I can understand how many would feel it is a right since it’s hard to have life and pursue happiness when one is unable to get treatments that save their lives and allow them happiness, however the medical profession in the US has always been a for-profit venture and the times that the government did get involved was usually out of necessity for large groups of people (i.e. the depression or natural disasters) and not isolated individuals who are unable or simply do not want to pay for their healthcare.
For those who feel that Americans do have a right to healthcare, how do the bills get paid? Maybe it’s hyperbole to call doctors slaves, but the fact is that doctors and everyone else who pay for insurance and/or medical bills will wind up footing the bill for everyone else if it’s an inalienable right that all citizens recieve.
For those who feel that it is a priviledge, how does a society deal with turning away the indigent, the diseased or anyone else who simply cannot afford the escalating costs of healthcare? Charities cannot help everyone and someone has to pay for the poor person who uses emergency room services to deal with ailments.
It’s a complex issue, not nearly as oversimplified as those on the right or left seem to want to make it out to be, but the easiest way to at least find some common ground is to decide if it’s a right or not…
Does it have to argued as a right to get it established in the U.S.? Can’t it just be viewed as something the government can do more efficiently than the private sector, like police and fire departments?
Why would American medical personel be treated any differently than how medical personel is treated in First world nations? The inanity of the healthcare debate in the US is higlighted by the fact that the US is the only Western nation that is hapless at implementing it. It’s as stupid as a world where the US would be the only Western nation without any form of public mass transit.
At least in Europe, healthcare came about after WW2, where massive tragedy probably united societies, and enabled them to think collective. In a country where you still have debates as whether taxes are immoral, good luck on trying to have a system dedicated to helping your fellow citizens.
As for “where will the money come from”, note that a european-style UHC would probably be cheaper than the status quo.
America spends more than twice as much, per capita, on healthcare, than any other developed nation, with very little to show for it.
When you couple that stat with the tens of millions of uninsured, it’s surprising anyone tries to defend the current system.
Assuming we’re talking about inalienable/natural rights, I don’t believe health care to be a right because I don’t believe that anyone has an inherent right to be provided with something by someone else.
I can think something is good public policy without thinking that people have a right to it.
I don’t think so. If it’s not the government’s responsibility to do something, just being better at it doesn’t mean they should do it. The government might be able to run Major Leage Baseball better than Selig and crew but that doesn’t mean they should. Especially when there are other things that are undeniably the responsibility of the government that need attention.
Most types of healthcare are a moral right in a civilised society. I say ‘most’ because there are some grey areas even for people who support universal healthcare, and because some people who oppose universal healthcare will expand ‘healthcare’ to encompass anything which impacts on your wellbeing.
Where would the money come from? From the people paying into the system. Same as where the money comes from when you pay into private health insurance. I guess some people in the US are walking/hobbling up for their cancer treatment and paying for it in cash, but that’s not how it usually works.
It’s not a right but it’s a good idea. Society in general benefits from people having access to proper healthcare (and especially preventative care), in the same way that society benefits from having a well-educated populace.
“Rights” are a human construct, inalienable rights are a human construct.
Therefore in a democratic society such “rights” are whatever the voters say they are.
In the rest of the developed world we have said that healthcare is a right (with slight variations on how “healthcare” is defined)
In the US, this appears not to be the case.
Hedonistic nihilist answer: There are no natural rights. There is no good, no evil, no obligation, no right, no wrong. We get to choose what to do. If making health care a legal right makes you happy, you are free to do it. If leaving health care unaffordable to people makes you happy, you’re free to do that. I think in that case a right to health care makes me relatively happy.
Politically pragmatic answer: If the people want subsidized health care, giving them that right is a way to win votes. If the people want such health care to be denied (especially to others), then denying that right is a way to win votes. It looks like a right to health care is desired in the West, except in the USA. I don’t know why, really. Racism? Self-loathing? Some kind of moralistic philosophy?
Vengeful wrath answer: The United States of America is a terrorist operation which bombs cities & tortures innocents. The American people support and vote for this. They don’t deserve health care. They don’t deserve to live. Well, maybe showing mercy to the electorate of the world’s most powerful state will encourage them to show mercy.
It won’t. They are depraved. Let them suffer in their mutual loathing, & pray that one day they are destroyed by internal violence. Well, that took a dark turn.
I suppose the right to a government attorney thing is because the government is prosecuting you. A right to a CPA to help you do your taxes is more comparable.
So doctors will become slaves to their jobs. How many of you right now are not doctors but still slaves to your jobs?
The real question is not whether health care should be right, but whether or not it should be a matter of public policy.
Things like police protection and fire protection a LONG, long time ago where not provided free. If a fire broke out, you called your fire dept and they put your fire out.
Of course you can quickly see the flaw when the your fire dept puts out your fire, but the hot embers catch the houses on either side on fire and those two house don’t have fire protection or use another fire dept.
When’s the last time you heard anyone complain about fireman sitting around all day instead of putting out fires. Not likely, 'cause they are paid not only to put out fires but to assure us we’re secure “in case.”
So should health care be public policy as are the police, fire etc?
Basic preventative healthcare, birth control, and basic emergency services, (those that are life and limb saving) should be a right. Outside of that I’m fine with private providers taking care of long term care, advanced or complicated medicines, elder care, natal care, and luxury procedures.
Doctor’s lives would probably improve. Salaries would have to be decent, and shifts proscribed to ensure proper relief.
I think it was here. Even those who felt the family in question was rather stupid generally agreed that the county government was wrong to have no county fire service, forcing individuals to pay for fire service from the surrounding towns.
It’s not just a right but a responsibility in a karmic exchange. Note the good Samaritan parable and Cain’s reply to God ‘am I my brother’s keeper’ as Cain was sent to be a restless wanderer on the earth… We all need each others Love and caring and that is especially true when we are sick.
This applies to health care today, we are all in it together, and all still very much need each other in a much more personal way then we are discussing. Not only is the ability to pay a issue, but the ability to help. We as a society have been made afraid to help out each other so we don’t.
There was a emergency in the town where I live, a massive ice storm cut power off for a week while the roads were blocked by tree falls. There was much good out of this, neighbors helped each other out, those with food and water shared with those without. Anyone who could help in the smallest capacity did, people walked and in some cases climbed to check on others, less abeled. There was a strengthening of the community that day and much good was accomplished. A big part of that is because the system broke down.
The problem is the system, that of what the OP speaks of in part, it hinders the above, and gives us a easy out. Call 911, have medicade take care of them, they should have had enough insurance, it’s their own fault. Also after the above event the town had a meeting as how to prepare if this happens again, quite frankly I stated the best thing the town can do is stay out of the way, any procedures set up can only hinder the overwhelming flow of support from all the people we experienced. Plus no 2 emergencies are the same and developing procedures based on a unique event can easily be totally inappropriate for another and thus would be a hindrance in itself.
Ultimately health care is a right, and once we learn that a person’s suffering is our brother’s/sister’s suffering and we are not a isolated individual person we will step up to the plate and serve as we know how.
As a Mason, I am bound by an obligation to help those in need. Even if the person is not a Mason, they share my Creator and I am therefore bound by my obligation to Him to help them as much as I can, without material injury to myself.