JUDGE ORDERS SEBELIUS TO SUSPEND TRANSPLANT RULE IN MURNAGHAN CASE

Commissar Sebelius has finally discovered a regulation she isn’t willing to break. Sarah Murnaghan is a 10-year-old girl who needs a lung transplant but doesn’t qualify pursuant to federal regulations that put kids her age on a different waiting list than those 12 or older.

Sebelius has the authority to waive that rule but refuses to do it because, she says, her HHS lawyers have told her she can’t. Since when does does this apparatchik give a rat’s ass about regulations or the rule of law? Watch the Commissar justify her intransigence:

This is a complex situation, but at least one judge has decided that now is not the time to ponder nuances. U.S. District Judge Michael Baylson, apparently agreeing with the parents that the regulation is “arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion,” has ordered her to suspend it.

It is Sebelius’ normal practice to ignore the law when it suits her to do so. I wonder if she has the guts to ignore a court order in a situation like this.

Comments 5

  1. Marc Brown wrote:

    Hi David. I guess you don’t realize there are medical and ethical reasons in play here – you’d be doing yourself a favor if you go look at this properly rather than play knee-jerk games over a 10 year old girl. You might, given your extreme position, also discuss how a free market solution to this would be better.

    Posted 06 Jun 2013 at 2:20 pm
  2. Catron wrote:

    Actually, I have looked into this in enough depth to move beyond hopelessly trite assertions like “there are medical and ethical reasons in play here.”

    No kidding, Sherlock? If you were capable of critical thinking, you would see that Commissar Sebelius isn’t concerned about medical or any other brand of ethics.

    This is nothing less than a bureaucrat sentencing a child to death in order to defend her federal fiefdom from the elected officials charged with overseeing (and paying for) its activities.

    I’m delighted that Judge Baylson didn’t allow her to get away it.

    Posted 06 Jun 2013 at 8:48 pm
  3. Marc Brown wrote:

    “you would see that Commissar Sebelius isn’t concerned about medical or any other brand of ethics.”

    So why does the US government contract with UNOS (United Network for Organ Sharing) to carry out this medical and ethical work? Your reply just says you have no understanding of the issues involved with transplanting adult lungs into children (and almost certainly about other medical issues), and of course you did not answer the question about the ‘free market’.

    Posted 07 Jun 2013 at 2:15 pm
  4. Diogenes wrote:

    Mr. Brown, it’s understandable that you support bureaucratic trafficking in human organs. You are apparently a brain donor yourself.

    This, I assume, is why you have yet to make a single point relating to the general thrust of Catron’s post.

    Posted 08 Jun 2013 at 7:39 pm
  5. Dr. Zhivago wrote:

    Both sides are right and both sides are wrong. Rep. Barletta was doing what he was elected to do, and that’s advocate for his constituents.
    Commissar Sebelius is right, in that she isn’t medically qualified to get drawn into the day-to-day decision making of who lives and who dies.
    Organs are rationed out based on, to best of the medical community’s ability, objective criteria.
    With the judge ordering Commissar Sebelius to suspend the rules, that judge has trashed the objective criteria and substituted pure political ones. It is going to be ugly, watching day after day, Congresscritters begging the Commissar of HHS to save one of their constituents.
    Throw in money, power, greed and corruption (can you say “Mickey Mantle”?) and the organ transplant business is going to go up in flames.
    Bad outcome all around….

    Posted 11 Jun 2013 at 1:02 pm

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *