Is Healthcare a Right or a Privilege - Research Paper Example

?RUNNING HEAD: AN INVESTIGATIVE ANALYSIS An Investigative Analysis: “Is Healthcare a Right or a Privilege?” An Investigative Analysis: “Is Healthcare a Right or a Privilege?” Introduction The question whether healthcare is a right or a privilege may engender a number of controversies since the definition of healthcare itself is ambiguous and contextual. The concept of healthcare as a right is not as strong as a privilege is. Yet a deeper analysis of the concept of healthcare will show that healthcare is neither a right nor a privilege. Indeed the popular question whether healthcare is a right or a privilege paradoxically keeps one’s mind distracted from which the idea of one’s right or privilege originates by allowing him or her to choose exclusively from two sets of polar answers. If the concept of healthcare is deemed as a right, healthcare as a privilege becomes self-evident and contradictory with the definition of right itself. Those, who are willing to argue that healthcare is a right, simultaneously propose a bunch of policies that ultimately turns healthcare as privilege. In this regard, Brian T. Schwarz (2008) says, “Ironically, those who claim health care is “a right and not a privilege” support policies that make it a privilege” (p.1). Even both theoretically and ethically healthcare as a privilege are more reasoning than it as a right. Since philosophically the definition of right pivots on the commonality of the individuals’ ability to do and to have anything that sustains them both physically and mentally, the concept of healthcare as a right requires some additional attributes. Healthcare is a Product produced by those in this Field In the first place, healthcare as a right asserts that one has the right to take care of one’s health to avail themselves of the available healthcare options. Also the basic concept of ‘right’ ensures that one’s right must not be entitled to what others produce without their consents. That is, one’s right must not harm others’ right. In the following lines MA Faria (1997) delineates what natural right is and what a state’s role in preserving it is: “Natural rights embody the concept of individual autonomy and negative rights that are inalienable and inherent to human beings. Natural rights…..like human rights can be exercised by all individuals simultaneously without infringing and trampling on the rights of others.” (p.98) If analyzed deeply, it will be evident that “healthcare consists of diagnoses and treatments by highly-trained medical professionals. It involves sophisticated products, instruments, and tests designed and developed at great investment, effort, and cost by scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs. That is, people produce health care” (Schwarz, 2008, p. 2). The pattern of healthcare market in the USA has flourished to the stage at which the status of healthcare as a product has been rather boosted up by the mode the production of healthcare service. On one hand, the US healthcare industry has excelled both qualitatively and quantitatively in the past few decades. On the other hand, healthcare-cost has increased many times, as it is said in an article, According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Americans spent $1.3 trillion, or 13.2 percent of the gross domestic product, on health care in 2000. Since the mid-1960s, health care costs have increased at double-digit levels, far exceeding the rate of inflation. (Barlett & James, 2006, p. 34) In the face of the increasing cost of medical-care in the private, the Health Saving Account was started as a tax advantaged medical savings account in 2003. Health saving account (HSA) is an investment in individual health an option differentiated from health insurance cover. In this account the patient deposits savings in order to pay for their health care needs. This account allows people to pay for current health expenses and save for future medical and retiree health expenses on a tax-free basis. The goal of these savings accounts is to help patients control their health costs at the same time checking exorbitant insurance premiums. Consumer-directed health care plans are programs tailored to give the consumers an upper hand in managing heir finances when it comes to health care. Finances are no longer under the custody of third party players but are under the care of patients. The objective of the High Deductible Health Plan (HDHP) is to minimize spending by ensuring that consumers are aware of the expenditure incurred due to their health care expenses. Research studies have found those lower-income individuals and those with serious health concerns will particularly be at risk, as these consumers bear the burden of higher out-of-pocket costs so this kind of program is ideal for them. The private market has failed because they discriminate against the old, disabled and people suffering from terminal diseases. As a group, people with disabilities or chronic conditions experience higher-than-average health care costs and have difficulty gaining access to affordable private health insurance coverage, they are overcharged or even denied access to decent treatment possible. Adverse selection causes the providers to discriminate against the old, disabled and people with chronic diseases. Moral Hazard: any conduct, which contravenes the normal, conduct, for example where people mistreat the old or offer mediocre services to the disabled people in the society. As the federal state mandated the employers to accord health insurance to their employees, medical care has become unaffordable. The premiums paid are normally high but the services accorded are mediocre since the insurance companies want to maximize on profit at the employees expense this leads to moral hazard because the employees don’t get full value for their money. Owing to the high premiums charged, employees are paid less and the insurance companies reap all the benefits making health care unaffordable. The presence of a single player program in health care fraternity will make the field manageable because the government will be able to access and assess all their transactions and determine their credibility. In single player system entrepreneurs are most likely going to be ahead of the people who are trying to regulate the system and there will be limited benefits obtained from addition money spent on health care. Dilemma of Considering Healthcare as a Right Ensuring healthcare as one’s right, when healthcare is to be deemed as others’ product, is bound to prepare some plots in which people’s rights are violated. Therefore, one’s right to have healthcare facilities, as far as others’ rights are not harmed, can be considered as healthcare right. Since establishing healthcare as a right is not possible without violating others’ right, healthcare is more of a privilege than a right. In this regard, Brian T. Schwartz (2008) says, “Health care is not a right. Rights are freedoms of action, not entitlements to what others produce. A “right” to healthcare violates the rights of those who produce it.” (p. 2) Therefore the ethical dilemma of considering healthcare as a right lies in the ambiguity of the term “healthcare”. This ambiguity has been further clarified in Schwarz’s speech: “There’s no right to health care, just as there’s no right to happiness. But the pursuit of happiness is a right. Similarly, everyone has the right to pursue medical treatment through voluntary exchange with those who produce it” (2008, p. 2). When healthcare is considered as a product then it is the right of a doctor or its producer to have the freedom to sell it or give away. But if healthcare is considered as a right, it is everyone’s right to have the healthcare whether the doctors or the producers of healthcare want to give it away or not. Therefore simply the term “healthcare” is product, it is not a right. Since healthcare is not a right, it cannot be a privilege either. Robert Sade (2009) comments on the dilemma of considering healthcare as right: “It is the provision of this service [healthcare] that a doctor depends upon for his livelihood, and his means of supporting his own life. If the right to healthcare belongs to the patient, he starts out owning the services of a doctor without the necessity of either earning them or receiving them as a gift from the only man who has the right to give them, the doctor himself." (p. 182) Indeed if healthcare is considered as a right, everyone should have equal and unbiased access to it. But the nature, pattern and cost of healthcare are such tied with each other that one’s proper and effective treatment may maim others’ healthcare facilities. For example, older people generally need much care. Also they suffer a lot from diseases. Health care in US is not affordable and this is due to growth in health care costs and increasing instability in health insurance coverage. The health care insurance premiums are very high making it very expensive for US citizens to take medical cover. According to The National Coalition on Health Care, the premiums paid by citizens in order to gain health insurance are exorbitant; there is increased per capita costs which keep on rising. These factors contribute to high medical costs in the U.S. Technology has great positive impacts on human life. The modern innovation in health care has both positive and negative effect on the system of health care. One on hand it has made treatment more effective on the other hand it raises cost. Consequently financially less able people cannot get access to modern treatment. Generally the health care expanses are comparative high in Japan and America. Because of this high cost of treatment has forced many people to visit Asian and European countries. The health care policies of the governments of European Countries contribute to drawing the patient-pool from America to Europe. The federation should adapt age worthy policies to resolve the existing troubles and problems in the health care issues. The funds and the support of the federation are crucial to make the cheap and up-to-date standards in the field of healthcare. Reports generated by the U.S. Census Bureau in the year 2007 indicate that 45.657 million Americans are not under health insurance cover. In the state of California 6.720 million people lacked health insurances by the end of 2007 were without health insurance. When people lack insurance cover it does not mean they can’t access medical care, however the implication is they are compelled to pay for their health bills and they have no privileges attached to insurance cover whatsoever. About 50 million Americans lack medical insurance, and a similar number are underinsured (Engel, 2006, pp. 58-67). The uninsured are excluded from services, charged more for services, and die when medical care could save them hence it’s very crucial to have a medical cover employers must strive to accord their employees this privilege. Universal Healthcare as a Right A universal mandatory healthcare system will be all encompassing so that the entire citizen will reap maximum benefits from the health care system. In a free market system the health care costs are reduced to minimal levels so that all individuals can gain access to medical attention. The medicine is sold at subsidized price so that all people can afford it. The United Nations declared universally in the year 1948 "everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of oneself and one's family, including food, clothing, housing, and medical care." Meaning that, every individual has a right to be provided with decent health care hence deeming personal medical care as a basic right. Personal medical insurance may not be a basic human right, what is important is that people have access to health care facilities and receive good attention. Insurance is expensive and it would cost the government a lot in terms of revenue, offering subsidized services would be a better option since it will be less expensive and easy to regulate by the government. Medical drugs are sold at very expensive prices; the government should fight to ensure that people could afford to buy drugs at lower prices. Conclusion Healthcare is neither a privilege nor a right. Rather in a crude objective sense it is a product. It is a doctor’s right to distribute it according to his or her will. On the other hand it is a man’s right to pursue it. Without the disambiguation of healthcare it is absurd to call it a privilege. ‘Pursuit of healthcare’ can be called a right. But ‘receiving healthcare’ is obviously not a right. Therefore simply the term “healthcare” is neither a right nor a privilege. For Schwarz, a special group or community receives state-provided healthcare under certain policies, only then healthcare can be considered as a privilege, as he says in this regard, “When government enforces an alleged “right” to health care, the political class decides what health care is and when it’s appropriate for people to get it. That is, health care becomes a privilege granted by those in charge” (2008, p. 1). Since healthcare as well as medical care is a product that is produced and supplied by a group of individuals, it is the right of those producer-individuals to sell or supply their products. A government owned healthcare system may provide free healthcare facilities considering it as the rights of the citizens. Yet since a government has to depend on taxes, the state-provided healthcare facilities cannot be considered as rights of those who do not pay the taxes. In this regard Maria (1997) says, When governments transcend these rights with welfare rights, entitlements, and redistribution of wealth schemes — in the name of compassion, utilitarianism, or some greater common good — it squarely infringes upon the autonomy and basic rights of individuals and corrupts the negative concept of the law."(p. 96) Rather state-provided healthcare facilities are more of charity than a right. Logically the taxpayers preserve the right to decide whether their money will be spent for the treatments of a cancer-affected smoker or others who intentionally push themselves towards death through substance-abuse or simply others patients. One may say that the taxpayers should consent to the provision of healthcare to all equally. But obviously a taxpayer should do it but he should not be compelled since freedom of action or the concept of natural right does not permit it. References Barlett, D. L., & James B. S. (2006). Critical Condition: How Health Care in America Became Big Business-and Bad Medicine. California: Broadway LLC. Engel, J. (2006). Poor People's Medicine: Medicaid and American Charity Care since1965. Ohio: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press. Faria M.A Jr. (1997) Health care as a right. Medical Warrior: Fighting Corporate Socialized Medicine Macon, Georgia: Hacienda Publishing, Inc., 94-103. Sade, R. M. (2009). Medical Care as a Right: A Refutation. Cross Cultural Perspectives in Medical Ethics, New York: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 179- 183 Schwarz, B. T. (2008). Health Care Is Not a Privilege … Nor Is It a Right. Retrieved on 27 Sep 2008 from http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/health-care-is-not-a-privilege-nor-is-it-a-right/?singlepage=true Read More