I agree with the authors of this paper (Buchanan) that health care is a universal right that we have as humans. It’s more than just an act of beneficence to provide health care to those who need it but an issue of justice. It is hard to enforce an act of beneficence. I don’t believe you can force anybody to perform or provide financially an act of beneficence if they don’t want to, so it’s important to understand that life-sustaining health care is not simply an act of beneficence, but an issue of justice. As humans, there’s no question that we hold a certain moral status that should be respected by fellow humans. Therefore, I believe that we are morally obligated to take care of those in need by providing necessary, life-sustaining or life-saving health care. Besides it being the fair and morally correct thing to do in regards to justice, it is also what is best for not only the individual receiving the health care, but also society as a whole. By providing preventative health care such as immunizations, we are protecting whole communities from the spread of disease. Also, by keeping individuals healthy, we are keeping our communities healthy, which means its people will better be able to provide for the society’s needs.
The only issue I run across with saying that health care is a universal right is when people abuse this right. Whether we want to acknowledge it or not, there will be people who will take their right to health care for granted and not take care of their bodies like they should. There is definitely a limit to the health care resources we have, and if we are constantly providing health care to people who do the harm to their own bodies, then we are wasting it. There are other people who need support in obtaining health care who will never get it if we waste all of our resources on those who exploit the right. Therefore, I believe that even though health care is a universal right, there needs to be a system set up to ensure that the right isn’t being abused. However, I am a little stuck on what this should look like practically. It seems easy when you’re talking about people who smoke or abuse drugs or alcohol, but what about those people who put their health in jeopardy for their livelihood or to perform another beneficent service to humankind such as military or servicemen and women? Should their health care be restricted in the same fashion as drug addicts’ health care because they both knowingly put their health at risk? It hardly seems fair to put the two in the same boat, so this is when I struggle with saying that everyone has the same right to health care. However, you also don’t want to give special health care rights to certain individuals because then I don’t think it can really be considered a universal right if others receive more of the right or better quality of treatment. Therefore, I think we need to be careful making qualifications that certain people have more of a right to health care than others, but we also need to make sure the right to health care is not being abused, if we want to have enough resources to be able to provide to everyone.
Beauchamp, Tom L., and James F. Childress. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 7th ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013. Print.
Buchanan, Allen, “The Right to a Decent Minimum of Health Care” Philosophy and Public Affairs 13 (1): 68-78 (1984).
I agree with your opinion regarding universal healthcare practices. I also agree that gathering a large enough sum of resources to handle a universal healthcare system would be extremely challenging. The more I think about the challenge, the more daunting the challenge becomes. The challenge is to provide equal treatment across the board, to all citizens. Just one challenge this system would face is justifying providing life-sustaining treatment. As Alyssa stated in the post above, “we are morally obligated to take care of those in need by providing necessary, life-sustaining or life-saving health care.” The only problem here is that lower-class citizens consume cheaper food, which in turn deteriorates their bodies faster than higher-cost foods that only the slightly more wealthy can afford. Wouldn’t this justify providing everyone with the higher quality food? The magnitude of this problem is enormous. I believe that if we are morally obligated to provide life-sustaining healthcare, then providing healthier food ought to be required as well. The system to be set forth for equal healthcare for all would be a convoluted and extremely complex system.
While I do agree that it is a massive complex issue. I think its important that we look a the larger picture and really figure out what is preventing national healthcare from being a possibility. For me it is clear that we are morally obligated to provide, life-sustaining or life-saving health care.” Which is PREVENTATIVE HEALTHCARE. If this inexpensive care was accessible to all it would prevent a lot of the chronic diseases and expensive treatments that follow to keep the illnesses under control. But upon thinking about that the reason this isn’t done, i think we have to start consider that maybe the medical arena is more focused on profit then health.
Jonah, while I agree with both you and Alyssa regarding these universal healthcare practices, your comment about food, and the need to provide healthier food is something I disagree with. While I’m not trying to offend any population or group of people in this comment, I am just speaking in terms of what I, personally, believe in. Just because lower-class citizens “consume cheaper food” does not mean that we are then morally obligated to provide healthier food to those populations. As Alyssa mentioned above, what do we do with the people who abuse their right to health care? What do we do about those that abuse drugs and smoke and harm their bodies through their conscious, informed actions. Some of these people are the same people that are eating “cheaper foods,” however maybe one of the reasons they have to consume lower quality foods is because they are spending money on things like cigarettes, or other physically harmful substances. No matter what class you are in, you have a choice, a choice to take care of your body to the best of your ability – and while I do believe that universal health care is an amazing idea, I don’t think that it should apply to those knowingly harming their bodies, making them consequently require more health care than they probably would have needed. We all have a choice when it comes to our behaviors, actions, and our bodies – and those who abuse their bodies shouldn’t also be allowed to abuse their health care systems.
On the surface, universal healthcare seems like the right, obvious service to provide to all. Everyone should truly have access to healthcare. However, there are definitely barriers to implementing this, and you accurately listed some of them. The struggle here is where to draw the line, as some could abuse the privilege, like you said. To think about it in comparison, what if one person came to the doctor and got a routine check-up and left with nothing, while another came in and received multiple scans, blood work, and left with prescription drugs. They use a lot of the resources, yet we all are under the same umbrella. I am left wondering if we could provide universal check-ups and routine visits, and then maybe move from there. Again, there are problems with this system. Is there truly a way to properly and effectively implement universal healthcare?