Politics | amendment 2 Words Could Clean Up 'Death Panel' Mess: Parker 'A simple amendment' would put debate to rest By Matt Cantor Posted Aug 12, 2009 8:38 AM CDT Copied Ellen Geiger, 56, who opposes health care reform, yells as she listens to panelists during a health care town hall meeting in Alhambra, Calif, Tuesday, Aug. 11, 2009. (AP Photo/Jae C. Hong) Sarah Palin went way too far in suggesting “death panels” would kill her loved ones—but the wording of the House health bill authorizing payment for end-of-life consultations is worrisome, writes Kathleen Parker in the Washington Post. “A simple amendment would do much to cool tempers.” The current wording lets us “imagine a scenario when, feeble and ill, we might be subtly urged to forgo further life-sustaining treatment out of consideration for others,” Parker writes. To fix that, “all that's needed is specific language saying that these end-of-life consultations are not mandatory—either for physicians or patients—and that there would be no penalty, either in coverage or compensation, for declining to participate.” Read These Next The Wall Street Journal is naming more names tied to Epstein. The sheriff says he's never seen a worse case of child sex abuse. Google exposes man's butt, is ordered to pay him $12.5K. Journal pulls a controversial paper on arsenic after 15 years. Report an error