tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post8365041088230413009..comments2024-03-18T22:21:33.261-07:00Comments on The Debate Link: Didn't You Hear Me? I Said UNBUNDLING!David Schraubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-45535480714320655112008-12-18T02:16:00.000-08:002008-12-18T02:16:00.000-08:00Grant, many procedures are recorded for accounting...Grant, many procedures are recorded for accounting purposes as separate items. You have a hip replacement, it'll be recorded as a physio appointment, several appointments with the surgeon, pre-admission appointments with the anaesthetist, nurse prior to the operation, the operation itself (during which there will be drugs, the implant, different lines for each staff member's time), post-operative physio and occupational therapy, antibiotics and follow up appointments with the surgeon. There'll be separate accounting charges for bandages, support socks, crutches, the cool booster seat for the toilet. <BR/><BR/>For certain purposes, these costs will be bundled. But they are also recorded separately for other purposes. The organisation needs to be able to say how many physio appointments were seen in a given period, they also need to be able to say how much those cost, what number were charged to what specialty and which were part of accident recovery, pre-op assessment and post-op recovery. <BR/><BR/>You want to see the numbers bundled? Ask questions that will require it. But don't jump on an organisation for recording their accounting line items correctly and individually. It's like telling a bakery that they're being ambiguous for recording their flour and sugar purchases separate from their bakers' labour. 'Cos it all ends up in the cake at the end.Alice Ronaldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14080355753506039665noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-76999059338580708632008-12-18T00:12:00.000-08:002008-12-18T00:12:00.000-08:00If a procedure is always included with the abortio...If a procedure is always included with the abortion, then there is a plausible argument, independent of one's regard for abortion-seeking women, that said proceudre is really part of the abortion procedure (i.e. pregnancy test). Is it medically unethical, impractical, or negligent to preform an abortion without doing certain exmas first, or certain follow-ups afterwards (I don't know the answer to this question)? If so, and if we're not funding abortion procedures, we might not want to fund such procedures when women get them in anticipation of an abortion. <BR/><BR/><BR/>I agree that the argument is not necessary for most pro-lifers (Douthat makes that point too), but it may be persuasive to some fence-sitters. And I don't think it is implausible, or that it depends on a negative view of specfic groups.<BR/>-GrantAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-51008474294398139472008-12-17T18:16:00.000-08:002008-12-17T18:16:00.000-08:00I disagree. I don't think it's particularly useful...I disagree. I don't think it's particularly useful to have a debate over what is proper accounting procedure when it's rather clearly a facade for "how much of a proportion of Planned Parenthood's services are in areas I find morally objectionable?" The only reason one would waste energy trying to group "STD exam given to abortion patient" into "abortion" is because one wants to label that, too, as objectionable -- particularly since, as indicated, it's not a step that needs to be taken because the better hitch for the argument is deontological anyway. But the move itself, I think is bogus, and holds abortion-seeking women in shockingly (well, not too shockingly, unfortunately) low regard.David Schraubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-83365939444155879512008-12-17T18:07:00.000-08:002008-12-17T18:07:00.000-08:00Dave, I like you and I like your blog. You're ver...Dave, I like you and I like your blog. You're very informed and insightful, but I wonder if you could have been a bit more restrained here. You made a good effort at the end of the post, but there were a couple of "come on dude" moments for me. <BR/><BR/>While many members of the religious right enjoy whore bashing, if abortion services come bundled with other services from the consumer's perspective, they should come similarly bundled for budgeting and accounting purposes when tax dollars are at stake. This opinion does not require the moral vice you often attribute to your opponents. <BR/><BR/>I think your charge that neither of the linked authors think that women seeking abortions deserve other health services because they are such whores is a terrible kind of straw-manning. I, for one, think the services should be bundled for accounting and budgeting, but also think that women with unwanted pregnancies should have all of the access to health care that our tax money can buy. I think that most other pro-life people would agree with me.<BR/><BR/>Like I said, I like your blog. i just think you're a bit footloose with calling names and charging moral vices. If it takes you three or four logical steps to get there, there's usually a good chance the person you're talking about would have gone a different route on one of those steps. <BR/><BR/>On the other hand, posting polarizing attacks like that is probably good for your reputation and traffic level, as it's an easy way to score points with your audience. Feel free to ignore me. I've never run a blog, and I'm not even sure if you have an intent here or not, or if too much restraint might be contrary to that intent.<BR/>-GrantAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-18768698066587649102008-12-15T08:00:00.000-08:002008-12-15T08:00:00.000-08:00If I may quote my good friend John McCain...*airqu...If I may quote my good friend John McCain...<BR/><BR/>*airquotes* "Women's health, pssh" *airquotes*Juliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02259013534873624521noreply@blogger.com