It is a sad fact that medical care has become horrendously expensive. Many people only regard the value of their health when they become ill or when they contract a disease. Those that can afford it pay for medical insurance or health plans and they are able to obtain the best possible care when they need it. The question about providing healthcare for the poor and undeserved people remains a contentious issue in many countries.
There are those that are of the opinion that medical care should only be given to those that are able to pay for it. They argue that all services are expensive and that those that cannot pay for gas should not have gas, that those that cannot afford it should not have medicine. They say that a democracy is about the creation of wealth, not the distribution of wealth.
On the other hand, humanists are arguing that it is the duty of society to look after the whole of society, including those that are destitute, jobless or needy. The state is there to look after and to represent everybody, not just the wealthy and the productive citizens. Catering for the needs of every single citizen, regardless of the social status of that person is enshrined in the constitution of most democracies.
The fact is that there are numerous advantages in providing medical care for everyone, even if such care is basic. Sick people are not productive, cannot work and they overwhelm the social assistance programs of any government. Also, prevention is better than cure. By identifying diseases early and by providing basic treatment, more serious developments can be prevented, thereby relieving the pressure upon the entire public health system.
If no public health system exist conditions such as measles, HIV and tuberculosis, to name just a few, can easily affect even those people that are actually able to afford medical care. This can be prevented by affording medical care to anyone that is ill. Simply put, it is in the best interest of society to ensure a healthy society.
There is another matter that should be considered. In a democracy, government must see every single citizen as equal, regardless of income, status, race, religion or creed. This means that everybody should be afforded the same privileges and few people will argue that health care is not a basic privilege or even a basic right. Elected governments have an obligation towards every person in their constituency.
The cost of medical services is expensive. Many people begrudge the additional taxes that they have to pay to finance public medical schemes. There will always be poor people, people in prisons and people that are simply not able to contribute towards society. They simply cannot be left to rot. They need to eat and they need medical attention.
Healthcare for the poor and undeserved, misnomer as the latter is has been a contentious issue for a long time. Nobody should be denied critical care and nobody should go hungry. That is the dream of the free world and those that have should help sponsor those that do not have. The ability to give should be seen as a privilege.
There are those that are of the opinion that medical care should only be given to those that are able to pay for it. They argue that all services are expensive and that those that cannot pay for gas should not have gas, that those that cannot afford it should not have medicine. They say that a democracy is about the creation of wealth, not the distribution of wealth.
On the other hand, humanists are arguing that it is the duty of society to look after the whole of society, including those that are destitute, jobless or needy. The state is there to look after and to represent everybody, not just the wealthy and the productive citizens. Catering for the needs of every single citizen, regardless of the social status of that person is enshrined in the constitution of most democracies.
The fact is that there are numerous advantages in providing medical care for everyone, even if such care is basic. Sick people are not productive, cannot work and they overwhelm the social assistance programs of any government. Also, prevention is better than cure. By identifying diseases early and by providing basic treatment, more serious developments can be prevented, thereby relieving the pressure upon the entire public health system.
If no public health system exist conditions such as measles, HIV and tuberculosis, to name just a few, can easily affect even those people that are actually able to afford medical care. This can be prevented by affording medical care to anyone that is ill. Simply put, it is in the best interest of society to ensure a healthy society.
There is another matter that should be considered. In a democracy, government must see every single citizen as equal, regardless of income, status, race, religion or creed. This means that everybody should be afforded the same privileges and few people will argue that health care is not a basic privilege or even a basic right. Elected governments have an obligation towards every person in their constituency.
The cost of medical services is expensive. Many people begrudge the additional taxes that they have to pay to finance public medical schemes. There will always be poor people, people in prisons and people that are simply not able to contribute towards society. They simply cannot be left to rot. They need to eat and they need medical attention.
Healthcare for the poor and undeserved, misnomer as the latter is has been a contentious issue for a long time. Nobody should be denied critical care and nobody should go hungry. That is the dream of the free world and those that have should help sponsor those that do not have. The ability to give should be seen as a privilege.
About the Author:
You can visit www.micglobalvision.com for more helpful information about Why Healthcare For The Poor And Undeserved Is A Contentious Issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment