First Semester of Nursing School

It's been awhile. I haven't posted in some time. I've been very busy. This spring I finished up my pre-reqs for nursing. I walked out of my classes with no idea of what my summer would look like. I had to wait almost 4 weeks to get a phone call. Then it came. On Friday May 18 at 3pm I got a phone call. I was informed I had made it into the Track 2 fast track nursing program at NWACC. I was dumbfounded and speechless. I know imagine ME speechless??? Ms Halloway after the moment silence said "are you ok?" I mustarded up enough air from my lungs to say "I will be" and as I exhaled those words with them flowed tears of joy. She went over some instructions that I quickly jotted down. Thank God my hand was working because my brain hadn't gotten past "you've been accepted into the program" I thanked Ms Halloway and then we both hung up. I sat down for a minute and continued to cry. I had worked so hard to get to here. This was the climatic moment I had been waiting for all these months. I wanted to revel in it for awhile. I had a score of 49.8 out of 53 points possible for the program. While all my friends were telling me I was for sure getting in a part of me was unable to either be that confident or even hopeful. I had hoped for the best but prepared myself for the worst. The realization I had actually made it in continued to rush over me like a wave from the ocean crashes against the beach and slowly works its way back out again. I'd be fine and then I'd hear those words in my head again and start to cry. Moments later I had begun to move on and then it would hit me again. With each instance of cognitive clarity I felt joy, relief and pride. I thought of how far I had come and all those around me who gave me the support to make it this far. I was overcome with gratitude to God, to my family, I probably would have thank my dog even, I was just so happy.

My excessive jubilation had been well warranted. To think at 35 I am FINALLY being given the opportunity to fulfill my career aspirations. I still get teary eyed thinking about it.  Fresh out of school I tried to become a nurse. I always knew I wanted to be in nursing. A candy striper at 15 and a CNA at 18. I enrolled and started classes at NWACC in 1997. Sadly it wasn't too long before I was told to pack my bags and go because my "guaranteed" loan didn't come through. Being young and living with your parents is a real disadvantage to getting assistance with school. And well, my parents were the types that didn't believe a college education was necessary and while Uncle Sam said they had an "expected family contribution" my father adamantly disagreed. I was out and that was that. I moved on with my life and put my dreams of becoming a nurse away. I got married had a kid I was content to live a mediocre life doing clerical work and figured the closest I could get to a fulfilling employment would be to work in doctor offices. So that's what I did for many years. I've worked in surgery centers. I've worked for the world renowned Dr Fine. One of the best cataract surgeons in the world. Even still my passion for medicine could not be suppressed. I found myself begging to watch in OR at every opportunity. Dr Fine and his staff of 4 other eye surgeons and one plastic surgeon were so great to let me see several cases. I've seen cataract, lasik, rhinoplasty, blephoplasty, and more. I worked in various other clinics and even did medical billing for an insurance company for awhile.

Little did I know that all this work was preparing me for my eventual destination. By Sept 2013 I should ( God willing) be a nurse. The program is hard and I know much will be asked; no demanded; of me. I am willing to do what ever is necessary for me to succeed in this program. Long hours of studying, memorizing and listening to lecture after lecture. It is not easy. Matter of fact it will likely get harder before it's over. I'm not assured of my completion based on any over confidence of my intellectual aptitude. No, I'm assured of my success because of my determination and desire to FINALLY realize this dream.

I remind myself often I'm living the dream, because being in nursing school leaves little time to sleep and have actual dreams.    

William Faulkner said, "The end of wisdom is to dream high enough to lose the dream in the seeking of it".

I am comforted by the knowledge that the loss of my nighttime dreams are a result of my finding them in the waking hours.

PAS= Perfectly Acceptable Substitute

Physician-Assisted Suicide:

Perfectly Acceptable Substitute

Helen had cancer. Breast cancer that had metastasized to her lungs and she was considered terminally ill. She was in her eighties and ready to die. Helen is the first case in Oregon of legal physician-assisted suicide. Helen had to request 3 doctors before she found one that would administer the procedure. “She then took a mixture of barbiturates (nine grams) and syrup followed by a glass of brandy. She is said to have died within thirty minutes”  (quoted in…Hedin and Foley 1616).  Helen was afforded the choice most other Americans do not have:  a choice to die, peacefully, in a comfortable setting, surrounded by their loved ones. There are many people just like Helen, who are terminally ill but not allowed this option.  Helen was able to pass on her own terms. Helen did not choose to die; Helen simply chose when to die.  Physician-assisted suicide is not choosing to die, but when to die and should be legalized in the United States.

            Death is something that no man can avoid.  Socrates once said:

Wherefore, O judges, be of good cheer about death, and know of a certainty, that no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after death. He and his are not neglected by the gods; nor has my own approaching end happened by mere chance. But I see clearly that the time had arrived when it was better for me to die and be released from trouble [. . .].

 The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our separate ways, I to die, and you to live. Which of these two is better only God knows. (qtd in Hooker)

Dying can be a release of troubles.  Likewise, terminally ill patients seeking physician-assisted suicide only want to end their life when they choose to release themselves and their loved ones from further “troubles” (qtd in Hooker).  Many states have the death penalty and put a criminal to “justice” by euthanasia, yet they will not allow someone who is in pain and suffering to end their life.  We as a society view death as a punishment, but when should it be viewed as just an end to living? Often terminally ill patients spend months in hospice in pain and cause their loved ones to endure emotional pain and costly expenses. Many times, these patients lose all of their cognitive and physical abilities while waiting to die.  To many of these people, death is not a punishment but a welcome ending to their suffering.

Death does come; it comes for us all.  You cannot choose to not die, but you should be able to choose when. When is the appropriate time to choose to die? Oregon state law provides the option for physician-assisted suicide to those who are terminally ill with less than six months to live and who are competent enough to make the decision (Gill 53). Physician-assisted suicide is not for the depressed or disabled as is claimed by some opponents of the law (Radtke 58-60).   When a person has been diagnosed with a terminal illness and informed they have less than six months to live they should be given all options of life care.  People should be counseled about their disease, it’s progression and what to expect in the time to come. Hospice, along with all other options for care/treatment should be explained fully.  Patients should then be screened for competency, and if they pass, they should be able to make an informed decision for themselves.  

            Death is inevitable.  There is no argument over whether or not terminally ill people die.  However, one of the arguments made against physician-assisted suicide claims, “we will lose a lot of people who can make a difference. We cannot even dream of what those losses might be right now; we would never know” (Radtke 59).  This type of statement is just emotionally based bad logic. According to statistics three years after legalizing physician-assisted suicide in the state of Oregon only fifteen people choose this option (Miller 264).  This number averages out to five people per year, hardly an excessive amount when you compare it to the number of terminally ill. This data proves that most people will not choose physician-assisted suicide, however it was their choice to make. Also, patients with less than six months to live will not typically be contributing to society in a way that would “make a difference.” Granted, someone could learn more about himself or herself going through this process, but when we learn something, we are able to grow and become a better person for our future. Terminally ill patients have no future, so enriching their spiritual or psychological lives by enduring those last six months serves no purpose.        

            There are also many religious arguments against physician-assisted suicide.  However, religion is personal and a belief that is not based in science and does not belong in legislation. Legislating morality is wrong. The Bill of Rights clearly says, “Congress shall make no law respecting an established religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” (Dawson 1).  Moral issues are religious issues, and prohibiting physician-assisted suicide based on morality would be unconstitutional. It has been argued, “Americans regard themselves as autonomous possessors of individual rights” (Jelen 2).   Thus, legislating morality would be a direct violation of autonomy, something American’s value more than morality.    But legalizing physician-assisted suicide does not take any religious side. Legalizing it is not the same as encouraging it or requiring it. It allows everyone to choose their own side based on their own religious values. There is no religious debate to be had because if you are religious, simply don’t ask for physician-assisted suicide.  Religious groups would be free to advocate hospice and create hospice centers that discourage physician-assisted suicide and assist in palliative care.  Those supporting legalizing physician-assisted suicide still see the benefits for hospice and realize that not everyone will want to pursue ending their life (as the Oregon statistics show).

            There are those that claim that if we allow physician-assisted suicide for the terminally ill, we will one day allow it for healthy people as well (Radtke 59). But this is absurd.  Oregon law would certainly set a standard the rest of the nation would follow.  In order for healthy people to terminate their life this way, the law would have to be revised. It is highly doubtful that such a law would be passed. However, if it were, it would be based on autonomy and a person’s right to choose and not terminal illness which is the key component of today’s laws.  In 1997, the Supreme Court decided that, “physician-assisted suicide could prove extremely difficult to police and contain” (qtd in Mariner 2059). So they left the decision to the states (Mariner 2059). The Supreme Court did decide, however, that physician-assisted suicide is not a constitutional right.  Based on this decision, the thought of healthy people legally obtaining physician-assisted suicide is highly unlikely.  There are more than 30,000 suicides every year in the United States (Mariner 2058).  Suicide is not illegal. There is no law preventing anyone from committing suicide (Mariner 2061). What is illegal is anyone (physician in this case) assisting in suicide.  If a physician assists in a suicide in states where it is prohibited, he or she is “subject to up to five years in imprisonment and a fine of up to $10,000” as well having his license revoked (Mariner 2058).  Those compassionate enough to offer assistance to the dying face criminalization. In those states, not only is death a punishment in the judicial system’s eyes but, compassion is criminal.

            It is the role of a physician in the suicide that is illegal and up for debate.  A physician’s job is to heal or to comfort once healing is no longer an option.  Some physicians argue, “This approach is a violation of the Hippocratic Oath” (Girsh 189).  If that were true, hospice would also be a violation of this oath, and once a patient was terminally ill with no hope of recovery, a physician would have to stop treating the patient. We know this does not happen; physicians will continue to treat pain and the symptoms of a disease without being able to cure it.  Sometimes medications prescribed in order to cure disease cause harm, so would this not also be a violation of the Hippocratic Oath? Similarly, Chemotherapy is not a pleasant experience. I have often heard people say, “The cure is worse than the disease” when it comes to cancer and the treatments for it. When a physician can help, he or she should, either by healing or comforting.

            The Hippocratic Oath would also surely be opposed to medicine being the commodity it is today. Currently, in our system, physicians deny care based on financial means. Is this not neglect?  Refusing a patient based on financial means would be indirectly causing harm, would it not?  Denying someone treatment based on financial means causes more harm than physician-assisted suicide. In one case, you have someone who wants to and could get well but can’t get well because medicine has become a commodity, and treating it as such is “morally unpalatable” (Pellegrino 258).  It is said that, “Health is a fundamental requirement for the fulfillment of the human potential and freedom to act and directs one’s life” (Pellegrino 248).  In physician-assisted suicide you are helping someone to ease his or her pain and suffering because failing health has blocked his or her potential.  Attempting to use the Hippocratic oath as a means to prohibit physician-assisted suicide is hypocritical. It is a greater violation that occurs everyday in denying health than that of assisting in death.

            Some physicians have argued that “physicians do not want this option” and “suicide is never acceptable” (Girsh 189). When people rely on a doctor to defend or protest physician-assisted suicide it utilizes a false ethos. Doctors are not philosophers, or spiritualists by trade. They know no more about what is right or wrong in the world than anyone else does.  “Medicine has no competence to manage the meaning of life and death, only the physical and psychological manifestations of those problems. Medicines role must be limited to what it can appropriately do, and it has neither the expertise nor the wisdom to respond to the deepest and oldest human questions” (qtd in Gill 60).   In other words, doctor’s role in society is to administer medicine, not dictate human morality.  Patients will determine whether they want to die or not.  The physician merely requires the knowledge and compassion to assist.  Any physician who has a moral objection to assisting should be allowed to refuse but should realize it is a moral objection and not a violation of the Hippocratic Oath.

            Currently, doctors are allowed to “engage in the more death-related act of withdrawing a respirator from the respirator-dependent patient” (Robinson 16).  Again would this not also violate the Hippocratic Oath? Physically disengaging a life saving machine is no less harmful than prescribing medication that would end someone’s life.  In one scenario, which is legal, the “act of death” lies in the physician’s hands, where as in prescribing medication, the patient must have the determination and desire to physically take the pills, and the “act of death” is in their own hands (Robinson 16).  

            Some physicians will resort to “covert and undocumented practices when they feel compelled, for ethical and humane reasons, to provide assistance” (Linville 204). Some physicians do this because of close long term relationships with their patients (Linville 204). And by doing this, they risk their careers and lives.  But it is not fair for people who do not have these relationships with their doctor to be unable to obtain the same treatment.  It is also unfair to criminalize a physician who is following the direction of his patient within the scope of his knowledge and abilities.

            Finally, physician-assisted suicide is said to be about autonomy.  Those who argue against physician-assisted suicide claim “[the patient] will not be able to exercise her autonomy in the future” (Gill 56). However, terminally ill patients with less than six months to live have a short future, and how much of that they would maintain their autonomy in would also be questionable. Those who support physician-assisted suicide argue “that the suicide of a person who is about to die does not violate the value of autonomy because the person’s decision-making ability is going to disappear whether she commits suicide or not” (Gill 55).  They also argue, “It is the ability to make big decisions that is of profound moral importance” (Gill 58).  Physician-assisted suicide should be legalized in the United States so that everyone will be given the opportunity to evaluate their own life and morals and make a decision that is best for them. Banning physician-assisted suicide does not prevent deaths.  Nor would legalizing it increase deaths. It would simply allow the terminally ill to choose when to die.

             

Works Cited

Dawson, Joseph. "The Meaning of Separation of

Church and State in the First Amendment." Journal of Church & State. 50.4 (2008): 677-681. Print.

Gill, Michael. "A moral defense of Oregon's physician-assisted  

suicide law.” Morality.10.1 (2005): 53-67. Print 

Girsh, Faye J. "Physician Aid in Dying What

Physicians Say, What Patients Say." West J Med. 157. (1992): 188-189. Print.

Hendin, H., Foley, K.  "Physician – Assisted Suicide in

Oregon: A Medical Perspective." Michigan Law Review. 106. (2008): 1613-1634. Print.

Hooker , Richard. "Greek Philosophy: Plato, The

Apology." Washington State University. N.p., 1999. Web. 5 Apr 2011. <http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/greece/apology.htm>.

Jelen, Ted G. "Politica Esperanto: Rhetorical

Resources and Limitations of the The Christian Right in the United States." Sociology of Religion. 66.3 (2005): 303-321. Print.

Linville, John E. "Physician-Assisted Suicide as a

Constitutional Right." Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics. 24. (1996): 198-206. Print.

Mariner, Wendy. "Physician Assisted Suicide and the

Supreme Court: Putting the Constitutional Claim to Rest." American Journal of Public Health/ Health Law and Ethics. 87.12 (1997): 2058-2062. Print.

Miller, Pamela. "Life after Death with Dignity: The

Oregon Experience." Social Work. 45.3 (2000): 263-271. Print.

Pellegrino, Edmund D. "The Commodification of

Medical and Health Care: The Moral Consequences of a Paradigm Shift from a Professional to a Market Ethic." Journal of Medicine and Philosophy. 24.3 (1999): 243-266. Print.

Radtke, Richard. "A Case Against Physician-Assisted

Suicide." Journal of Disability Policy Studies. 16.1 (2005): 58-60. Print.

Robinson, John. "Baxter and the Return of Physician-Assisted

Suicide.” Hasting Report.40.6 (2010): 15-17. Print.

GI Jesus????

The following bumper sticker reads 

"That's Right I'm clinging to my Guns and Religion"

   This has to be one of the most absurd bumper stickers I have seen. Firstly, I'm reassured that while most love to express their political views on the backside of their automobiles, they rarely get out of them to go vote. This slogan stuck with me in a few ways, but mostly at associating "religion" with "guns".

    I'm going to take a leap of "faith" here and say this "religion" being applied is "Christian". I do so based on the demographics of this region. I feel that's a safe assumption. 

   When I was raised in a Catholic home attending mass 6 out of 7 days a week I never got the memo about Jesus' endorsement of weapons. I endured many a mass growing up and NOT once did I hear about Jesus advocating weapons. So I'm left with a few questions for the driver of this vehicle. How can you cling to a religion that promotes peace and love and to your gun at the same time without feeling some sort of dissonance? 

When you think of Jesus is this the image you have?

I must have missed mass the day we explored the teachings of christ on guns and ammo.  Jesus asks us to turn the other cheek not load another clip into your 9mm.  If you want to own a gun go for it but please don't create an association between gun ownership and religion. These two things are incompatible even when Jesus was taken at the garden one of the disciples raised a sword to defend Jesus and Jesus had him lay his sword down.

John 18 10-11
'Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, cutting off his right ear. Jesus commanded Peter "Put down your sword!"

It is distressing how often people "cling" to things that they don't understand.

Time for a Rant

Maybe it's because I don't have MATH to hate anymore, that my mind is free to be irritated by other things. On the way to take my math final today I was behind this truck, and his bumper sticker really annoyed me.

When I saw this sticker I had several thoughts... When is this trucker gonna run into the enemy to aid or comfort him???? Very unlikely. What does the enemy have to do with supporting the troops? I mean if my daughter asks me to support her, and I refuse to help the neighbor kid am I supporting my daughter???? NO. ( I know ludicrous right, but sometimes you have to make things absurdly obvious for others to get it). 
Ok, with most people that would be it. Off to take your test and you're done, but NOT me. I'm a bit more neurotic lol. Especially when I see principles or ideals being twisted and abused. It actually irritates the heck out of me. I live in AR. AKA American Bible Belt. My thoughts turned to I wonder if PAM transport has ever read the book of Matthew.. I'd wager the jackoff who thought this sticker was an outstanding idea also has a bible on his bookcase collecting dust. 


 You have heard that it was said, "Love your neighbor and hate your enemy."
But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you (Matthew 5:43-44).


 or how about the "Good Samaritan"  Samaritan doesn't just mean stranger they were "enemies"

Thats when I thought about my psych class and learning about the theory of dissonance (how when you hold two conflicting ideals you'll justify, rationalize etc to feel better about it because your brain knows it doesn't make sense to say one thing and do another) 


Even still we all know that comfort requires compassion and compassion teaches us to love. Love creates friends out of enemies. I mean how on earth can we strive for peace when we sport these kinds of signs on our bumpers that glamorize being a rotten individual???  

Also how is this ANY form of support for our troops?? We have troops coming home damaged, dismembered and diseased. I'm sure your flag embellished bumper stick makes them feel like losing their leg was so worth it. Hey PAM if you truly want to "support" our troops how about sending some $$ to the VA, or care packages to Iraq or any other REAL way of showing support????? 

Never let it be said that I don't follow my convictions or speak up when I see something wrong. I called PAM trucking ((479) 361-9111 feel free to do the same if you agree with me) and asked was this sticker company policy or some random thing the driver did? I was shocked when they said it was company policy!! When I voiced my opinion the lady said "well we have freedom of speech". I told her she was absolutely right!!! freedom of speech was great! and that PAM trucking had the right to say any ignorant thing they wanted to. I told her my problem wasn't with "freedom of speech" or even the sentiment I thought the sticker may be attempting to convey (supporting the troops), but that the way they were choosing to show their support was self glorifying, superficial and ignorant and suggested that if PAM really wanted to support troops that the money used to plaster this sticker on ALL their trucks would have been better spent ACTUALLY supporting troops.

I can't bring myself to put a sticker on my car. I've seen several I like, but to actually stick one on my car would cause dissonance lol. I was scolded as a child for putting stickers on things. I was taught it is wrong to put a sticker somewhere nice that they belong in collection books ONLY. That cognition wont allow me to put any stickers on my car which I love and cherish. But if I was able to do it mine would look something like this:

maybe one day they'll make a window cling :) 

2 years into Forever

     In a week and a half I'll be celebrating my 2 year anniversary with my husband. When I met him in 2007, I have to admit, I knew he was going to be my husband. I never believed people when they said, "I knew it right away", until it happened to me. I knew right away that Martin would be my husband. That doesn't mean it was easy though. in 2009 we went through the fiance visa process and it is a pain and there were many times I'd get so discouraged and upset, but Martin would always say, "in a few years this will all just be a memory".  Well, thank you for the memory baby. I love you deeply, and each day the bond I feel for you strengthens. I can't imagine my life without you in it, and I don't want to. We are 2 years into our forever and I'm glad its you I'm making memories with.
(here's just a few of my favorite memories with you)

    

ME+MATH=MUDDLED

ME + MATH = MUDDLED

Math. The study of the measurement, properties, and relationships of quantities and sets, using numbers and symbols. This is the definition according to online free dictionary.. No wonder I struggle with math so badly. I can't even wrap my head around the definition of it. I've recently been turned on to a fellow called Derrida.. "the center is not the center".. If you are aware of him you know how mind blowing his writings are and how enter his mind is like falling down the rabbits hole. 

   The other day while sitting in my excruciatingly long math class my mind drifted, as it does when my teacher begins to ramble on the easy bits of an equation... "okay... now subtract 5 from both sides". My mind drifted to Derrida (http://www.iep.utm.edu/derrida/). I say drift but to land on Derrida is more like an cosmic shift and not a drift. I thought about how the image of two glasses becomes the word "two" and the word "two with the image"becomes the concept... but wait... there's to and too as well all sound like TWO.. while I giggled this off in my mind by saying "the center is not the center" I began to wonder how on earth we decided to label 2 as two and that 2+2=4??? Can Derrida be applied to math?? Some would argue yes because if we labeled 2 as 3 than 3+3=4 if we so chose to when developing language.  

   Math is supposedly constant though set fixed. I struggle with math it seems to me to be so much memorization. I see no logic in it. I have to memorize everything. mathematical equations are constantly popping up in the universe.. for example pie its apparently found everywhere. (http://turner.faculty.swau.edu/mathematics/materialslibrary/pi/pimystery.html) try and wrap your head around that lol. As my mind began to quietly and discreetly explode in class I began to wonder about those crazy alien conspiracies. Everything I know about math especially really BIG HARD COMPLEX math has been taught to me. I thought who the hell thought up this stuff? Did someone stumble on algebra and calculus the way we stumbled on gravity? It seems unlikely (those crazy alien people have it right).  I thought about the first person to say 2x+5y=16 is actually y=mx+b and defines a line. (and that's some basic stuff folks). How do you come up with this stuff? And why does it make sense universally? Could it be from aliens? I have no clue, but I as I quantify "imaginary numbers" I begin to think that if 10i is possible we aren't far from little green men are we?  

WWJD and NHS

 The Parable of the Good Samaritan

 25 On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”   26 “What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”

 27 He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b]”

   28 “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”

 29 But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, “And who is my neighbor?”

 30 In reply Jesus said: “A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he was attacked by robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. 31 A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. 32 So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. 33 But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. 34 He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, brought him to an inn and took care of him. 35The next day he took out two denarii[c] and gave them to the innkeeper. ‘Look after him,’ he said, ‘and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.’

   36 “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”

 37 The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”

   Jesus told him, “Go and do likewise.”This blog, like me, is still a work in progress. C

     So what would Jesus say about National Healthcare??? Looks pretty clear doesn't it? Am I the only person who is aware of this parable?  On several occasions I have been in "debates"( Ok arguements) about the topic of a National Healthcare System. Under a national healthcare system taxes MIGHT increase (it depends on our priorities and things like multiple wars etc.. we easily spend more on the war on terrorism than we would on NHS in a week currently) but I digress. My real issue is with the need for a NHS, and our social/moral obligation to provide a health care system to ourselves and fellow citizens (you know that "we the people" bit) of this nation. While I do not agree that this nation was "based on christianity" (I'll save that for another blog) I do believe that the majority of the country classify themselves as Christians..87% of them in fact. (http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_prac2.htm).  

       IF 87% of people in America claim to be christian how is it we don't have NHS? How many "christians" are aware of this parable? As of 2009 45,000 people die every year due to a lack of insurance aka no access to proper health care.  45,000?!?!?!?! Please understand that's not just a number. That is someone's wife, husband, daughter, son, mother, father, grandmother, grandfather or our "neighbor". This number is unacceptable.  (http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/17/harvard-medical-study-links-lack-of-insurance-to-45000-us-deaths-a-year/ ). How can those 87% (a majority vote) claim to be good christians yet allow 45,000 of their neighbors to die?