Is Health Care A Right Or A Privilege?
Neither. It's a Responsibility. To be specific, it's your responsibility. It is not owed to you by the government. It is not owed to you by your employer. It is up to you to care for you and your family. If you cannot provide health care for your family, it is your responsibility to submit your ego and ask your friends, family, doctor, and church for help. They however, are under no obligation to provide that assistance as it is your responsibility. If all else fails it is your responsibility to work three jobs and sell your possessions to pay for it.
Should health care be a right or a priviledge?
Basic healthcare should be a right, but keep in mind: If government controls health care, doctors will be more controlled and payed less. Meaning the best and brightest will have less reasons to become doctors. We have the best doctors in the world because healthcare is privatized. Like everything else, it's a trade-off
Is healthcare a right?
There is no such thing as a “natural” set of rights. It’ll be cool and dandy if ALL expensive healthcare was free for all and money grows on trees. Unfortunately, somebody always pays for healthcare services and many people in Europe fly to the US for medical services, ditching their “free” healthcare. Why is it that we MUST follow Europe when some of them prefer our healthcare? If it’s all great, they must be ALL staying at home, right?This question in essence is asking: should healthcare services be considered public services funded by taxpayers?If you’re going to make it universally available, the US will have to increase taxes by a large amount from the people. That isn’t a popular proposition, and you’d also have to go through various industry lobbies with vast resources that will defend their status quo to the death. We also don’t have unlimited resources. You also will need to ration it very carefully. Underutilization and/or overutilization, lowered access to certain areas will happen.I welcome any reasonable proposals that would drastically reduce healthcare costs without reducing quality that can ration it in a “fair” (or fair enough) manner without the long wait times, lowered access or reduction in innovations, but I find it unlikely to be considered a “right” in the US right now, there is however, a minimum “right” to emergency healthcare services regardless of ability to pay and Medicare/Medicaid, as well as Obamacare.That’s not to say universal healthcare can’t work in the US, there are just many obstacles to it as well as it’s own pros and cons to it. Perhaps more funding to public health initiatives and more effective preventative health would be a better route. We barely do any research on what to prioritize, it’s been mostly emotional language from both ends of the two parties.Instead we should focus more on other policies such as sugar taxes, higher cigarette/alcohol taxes, default organ donor registration, subsidized contraceptives/vaccinations, prevention of decline in aging (to mobilize an elderly workforce), and allowing physicians to prescribe mandatory exercise classes. This would go a much longer way in improving health of the nation. Progressive consumption taxes to modify behaviors would a better solution with sufficient evidence that it can work. It’s endorsed by Bill Gates. Taxing on savings, investments, and capital are actually the worst form of taxes. Why work harder if you’re taxed so much?
What are the basic components of a healthcare system?
The basic components of a healthcare system: First, it depends on what kind of system you are looking at. There are private systems, government systems, subsidized systems, universal systems..... Broken down to the basics: There are healthcare providers, payers, and clients. Healthcare providers are the ones that serve the clients and provide them with healthcare. They receive payment from the payers. Clients are those that receive care from the healthcare provider. They also either pay the payers (such as insurance companies) who then pay the provider- or they pay the provider directly, or they have their bills payed on their behalf by the government. Payers are those who finance the healthcare. Payers can include the family of the client, the clients themselves, the insurance companies, or the government. There is also a setting for care- which could be a home, a rural clinic, a major hospital, nursing home, ambulatory care setting, or outpatient surgical center. Additional sections of the health care system include government, regulatory agencies, pharmaceutical and medical research companies, and other medical personnel (nurses, technicians, and all others who must work under a physician or other health care provider.) The government and regulatory agencies approve or ban medications and medical equipment and practices from the country, and play a role in setting standards for care in the care settings. The government is sometimes the payer for the clients, and regulates how much the provider is allowed to be reimbursed for. Regulatory agencies also define who can be a provider, what educational standards they must have, maintain a registry of these individuals, and set up the governance for what standards they must uphold. Pharmaceutical and medical research companies research new medications, and develop new treatments for disease and injury. They learn about the body and sell medications and materials to providers and clients. Other medical personnel may be those who are in contact with the client the most during his or her encounter with the healthcare system. Nurses, medical technicians, phlebotomists, schedulers, billing personnel, physician assistants, and nursing assistants are all just some of these personnel.
Why shouldn't healthcare be a privilege?
I had cancer this past year. The total billings to my insurance provider for all the treatment (I have a good job, so fortunately that includes good insurance) were in the realm of a quarter of a million dollars. Without my insurance, there’s no way I could have afforded that. I talked to my doctors, and they told me that as near as they can tell, there’s nothing in particular I could have done to have prevented the cancer, and nothing in particular I did to cause it - it just happened.What if I hadn’t had nearly as good a job as I do? What if my employer didn’t feel like providing a solid health insurance plan as a benefit of my employment? What if I’d already been sick, and the ACA’s preexisting condition protections hadn’t existed, thus making me effectively uninsurable? Would you say that I deserved to die of cancer because of that? I mean, even with the job I have, a quarter of a million dollars would have ruined me. Straight up. Ruined. I couldn’t have afforded that. I’d be bankrupt. Destitute. Or dying. Or quite likely both.So healthcare, to allow a person who could live to survive a condition like this, should be a privilege of wealth? Explain that to me. Why should a person have to be wealthy to be treated for a curable disease - especially one that’s not caused by choice or lifestyle, no family history, but just by stupid luck? What if it was you? Your kid? Your spouse? Your parent, or sibling? Would you shrug your shoulders and say “gee, that’s a shame, you should have been rich”? “Sounds like a personal problem”?The problem is, almost everybody gets sick, or has an accident, breaks a bone, takes a fall, gets cancer, has a heart attack, or something at some point in their lives. Maybe you’ll get lucky and it won’t happen for many years. Or maybe you’ll have a kid diagnosed with cancer at the age of 6 or 7 or 8. You’ll be a girl in your mid-20s with toxic shock syndrome. You’ll be in your 30s and have an unexpected stroke. Or like me, you’ll be just turning 40 and get diagnosed with a cancer that you had no reason to expect, and no family history to indicate.Then tell me how it should be a privilege of wealth to get healthcare.
Why should healthcare be a right when food and housing are not rights?
I have used the exact analogy with many Congressman who are supporters that the healthcare issue is moot since everyone should have it. My reply is what is more important eating to prevent dying or medical to prevent dying. Either way without it you dieThe issue is that food in comparison is something that society is willing to do anything to make sure they have while healthcare is viewed as one part of society taking advantage of the restNo one would dream to accuse a farmer of ripping off the nation but every day anyone in the medical community is assumed to be ripping everyone off by doing the same exact thing (preventing death)Healthcare regardless of how one slices it is expensive in today's day and age. That is because technology has made HUGE changes to people's livesIn the turn of the 20th century the average person would be lucky to live to 60 now they are easily living to 80+In food there hasn't been much change. Yes there has been increases in food costs since the 20th century but the technology to get calories and nutrition to each person is basically the sameTo go from 60 to 80 took huge technology and that was expensive and continues to be expensive. Their is a grudge against the medical industry because the economy in the US has not kept up with the technology of medical services. If the economy was stronger thru the last 30 years the actual cost of care would not be 19% of GDP. The food supply is less then 8% of the GDP since we have no excessive changes. If the costs start to increase say of we get bad weather or diseases to affect food then technology will have to be used to increase food supply and then the costs will increase and people will complain about the high cost of foodThe whole issue is we see food as not being expensive so we make it "open" while the costs of medical care is expensive so we have to then call it "a right" in order to justify the Gov. to step in and force modifications and limitations on how to compensate for itThanks for the request to answerDr D
Do you agree with Rand Paul that the right to healthcare means slavery for doctors?
This is a really old quote. Looks like he said it in 2011.No matter, let’s look at his exact words. I don’t want to rush to judge him.With regard to the idea whether or not you have a right to health care you have to realize what that implies. I am a physician. You have a right to come to my house and conscript me. It means you believe in slavery. You are going to enslave not only me but the janitor at my hospital, the person who cleans my office, the assistants, the nurses. … You are basically saying you believe in slavery.Okay, this is literally the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard.And this kind of idiocy is the reason why it’s hard to have a rational debate about most things political in this country.“You have a right to come to my house and conscript me. It means you believe in slavery. You are going to enslave not only me but the janitor at my hospital, the person who cleans my office, the assistants, the nurses.”No, no one is saying that. This is an intellectually lazy and exceedingly silly straw man.What people who argue that healthcare is a right are saying is that the government should pick up the cost of providing healthcare for the entire population. It’s possible to disagree with this notion without making an imbecilic caricature of the argument. No one implies that physicians or anyone else working in a hospital would be forced to work.In the US, the most likely form this would take would be to make everyone eligible for Medicare or Medicaid. Even if you take a system like the NHS, where physicians are employees of the government, no one is forced to work.I don’t think I need to say anything more. Rand Paul is a smart man. He should be capable of better arguments than this.
Example of a form giving my parents permission to get medical help for my daughter while I am out of town?
You just have to hand write one out and sign it. Make sure you leave a copy of your ID, ss card, your daughters, a copy of any insurance information and a copy of shot records with brief medical history. I have 4 kids and I gave my father one for each child. You could also provide a current picture of your child and keep it updated. I wrote: As of today ____date____,I ___My name___________ give my father ____his name____ permission the make medical decisions on my child ____their name______ born on ___date_____ with SS# ____#____in case of any medical issue that may arrise may it be emergany or not. Below is a brief medical history of my child. A copy of my ID, SS card and my childs SS card, shot records and insurance information is attatched. Thank You Sign here and date Type your name and date Can have it notorized if you want to have it witnessed to insure your parents have no problems.
Is there a right to health care in the US Constitution?
The constitution has neither a right to health care nor an obstruction to health care as a right. You could argue that health care is one of those rights mentioned by the Ninth Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” You could argue that health care is part of “Life” as included in the Declaration of Independence: “WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by the Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness…”But to exercise this right you’ll have to persuade Congress to pass it, the President to implement it, and the courts to not obstruct it.