Is Health Care a Right?

cmggriff · Feb 4, 2003

Human beings are born with certain inalienable rights. These are defined in the Constitution of the United States. The right to heath care is not listed so far as I can find. If I choose to smoke 3 packs of cigarettes a day in spite of all the evidence that this is unhealthy, I have the right to do so. (So long as cigarettes are legal.) But why should I be afforded the best in health care if I chose to finance my addiction with money I could have used to purchase heath insurance?

As long as ETOH is a legal drug, I can choose to poison my liver with any number of spirits. If I can't afford booze and insurance, how have I earned the right to multiple blood transfusions to correct the problems I created?

A community (nation) can choose to provide health care to all regardless of ability to pay. But that does not make it a human right. Some communities have tried to gather together all resources produced in that community and then give each member only what was needed. No one gets more than they need or less than they need. This has not worked out well on a large scale or for a long period of time.

Health care is a luxury, not a right. Gary

JNJ · Feb 4, 2003

One measure of a civilized society is the care it takes of those not able to care for themselves.

Any addiction, possibly including a poor lifestyle, can be taken as a problem with mental health.

The term 'socialized' medicine should more properly be called a National Health Service (UK). Think about this - in the UK health care professionals are mainly paid to keep people healthy, where in the USA, health care people mainly get paid when people are sick. There's a huge philosophical difference.

I believe in basic health care coverage for all, even at my expense. This includes health education and immunizations etc.

fergus51 · Feb 4, 2003

What's a GIB? (I work maternity, don't remember a lot about those sick people;)) Is it a GI bleed that alcoholics get with their varicose veins in there?

KP RN · Feb 4, 2003

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....

maureeno · Feb 5, 2003

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.

researchrabbit · Feb 5, 2003

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.

KC CHICK · Feb 5, 2003

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:cool:

OzNurse69 · Feb 5, 2003

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!!

Q. · Feb 5, 2003

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." :rolleyes: 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.

OzNurse69 · Feb 5, 2003

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!!

kmchugh · Feb 5, 2003

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

Furball · Feb 5, 2003

good one!