Healthcare is NOT a basic human right.

Nurses Activism

Published

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.

As I have witnessed in my own home with a friend of mine who was injured, while self-employed with no insurance, went to a free clinic, they found him treatment and he enrolled in a hospital program that waived his payment. He renews his eligibility annually. My daughter who was in between jobs with no insurance was able to get treated and negotiated a payment plan with her local hospital-and I helped her some as I was able to. There are ways to get treatment and negotiate-you just have to ask. Most people don't-pride, lack of knowledge-don't know, but you can find a way. I don't mean to be preachy-but if you are young, have medical issues, need care for chronic problems, then that should be a priority. Do they go out to eat?, Do they go to movies?, Do they own a smart phone? Do they pay for car insurance?Do they have cable /satellite or , Do they get their hair or nails done every 6 weeks? I mean you have to make hard choices on where you are going to budget your hard earned money.

I totally agree!!!!! I think many people need a course in consumer math followed up with an explanation of "Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs". I know it is frustrating to work all week and not be able to "treat" yourself to something but it seems that many in our society have lost the meaning of sacrifice and of "all things in moderation" Just look at walmart and the huge amount of total junk they sell everyday. Next take the issue of refined sugar, 40 years ago kids saw candy for Easter, Halloween and some nasty hard stuff at Christmas. Cakes and pies were also only seen for special occasions. Water (many times drank from a hose) was the main source of beverage, with milk for meals and soda as a special treat. Car pools weren't a public service announcement but every family in my neighborhood knew the concept (out of necessity). Everyone I knew had a TV but many didn't have color and most didn't have cable. New clothes were bought before each school year and 2 pairs of pants was to last until they were replaced at Christmas! (considered your big gift) It goes on and on. No we don't want to go back there but that's the difference. Wants are only wants. Yes healthcare is important and should be just about the second thing to be paid every month right behind housing that one can afford. Ok done with my soapbox

Specializes in ED, LTC, SNF, Med/Surg.

"The "choice" only exists on the side of the consumer, not on the side of the provider."

Again, this is wrong. Go through the phone book and call some doctors offices, particularly specialists, and ask if they are accepting new patients. You'll find that many are CHOOSING not to accept new patients. Also providers make a choice to practice in the first place. So your whole argument that there is no choice is null and void.

"Article 4, section 2, clause 3."

You mean this? "No Person held to Service or Labour in one State, under the Laws thereof, escaping into another, shall, in Consequence of any Law or Regulation therein, be discharged from such Service or Labour, But shall be delivered up on Claim of the Party to whom such Service or Labour may be due." This is hardly a constitutional allowance of slavery, by the federal government, rather an affirmation of states rights. None the less the clause is superceded by the 13th amendment anyways. There is a process for changing the constitution, unfortunately the ACA just undermines the constitution without the proper process.

As for the enumeration clause - ""The Constitution contains the enumeration clause, which counts slaves as 3/5's of a person, the entire reason for needing this definition was that theFederal government did not allow slaves to vote."

Wrong again! Article 1, Section 2, deals with the house of representatives, taxes and how they are apportioned. "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons." How you get "the federal government did not allow slaves to vote" out of that is mind boggling.

Who taught you constitutional law? Barry Soetoro?

Specializes in ICU, PACU, OR.

So you're argument over access to healthcare insurance is?? The woman in this post had insurance and still couldn't pay the bill. What is the issue. The post is about the right to health care and insurance. she had both and still couldn't pay. So she got the care-she still got sued? Something is missing. She either didn't fulfill her end of the negotiation or didn't pay-there's another side to this story.

If you are given access to healthcare insurance and healthcare-and you still can't afford to pay the amount you are responsible for, should it be written off? Are you saying that healthcare should be free?

Specializes in Oncology, Med/Surg, Hospice, Case Mgmt..
So you're argument over access to healthcare insurance is?? The woman in this post had insurance and still couldn't pay the bill. What is the issue. The post is about the right to health care and insurance. she had both and still couldn't pay. So she got the care-she still got sued? Something is missing. She either didn't fulfill her end of the negotiation or didn't pay-there's another side to this story.

If you are given access to healthcare insurance and healthcare-and you still can't afford to pay the amount you are responsible for, should it be written off? Are you saying that healthcare should be free?

That post was not about the Affordable Healthcare Act, it was in response to your post about "negotiating". Many years ago, I was told that if you had a hospital bill, either with or without insurance, you could just talk to them and "negotiate" and make whatever payment you could afford, even if it was "just $50.00 a mos." and that was true....then. Not now. I had a $4,000.00 hospital bill 6 years ago and they would not negotiate any payments. They wanted the full amount right then and there. I had to put it on a credit card. This was just a month after discharge. If I had not paid the full amount on the credit card, they would have turned me over to a collection agency.

So, I'm just saying that if negotiating and making payments worked for you and yours, consider yourself lucky. Not the case for everyone. I support the mandate and single-payer.

Specializes in Oncology, Med/Surg, Hospice, Case Mgmt..
I totally agree they need to get themselves insurance. It's not very good "consumer math" to be able to afford insurance and yet still be paying as a self pay. Whether insurance is available thru the workplace or not does not necessarily mean it is going to cost less (especially once the ACA has totally been initiated). If they can afford it, they need to go shopping around and find a plan that meets their needs. If they look into various organizations they may even be able to get into a group insurance plan. In addition, if there are so many people that fit into this category then they can call up BC/BS or fill in the blank insurance company and actually "create" a group plan. Sort of like what the small business org has done for self employed people. A back yard mechanic who is self employed and yet is barely getting by or maybe he is the most successful one in town. Either way they both would qualify to open a policy that has group rates and bargaining power.

Thank you. I don't know if he has tried to purchase individual coverage, but I will ask. He has Addison's disease, so I don't think they can refuse him, but I'm not sure if that will make the premiums much higher. Insurance premiums and taxes hurt, I know, but have any of you ever priced a CT scan or MRI without coverage? I'm not talking about a routine physical or routine labs, here. Some people need special labwork, tests, scans and procedures that are outrageous without insurance. The steroids he has to take every day for the rest of his life are also expensive and I think he goes without sometimes.

If he doesn't take his steroids for awhile, he can all of a sudden become severely hypotensive, disoriented and incontinent. Someone will call an ambulance or rush him to the ER and he ends up in ICU for days. He's 27 years old. The above scenario happened to him twice before he was diagnosed. He was lucky then, he was covered by his father's insurance. If this happened to him tomorrow because he struggles to pay for his medication, guess who foots the bill then?

I've never known him to have his nails done and he doesn't own a smart phone. I think he's more concerned with paying his share of the rent in the apartment he shares with a roommate, gas for his old battered car, food to eat and his community college tuition. I'm pretty sure any leftover money he has from his full-time job he uses to buy his steroid tablets.

Specializes in Rehab, LTC, Peds, Hospice.

I don't think the people who post about 'forgoing' getting their nails done, etc. Have any real life experience in life without health care themselves. I have a friend, who had a stroke at 33 years old. She lost her job at the health care facility we worked at because she needed to be on light duty and a shorter work schedule at first but 'couldn't meet the requirements for the job.' despite all of her coworkers going to the DON and offering our vacation time and support with her patient care. She lost her job and health benefits. They even challenged her unemployment - but she won that judgement. She made too much money last year to qualify for help this year. I helped to organize fund raising for her. I helped find services for her and her children. Yes - there is help out there but it's sporadic, regional and not anywhere near enough for the actual costs of health care. And no, not all hospitals will negotiate. Like I pointed out before, many bankruptsys are due to medical bills. Look it up.

Specializes in Wilderness Medicine, ICU, Adult Ed..

[quote=JMBnurse

Not directed at just you, CountyRat, but what should Americans who work full time and can't get insurance coverage do? I know many people in this situation. Some with medical conditions that require medication and regular follow-up care and they don't receive it because they cannot afford it and they do not qualify for Medicaid.

What should they do?

JMBnurse, I apologize for taking so long to reply to your post.

One of the burdens that we who oppose the ACA must bear is the assumption that because we do not support that law, we oppose fixing what is wrong with our healthcare system, which is not true. However, this thread is about whether healthcare is an inherent human right. In my post I tried to address that question without expanding to other questions.

I would be very interested to know what you think of the argument I offered for why healthcare cannot be a right, but rather, is a need. Is anything that I wrote inaccurate? I hope that I hear from you JMBnurse. I would like to read your comments in response.

Best wishes.

Specializes in ICU, PACU, OR.

You know-we all know people who have terrible stories of health problems that are expensive. We have people with insurance who also file for bankruptcy for catastrophic illness cost. Are these the norm? When we are in a general forum we talk in general terms, and some people will always fall out of the loop-while on ACA. Is healthcare cost out of control? Yes. Is some reform needed? Yes. Is Obama Care the answer? Not in my opinion. There is a need for the feds to be out of the situation. States need to run their medicaid programs, adjust their tax situation to fund the program and run it adequately and responsibly. Is that something I can influence? Yes at the ballot box, being involved in my organizations (nursing and political), and writing to my congressional representatives. I can become certified in my specialty, so that I can be a clinical expert and be used to review and consult in legal issues.

Healthcare is a need/not a right. We have a moral and ethical obligation based on our religious and moral belief systems, which can vary greatly, as to what we should do for our fellowman. Not everyone is obliged to help the downtrodden. Not everyone feels we should ignore our neighbor. But we all are individuals and should pay into established programs as required by law with established taxes, and do extra as we are led by conscience.

Specializes in Oncology, Med/Surg, Hospice, Case Mgmt..
JMBnurse, I apologize for taking so long to reply to your post.

One of the burdens that we who oppose the ACA must bear is the assumption that because we do not support that law, we oppose fixing what is wrong with our healthcare system, which is not true. However, this thread is about whether healthcare is an inherent human right. In my post I tried to address that question without expanding to other questions.

I would be very interested to know what you think of the argument I offered for why healthcare cannot be a right, but rather, is a need. Is anything that I wrote inaccurate? I hope that I hear from you JMBnurse. I would like to read your comments in response.

Best wishes.

Sorry, CountyRat, we have been hashing out whether or not healthcare is a right for almost 3 weeks now, so the discussion has expanded a little from time to time. I believe that you are correct- Healthcare is a need. I also believe it is a human right. I believe for too long now in this country it has been a privilege and therein lies the problem. I believe that healthcare should be attainable and affordable for all, not just wealthy people and people who graduated from college and have good jobs like most of the posters here. I am not as worried about the poor as we have provided healthcare for them. I am more concerned about those who work hard every day and still do not have access to affordable decent healthcare. I think that is a travesty. As a nurse and a mother, I worry about parents debating whether to take their child to the doctor or an emergency room because they don't have the money and it may be something serious. I don't spend a lot of time worrying about abusers and people who play the system as I believe that is a small percentage and it will be there no matter what we do. Thank you for your response.

Specializes in ED, LTC, SNF, Med/Surg.

"I believe that you are correct- Healthcare is a need. I also believe it is a human right. I believe for too long now in this country it has been a privilege and therein lies the problem."

I could make a case that "healthcare" is not a need, but that is a discussion for another thread and another place. As for it being a human right, it is not. You have a right to your life and your property, but not to the lives of other's and their property, which includes their goods and services. Healthcare is a service. You are not entitled to someone else providing you their service for free. This would essentially be slavery. I think we can all agree that slavery is wrong.

Additionally, as I've said before, healthcare in the US is not exclusively reserved as a privilege for the rich. Any hospital that accepts federal funds must treat you regardless of your ability to pay. This is one of the biggest myths being permeated today. That you can't get care if you are poor. In all actuality, you get better care if you are poor because the government, through the theft of others, will foot the bill. Health care is expensive. I don't go to work everyday for free, and neither do any of my co-workers. This is something I think the proponents of the ACA seem to ignore or are completely hypocritical on.

They love to champion the rights of the "poor" whom I've also pointed out before aren't even truly poor, they have cell phones, internet, food, shelter, etc. etc. Try not having water safe to drink or knowing where your next meal will come from, that's poor.

Yet these very same people go to work everyday and make a decent wage, but I never see them at the local churches volunteering for free community meals. I never see them at the food bank handing out free food. They're not at the community health fairs either, donating their time, knowledge, and experience. They're not giving a portion of their paycheck every week to the United Way. It seems they're only generous and real champions of the poor when someone else pays for it!

Despite having well over 1/2 of my income being stolen in taxes, I still donate to charity, volunteer, and contribute selflessly to the "greater good." Maybe if we didn't force people to "pay if forward" they would do it on their own, and MUCH more effectively. Let's not forget it wasn't that long ago that almost all hospitals and nursing homes were run by charity. No one ever got turned away and we had the highest standard of care in the world. It seems to me that the direction we are going with government managed care is not the right one.

Specializes in Oncology, Med/Surg, Hospice, Case Mgmt..

If you don't want to pay taxes at all, well good luck with that. If it were up to me, I would prefer to take the taxes we already pay and instead of using all of that money to buy more "uniforms" we don't need, use it for healthcare for our citizens.

If you don't want to pay taxes at all, well good luck with that. If it were up to me, I would prefer to take the taxes we already pay and instead of using all of that money to buy more "uniforms" we don't need, use it for healthcare for our citizens.

I agree with you that not paying taxes is a "pipe dream". However I don't think we need to sit back and let Wash DC continue down the path they're on. Taxes on the Federal level needs to be interstate needs.(Defense from foreign and domestic enemies, infrastructure like, railroads, roads, dams, etc. and other federal issues). Taxes that affect a single group of people like schools, healthcare possibly (if the people see it as a need that they consider a priority), etc need to be at a local/county/state level. We have it backwards, I would much rather pay the same amount of taxes but with the bulk going to my state level to run the services that my state needs to take care of our sovereign state. It is a whole lot easier to fix a problem starting at the hub of a circle--where you appear to be standing still and the outer area is spinning with chaos. One easy way to see the advantage is just follow your tax dollars. You work for it, the employer has to figure your pay and then your taxes. Then your taxes get sent to Washington, Washington has a HUGE department to decipher and distribute the taxes to other departments. These departments then distribute it back to your state, who then takes your tax dollars and redistributes it back to your community. Each step money is lost thru the cracks (bureaucracy at it's finest). Just my 2 cents! :)

+ Add a Comment