global politics Right to Health

[Oshawott]

Do you think people should be given the 'Right to Health'.

For example, in countries like UK, the government offers their citizens free or subsidised health care because they have the right to health and it is the responsibility of the state to look after the healthcare needs of their citizens.

In certain countries like India, the basic healthcare is free and that is fully subsidised by the state.

In countries like US, there is no right to health and most of the times, the citizens have to take care of their rights, by the way of insurance.

Which do you think is the right approach?

 

[Apsara]

In my country, the right to health is constitutionally protected, but implementing it fully is difficult due to our developing economy. While I believe everyone should have access to healthcare, financial constraints and infrastructure challenges make universal coverage unrealistic for now.

 

[Unvarnished]

Yes, the Right to Health is a basic human right! Access to good healthcare must be available to all men and women, regardless of who they are. Governments have a moral obligation to their citizens to care for their health and wellbeing.

 

[Harsh World]

Everyone has the right to health.

Nobody has the right to force someone else to pay for that though. You can pay for it yourself by being a contributing member of society. There are rare exemptions that I would make to that though.

 

[ActionAce]

The Right to Health is that of a just society. Healthcare to everyone is an effective way for a government to fight inequality, improve health and enhance economic productivity. It is one of the most investment-worthy opportunities in human capital and basic rights as people.

 

[Oshawott]

Everyone has the right to health.

Nobody has the right to force someone else to pay for that though. You can pay for it yourself by being a contributing member of society. There are rare exemptions that I would make to that though.

But see this issue with UK or Germany.

It is a protected legal right, but the waiting times are so high that it is pointless to offer the right to health as a legal right. Also, it becomes a pull factor for so many migrants that it also causes a demographic shift in the nation.

Is the UK benefitting from it substantially? I doubt.

 

[Harsh World]

It is a protected legal right, but the waiting times are so high that it is pointless to offer the right to health as a legal right. Also, it becomes a pull factor for so many migrants that it also causes a demographic shift in the nation.

This is also a problem in Japan with national care here too.

I had to wait about a year to get into a hospital for hormone panel testing (testing 3 times daily for 2 weeks) for a diagnosis.

What did that year take away from me by not having the appropriate amount of growth hormone? I'll never know. But if I were in the States, I could've walked in and got it right away with my insurance.

Yes, reduced growth hormone (GH) levels can contribute to early mortality, particularly if it leads to growth hormone deficiency (GHD) in adults or children. GHD is associated with increased cardiovascular risk, metabolic dysfunction, weakened immunity, reduced bone density, cognitive decline, and muscle loss, all of which can impact lifespan.

 

[Oshawott]

This is also a problem in Japan with national care here too.

I had to wait about a year to get into a hospital for hormone panel testing (testing 3 times daily for 2 weeks) for a diagnosis.

What did that year take away from me by not having the appropriate amount of growth hormone? I'll never know. But if I were in the States, I could've walked in and got it right away with my insurance.

Oh That is totally unacceptable.

A person having to wait for one year to know the diagnosis and the anxiety is produces impairs your liberty too much!

What about citizens who are willing to pay higher premium for timely treatment. is that permitted?