael DeBakey, the world-famous cardiovascular surgeon who pioneered the operation. Yes, said his family and surgeons, who prevailed after DeBakey lapsed into coma.

DeBakey later said they did the right thing. After a long, touch-and-go recovery, he resumed a busy schedule before his death last July at age 99.

DeBakey was a visionary, a genius, but his dilemma has become increasingly ordinary. Age is no longer the deciding factor, even for invasive treatment such as open-heart surgery.

"You have to get out of the idea that there's a threshold age where we think about this surgery differently," Charles Bridges, Pennsylvania Hospital's chief of cardiothoracic surgery, said. "With each patient, you have to lay out: What are the risks if I do this? What are the risks if I don't?"

A more basic question is whether this never-too-old approach is an example of U.S. medical progress, or an example of why Medicare -- federal health insurance for people over 64 -- is headed for insolvency.

The answer, experts say, is both. Which is why the current debate over expanding federal coverage to all uninsured Americans is an ethical and economic minefield.

"Forty years ago, it was taken for granted that the elderly were not good candidates for organ transplantation, dialysis, or advanced surgical procedures. That has changed," Daniel Callahan, cofounder of the Hastings Center, a bioethics research institute in Garrison, N.Y., wrote recently. "Under the best of circumstances, age should be irrelevant in the Medicare program. But so far, the cost of care has not been considered, and it can hardly remain irrelevant in a program strapped for money."

Growing numbers Americans 85 and older are a small but exponentially growing bunch, according to census data. Fifteen years ago, there were 3.4 million. Now, there are six million. By 2050, baby boomers will swell the number to 20 million -- 5 percent of the U.S. population -- including one million centenarians.

Life expectancy at such old ages is relatively short, emphasis on "relatively."

"It's not as short as you might think," Bridges said. "If you're 81 and a woman, your life expectancy is about eight or nine years. At 90, it could be five or six years."

Source: YellowBrix, The Philadelphia Inquirer
falsecut's picture
Interesting. "Government keep out!" I assume you'll pay for your own health care then if you want the government to really keep out. Or do you think there is no limit on the amount of money we can spend?
CattleyaRubra's picture
I have lived in the UK, and its social policies are dismal and disheartening. We should never forget that America should innovate and lead the way, not surrender to the bankrupt policies of the Old World. Age-based rationing should never be a government function, that would be the thin end of the wedge for a return to Third Reich morality. Education of individuals in their roles as health-consumers and above, all, freedom from the fear of lawsuits for the their physicians, could do a lot to ameliorate the over-consumption of costly services where not truly appropriate. When an M.D. says, "If it were my mother, I would not ..." carries a lot of weight. Most people do take quality of life, as opposed to merely staying alive, quite seriously, if given the chance. A government makes ones size fits all laws. What this means in practice is that it is guaranteed to fit no one. As a very fit, active, full-time school teacher of 66, from a family centenarians, who has recently found the love of my life, I take our remaining years very seriously. I may not be able to make time stand still, but by God I will make it run. Government keep out!
youthing_girl's picture
Thank you Marie for an informative and insightful article. My Mom, 94, has been unable to walk because her hip needs to be replaced and she doesn't want surgery. These are difficult situations, not just for getting the surgery but the intensive after care expense that will be required.I think the bottom line is that all of us needs to be in a youthing mindset of self care at every age. This requires a routine of nutrition, brain health, skin care and fitness. I'm an evangelist for this thought. I want to help people be healthy each day of their lives.
jaboard's picture
What a lovely article. It shows some of the dilemma the Health Care system has in front of it. I think with more body part replacements and drugs offered to those with minor emotional problems like sleeplessness and depression that the whole system is geared to consider those who do not take care of themselves. What should be taught to our young about nutrition and practiced through exercise and spiritual training is not done. Instead we are allowed to burn ourselves with life at full throttle knowing we have a fall back if we get ill. Until we are taught to care for ourselves at the beginning and during our years on earth we will have a problem as we grow older.
Ads by Google