Healthcare is NOT a basic human right.

[Asystole RN]

If one were to read the Constitution one would realize that the Constitution does not grant anyone freedoms, liberties, or rights. The Constitution only protects freedoms, liberties, and rights from transgressions on part of the government. A right is something that is inherent to the individual, comes from that individual, and is maintained by the individual. You are born with such rights like the right to speak freely, the only thing that can be done to that right is to have it infringed. No one can grant a right to another, only limit or impede the exercise of that right.

Healthcare is a human invention that does not exist in the natural environment. Only through the work of others and through the taking of resources from one party and giving to another does healthcare exist. You cannot force someone to give effort and resources to another and call that a right. In the absence of human intervention the individual would live their lives and succumb to the natural forces which would act upon their bodies.

Do I think we should provide preventative care and basic primary care? Sure. Do I think that we can? Maybe. Do I think that healthcare is a basic human right? Absolutely not.

[cdsga]

Wow-I guess we're just a bunch of run and fetch it people who never get out or live a life outside of bedpans and urinals. Please spare me. We must maintain knowledge of the healthcare industry because we are the watchdogs of it. Remember we are the patient advocate. We follow standards of care, therefore our practice is based on evidence and best outcomes. We also follow the legislative, regulatory and fiduciary policies set forth to keep our places of employ in business and within set guidelines.

I don't think nurses are the only ones that don't have access or exposure to business/healthcare economics.---Most people don't know enough about economics outside the GNP. Most don't even know how to handle their own personal economics. I'm certain that the gov't doesn't know how to handle economics-and I want to entrust the gov't with the healthcare industry and insurance industry? Not too sure on that one.

I think with the FEAR of the reality of these gov't mandates and the unknown handling of it-healthcare organizations are cleaning up their act. And that is a good thing. But watch salaries stay flat-and a unbalanced ratio of inexperienced highly educated nurses staff the industry and quality of care decline due to lack of clinical exposure---but boy will they know how to balance a checkbook.

[RNsRWe, ASN, RN]

I'm fascinated by this thread, and all of the good debate it contains.

But please, just a friendly reminder to all (and I do mean friendly, my intentions are honest!) to keep civility in mind as we post.

Since there's so much truly worthwhile information here, I don't want to see this thread shut down even for a single minute of "review", so.....let's be careful out there, ok?

[37 °C]

Wow-I guess we're just a bunch of run and fetch it people who never get out or live a life outside of bedpans and urinals. Please spare me. We must maintain knowledge of the healthcare industry because we are the watchdogs of it. Remember we are the patient advocate. We follow standards of care, therefore our practice is based on evidence and best outcomes. We also follow the legislative, regulatory and fiduciary policies set forth to keep our places of employ in business and within set guidelines.

Yes, we really should. I became more interested in the nuts and bolts of the system when a participated in a patient advocacy program. Physicians organizations get involved in the political process. There could be more participation in the process from nurse's organizations (the ANA does have a PAC).

There are also interesting books on the subject.

I haven't found many people, including nurses, who have a comprehensive understanding of the system in all its complexity. We all could do better as a nation. What saddens me, though, are those who have very strong opinions, but not much knowledge.

[montecarlo64, ASN, BSN, LPN]

Providing healthcare to EVERYONE is the RIGHT thing to do...

[DoGoodThenGo]

One only need to look to France. Arguably the best health care in the world. However, it is true socialized medicine. The French also pay very high taxes and there is definitely rationing. Frankly, I think that is the way to go. The question is how many more people are going to suffer before we admit it.

Even without adopting a single payer system, taxes are going to have to be raised and rationing is clearly a must. There really is no way around either of those two fundamentals, the politicians just aren't brave enough to tell you.

France does not have a "socialized" healthcare system per se, the following pretty much sums things up: France Fights Universal Care's High Cost - WSJ.com

What persons must understand is that for the most part modern healthcare in the UK and many EU countries grew out of the ruined economies and for that matter countries of WWII. When the war was over governments looked around and there really were few other options as most private insurance companies were either gone or in very bad shape.

Understand this as well; France, Germany and other EU countries have a strong nationalistic feelings amoung the populations. That is one is "French" not "African-French" or "gay-French" or any of the hundreds of ways Amercians break themselves down into groups. As such persons fall into line with what is good for the State/country ahead of themselves.

France places huge value on early education for children because it is there that they begin to learn what it means to be "French" and how they one day will fit into society.

The French don't mind paying "high" taxes for healthcare because by and large everyone has access to the same level of care. The wealthy and or those willing to pay extra for insurance to cover the gaps in what the state does not are welcome to do so, others make do with what they've got and are happy.

[cdsga]

There's a lot to learn-but back to the question? Healthcare is NOT a basic human right? Constitutional right, no, human right yes.

[37 °C]

Sure, Quebec has the lowest education cost in the nation. They also have the highest taxes. And with all the student loans I will be paying back over the next 20 years, as well as the 45% of my income that was being taken from my salary over the 4 years I worked there after getting my RN licence, I can ASSURE you they got back what they invested in my education. Then there is the fact that both my parents have also been paying taxes their whole lives, neither one of them went to college, and my brother is a high school dropout, so no higher education costs there either. So all that to say, no, I dont think I owe any more.

Let's see what it costs to live in Florida. The base sales tax rate is 6%, plus counties add more on top of that, and there are taxes aimed at tourists on top of that. You pay a 6% sales tax on automobiles. It doesn't matter how little you earn. You pay the same sales tax as anyone.

Then there's property taxes, which fund the schools, among other things, which you pay indirectly even if you rent. It doesn't matter if you have no kids in school, or if you drop out in the third grade. You still pay the taxes.

We'll skip the discussion on why it's better for everyone if a society is educated, even if people can't afford to pay for school themselves, or how much more limited the earning potential is for a high school dropout. In any case, a lot of your taxes go to fund public schools. Beyond that, high school students in the state who decide to go to college in-state have the opportunity to get a large tuition grant from the state. Any in-state resident, even long out of high school, gets a big subsidy from the state (which of course comes from taxes) if he attends a state school/community college. If you decide to go for a masters at a state school, you will reap that benefit.

There are also fees for a driver's license, a fishing license, an RN license, and any other certification you'll need from the state.

And after you're a multimillionaire, there will be a tax on your estate after you die.

Of course, then there's the federal income tax and the FICA tax (Social Security and Medicare). In the great majority of cases now in the U.S., there will also be a deduction for your contribution to health insurance coverage through your employer, which you will surely pay since you don't want to be a financial burden on everyone else if you become critically ill.

Your employer pays a lot for its employees' health insurance, and that comes out of their total compensation, whether or not they participate. The money to pay for it has to come from somewhere, right?

Florida has a high crime rate (which has a high cost aside from incarceration) and a large prison population (which has a high cost and is paid for by government funds — your taxes). Compare it with that of Quebec. It has a lot of uninsured drivers and car theft, which makes automobile insurance expensive. Florida has some of the highest (perhaps the highest) auto insurance rates in the nation.

Florida also is highly vulnerable to hurricanes, and parts of the state re periodically devastated by them. The governor then declares areas of damage disaster area and federal funds pay for a lot of the repairs. In other words, the entire country subsidizes Florida through taxes.

Have you priced out flood insurance? Anywhere near the coast, where the vast majority of the population lives, it is extremely expensive. In many cases, it is not obtainable except through a government agency. Does Quebec get many hurricanes or severe storms?

Over the coming decades, Florida is likely to have much worse problems with flooding. Beside the loss of land, aquifers are being lost to saltwater incursion. The availability of drinking water will diminish. What will it cost to deal with that issue? Who do you think will pay?

Regarding total cost of living (not just income tax rates), have you run all the numbers? How about quality of life measures? Does that involve more than tax rates?

[Susie2310]

This is to realmaninuniform, who was obsessing over the question:

It is irrelevant. You need to not worry about the person, and refining your ad hominem attacks, and concern yourself more with the argument at hand. Focus on the facts, the claims, and the evidence.

Nurses have no particular knowledge of health care policy unless the chose to pursue it. It's hardy touched upon at the undergraduate level. You may have some exposure to it while pursing an MSN. If you're really interested in the subject (you've given the impression that you're mainly interested in the ideology of libertarian economics), then you can pursue an MPH. You can get a start with a certificate in patient advocacy.

You claim to be a nurse. You are an anonymous person on an Internet message board. Why should I believe you? Why should I care? It has no relevance. Either you can back up your claims with evidence or you can't. How many welfare queens (as you see the uninsured poor) you patch up is irrelevant to the subject under discussion. So are your anecdotes.

Why do I have to lecture a "scholar" on the obvious?

This is a little arrogant. I looked up your profile. No mention of being a nurse or any personal information. Yes, people besides nurses are permitted to post on this forum, but it is not unreasonable in a nurse's forum for people to ask you if you are a nurse. Your manners are out of line in my opinion. And as to your claim that being a nurse is of no relevance to the person who asked you this question, many people who post here do so on the basis of the common ground they share with other members (i.e. nurses). You appear to be an educated person with a need to be confrontational.

[37 °C]

This is a little arrogant. I looked up your profile. No mention of being a nurse or any personal information. Yes, people besides nurses are permitted to post on this forum, but it is not unreasonable in a nurse's forum for people to ask you if you are a nurse. Your manners are out of line in my opinion. And as to your claim that being a nurse is of no relevance to the person who asked you this question, many people who post here do so on the basis of the common ground they share with other members (i.e. nurses). You appear to be an educated person with a need to be confrontational.

This group (or at least this thread) on this forum is not for social networking. We are discussion a serious topic, concerning one of the largest segments of our economy, and its policies have serious implications. Rather than attacking me and calling me names, I suggest we stick to the topic.

All should feel free to add something of relevance to the discussion.

For instance, to those who think our healthcare system is the best that there is, regardless of what the numbers say, how common is this type of scenario, recently posted by a member of this forum?

I recall while working on a cardiopulmonary step down back in 2010, a post thoracotomy patient I was assigned to was not out of bed for 2 days post op. He asked for assistance to just move forward in the bed, I move him up in the bed and he went into respiratory distress on me. I had to call an RRT, nebs, CXR the whole 9 yards. This was a horrendously busy and heavy nursing unit, and understaffed to say the least for the acuity of patient population. Had the staffing been adequate with a mix of experience levels- (yes, I was the only crabby mean old bat nurse on the floor) with attention to the nursing practices of the days of old, I don't think this would have happened.

These patients were so sick on this unit, right out of CVICU/CVSICU and only in those 2 units for the absolute bare minimum 1,2 maybe 3 days max, they went to those 2 units fresh from the OR- no PACU. With the amount of nurses staffed- I hated every minute I was at work. It was sheer hell. The nurse patient ratio= 5-6:1!!! all telemonitored, with drips, pump, tubes, chest and vascular dressings, sometimes the internal pacing wires were just capped and surgeons pulled them on the floor, not to mention the army of meds they were on. And we discharged from this floor, ?Amount of time to do discharge teaching??? Discharge what??? Throw the discharge instructions at them was more like it, because SICU was on the phone for the bed. and the supervisor was in your face to see what the hold up was!!! If the patient had to pee before discharge, give them a urinal and tell them to use it on the way home or cross the old legs in the car Which is another issue this regulation is addressing: there needs to be more staff on the floor so the nurse discharging the patient can do a competent job going over discharge instructions. That nurse is the bridge for that transition, but a CEO wouldn't know that.

I think this is going to fall on the administrations shoulders. I don't think the staff nurses should be accepting blame for this. There's not much staff nursing can do on the staff level.

These patient satisfaction surveys are nice CEO ego building fluff BS. If the nurse smiles and does the ADIET script, and behaves like unskilled the maid service the CEO thinks they are, the patient thinks 'service' in this hotel is wonderful. Then gets home and bang- CHF or sepsis a few days to weeks after discharge. Goes to show just how much the CEO really knows the health care industry. This Medicare reg. is objective data.

I also agree- these sick patient's should always be sent home with a Home Health RN next day follow up visit. How come the hospital CEO didn't come up with that solution.

[cdsga]

You know-37 deg. No one is calling names here. We appreciate your posts. However, you are becoming a little confrontational.

This latest entry could be a situation in any unit anywhere in the world on any given day. Is it like that everyday? No. We do have periods of time where staffed beds are in short supply. Back in the 80's I worked in ICU and when my shift ended there was no relief-and we HAD to stay another shift-or abandon our patients. So we worked 16 hours and came back the next day. That situations went on for a while-we worked together to do the best we could do for our patients. We survived, our patients survived and we became the most bonded team ever experienced, because we worked together for a common goal. Over all these years, I can count on one hand team experiences like that. They are a rare thing-the chemistry and synergy was right on. Once you experience that synergy-you want to have it again, and it just doesn't happen that often. Inspirational leadership is the key to weathering these harsh conditions.

You have situations like these where supervisors are in bed meetings coordinating how many patients they can triage out and how quickly they can do so. It's a constant situation, that nurses at the bedside don't always get to see or know how decisions are made.

We all are concerned with our own situation not the situation as a whole. You do what you can with what you have. The supervisors of course practice trickle down pressure on the staff nurse. That's a harsh reality. You, as a staff nurse, explain factually what is going on, express your concerns, then get the mandate and act on it.

If you can't work in that type of environment-then move on. No nurse is forced to stay in a situation where they don't ethically or morally agree with the management. If you are forced to stay due to your financial situation then work on a way of escape. I have noticed that people focus on the negatives and take the positives as expectations of normalcy. Better to understand that we work together on hard days and celebrate the good days-nothing stays the same.

[zoidberg, BSN, RN]

so... i think after discussing and reading, I have figured that maybe there aren't any rights bestowed upon us at birth, but rather rights that the current society(can be more than one nation) values and decides to protect. Using the US, this includes voting, education, a trial by jury, having police to protect you, etc. Where this discussion comes in is do we want to include basic health care in what we value as important to our citizens. The points of view seen include

no, it is too expensive;

no, people need to work harder to earn money to pay for healthcare;

no, we must keep healthcare free-market and govt free to encourage innovation

yes, it is economically sound to provide care to everyone to keep ER costs down;

yes, it is the morally right thing to do and it shows that we have advanced to a point in time as a race of humans who care for each member equally.

I find that the more information I learn on this subject, the more undecided I get, and the more I realize that there is no answer. Each answer has its own problems. We should also focus on the problems of each, and decide which course of action's negatives will be the easiest to compensate for.

(Not saying the conversation has gone too far off course, but it usually helps to stay kind-of on track, just since I have enjoyed this thread so much, lets keep it going.)

[joanna73, BSN, RN]

Actually, given the explosive political nature of this topic, I must commend the posters. With the exception of a few posts, the posters and comments have been rather civil and insightful, which makes for an interesting debate. Although we disagree on various points, we have managed to keep this discussion going. Thank you. It could easily have become very ugly.