should I rob you to keep Grandma alive?

From syndicated columnist Ellen Goodman in the C-J...

I was not surprised by the President's story. Health care reform is not just a matter of spreadsheets and patient charts. It's a repository of the personal narratives we carry around in our family hard drives.

This time, the story he told was about end-of-life costs and caring. It was about Madelyn Dunham, the grandmother who had died just a day too soon to see him become President. You see, the woman called Toot was terminally ill with cancer when she fell, broke her hip and then agreed to a hip replacement. The surgery was "successful" but two weeks later, as the President said, "You know, things fell apart."

Obama told a New York Times reporter that he would have paid for the operation himself if necessary, but then he asked aloud whether society should be expected to pay for such treatment of any other terminally ill parent or grandparent. Was this a "sustainable model"? asked the presidential grandson, adding, "So that's where I think you just get into some very difficult moral issues."

I appreciate Obama's courage in asking this difficult question. That said, I'm troubled that his public policy proposals-- for more govt involvement in health care-- would sadly require confronting this question much more often.

When someone has private insurance, payments are covered through the private, voluntary arrangement you have with another entity.

But when someone has "public" insurance, their benefits come at the expense of another-- through taxes.

End-of-life issues are interesting and difficult enough, without bringing coercive payments into it. In other words, we should "support life". But what if we're supporting life by forcibly taking money from others?

Or to put it in a more crass manner: Should I rob you to keep Grandma alive?