Is Health Care a Right? - page 28

Just want to see your opinion (friendly discussion, no flaming, please). Is health care a right that should be enjoyed equally here in the U.S.? If so, how would this be financed without breaking... Read More

  1. by   KP RN
    Sally, I had to read your post (#341) several times to try to make sense of it. Susy made a statement regarding the need to have consistent financial burdens on taxpayers to pay for health care. Your solution suggest that physicians would not be able to prescribe therapies or treatments which YOU deem to be too expensive, if YOU don't think the patient can go on to have any semblance of quality of life; and patient and family input would not be valued or respected?? I understand futile care, and I am thankful that I am not in the burdensome position to determine how care and/or resources are rationed.
    In answer to your question, Sally, I would certainly expect to be involved in the decision making process for whatever ailment my grandmother might have. Even if it meant a $4,000.00 bag of IV medication would be "wasted" on her.
    The assertion that your patients are "living and breathing classroom experiments" is disturbing. Perhaps you should go to your hospitals ethics committee to discuss your concerns for these patients....
    Lastly, I do agree that hospitals waste a lot of money. However, suggesting cutbacks and skimping on patient care and services would be the LAST possible way I would choose to save the budget....
  2. by   maureeno
    Talk to doctors and many will say they themselves are not in charge of their practices. We hear lots about HMO's denying care but on the other hand a bigger problem is our consumer/litiginous mentality. The most care is not necessarily the best care. The more expensive treatment might not be better. Many proceedures are driven by CYA [cover your self], can't chance a law suit, not medical judgement.
    I think nurses have a great role in helping patients and their families understand the complexities of care. Hopefully all of your friends and families have advanced directives.
  3. by   researchrabbit
    Originally posted by cmggriff
    Human beings are born with certain inalienable rights. These are defined in the Constitution of the United States.
    Um no. These rights are considered inalienable here, and in some other countries, but they are only as good as the government in charge is willing to make them (for example, slavery was legal while these rights were in force).

    Just because we put it in our Constitution doesn't mean that other countries don't have other rights THEY consider inalienable.

    Plus, look at that whole life thing. You deny someone a vent who needs it, you might as well shoot them.
  4. by   KC CHICK
    Karen, I don't think you understood completely what was being discussed. Sally is not alone in her beliefs that some END OF LIFE patients are being prescribed tx that they absolutely DO NOT NEED and do not AFFECT THE OUTCOME.....which is death. Yes, it is VERY wasteful.
    Read my post about the DNR patients and you will understand my position as well. post#345
    Keep in mind that these were KNOWN terminal patients ...by their families and docs. The patients in these examples were comatose.

    Anne
  5. by   OzNurse69
    Originally posted by researchrabbit
    Um no. These rights are considered inalienable here, and in some other countries, but they are only as good as the government in charge is willing to make them (for example, slavery was legal while these rights were in force).

    Just because we put it in our Constitution doesn't mean that other countries don't have other rights THEY consider inalienable.

    Plus, look at that whole life thing. You deny someone a vent who needs it, you might as well shoot them.
    You took the words right out of my mouth, researchrabbit. The US Constitution does NOT define what my rights as an AUSTRALIAN citizen are.....sorry, guys!!
  6. by   Q.
    Uh, sorry to speak for you Gary but...

    Gary used the term "human being" without really thinking, if you will. Seeing as the topic "Is Health Care a Right" is coming from an American POV/problem, so was his response inherently coming from an American POV as well.

    We all know that Australia and other countries have their own definition of "rights." THAT is evident.
    Wait, no! You mean, our Constitution doesn't prevail in Britain? Russia? Japan? C'mon guys.

    *sigh* I hate when people pick apart words rather than responding to the entire message.
    Last edit by Susy K on Feb 5, '03
  7. by   OzNurse69
    Actually, sorry Susy, you're right....I just went back & read the original post, & the poster states "....in the US" -- guess we just have a little inferiority complex over here sometimes -- thanks for your correction!!
  8. by   kmchugh
    Lets see. An apparently great attitude towards life, fun loving, home has the best, prettiest beaches in the world, and an accent that is music. Can't understand why you Aussies would have anything but a SUPERIORITY complex.

    Kevin
  9. by   Furball
    good one!
  10. by   researchrabbit
    But you also missed the point that our rights are not inalienable, even here. Plus definitions of "rights" change over time.

    The sexuality, for example, that we have in our media would not have been seen as "free speech" when the Constitution was framed.

    During the McCarthy era, free speech was actively suppressed.

    Plus there's the liberty issue -- slavery used to be legal here. How was that "liberty"?

    20 years from now, "life" may have been redefined as including wellness -- and healthcare.
  11. by   cmggriff
    Actually, I think every human being born on the face of the planet (or any planet) has theses in alienable rights. I believe goverments should protect and secure those rights. But governments do not grant those rights. Th US Constitution does not grant rights to people. It defines and and outlines the means of securing those rights.

    So I believe the women of muslim nations are also born with those rights. But the people of those and all nations consent to a government that does not protect or even recognize rights for women. Just because a citizenry consents to a government that denies these rights does not mean that these rights do not exist.

    Thanks Susy, you're the best. Gary
  12. by   mother/babyRN
    I think it is a priviledge, personally...I would provide assistance to anyone who needed it, if I could, but in my opinion, it isn't a deserved right status attached to it....
  13. by   JMP
    MotherBabyRN

    How can it be that if a child is born with a serious medical conditon that treatment of the condition is a priviledge? Perhaps it is just the difference in our countries and values of each country that I fail to see it as a priviledge.

    As a side note.... as I read these boards, especially this thread it is so apparent to me ( must be to others also) that so many of the debates fall on the left and right of issues. Health care, as an issue, seems to have the right side cheering for people working for their own health care and the working poor, old and sick can fend for themselves..... while the left tries to argue that every one deserves health care as a fundamental right, regardless.

    Susy and Kevin appear to lead the right side and from some of the private messages I get, lots disagree, but don't (for reasons I don't quite understand) want to disagree in public. To those people I would say, take heart...BE STRONG. Don't fear standing up for what you REALLY believe in.

    It is easy for me to believe in something I already have. I support those who want to be humanitarian in their efforts to ensure proper and descent health care to their families, neighbours and countryman.

Must Read Topics


close