Is it a Right or a Privilege?
Affiliate Institution
Is it a Right or a Privilege?
Healthcare has been a debate, where many people are trying to argue whether it is a right or a privilege. It is, therefore, important to define the terms for effective understanding. A privilege is something that an individual gets, but he or she has no authority over it. Meaning, he or she cannot demand it, and it is given to the whims of the person who provides it. On the other hand, a right is a constitutional provision that and individual must demand. In fact, there is no negotiation when one should have it. In the United States of America, the same issue got weight, and President Obama responded by giving an edict concerning the same (Oberlander, 2012). For a long time, people have been spending a lot of money to cover their hospital bills. Sometimes it becomes tough for a family who do not have enough money to experience the challenge of seeking good medical exercise in an emergency case. Before it is captured in the constitution, health care remains a privilege that the government offer to the citizens in a given state. Something becomes a fundamental right to claim if the constitution recognises it. Therefore, Americans today enjoy the quality and universal healthcare to everyone. In this sense, health care is an essential right that every citizen must get.
However, Obama care was so categorical in the way an individual should receive medical services in the United States of America, but the , latest statistics show that many people do not get out to enjoy such services. Many folks go for private medications than reaching out to the state sponsored care. This might imply that in the minds of many, the program is only a privilege to the poor. Many Americans believe that the foundation of the Constitution is to provide justice to the folks as reflected in the human rights document. Some people even think that the movement was a political strategy that President Obama initiated to gain the support of the citizens. In fact, the matter lies in the perception of the people rather than the act itself. In the region, the medical expenses are footed by the covers that people take in their areas of employment or on a private basis. People only believe on medical covers for emergencies than relying on the government-sponsored attentions.
According to Moncrieff (2012), one can mention reasons such as inadequate facilities in the support of these programs to make people not to consider them capable. Most of the public hospitals are understaffed. Therefore, it is a challenge to divide the attention of the workers to emergency cases if they become many. For instance, private facilities have been performing well regarding healthcare service provision than the government institution. In reality, the state has an obligation to provide healthcare service to its people. In fact, every government in the world should ensure mechanisms to help the citizens to eradicate poverty, diseases and ignorance. That means that healthcare, employment and education remain essential tenets that every citizen must get. As a result, the citizens of the United States of America should not hesitate to enjoy the act provided in healthcare to support their families. In addition, this should also remain a reflection in other states. More importantly, the state should set aside funds that drive its functions in the provision of healthcare to people.
References
Moncrieff, A. R. (2012). Cost-Benefit Federalism: Reconciling Collective Action Federalism
and Libertarian Federalism in the Obamacare Litigation and Beyond. Am. JL & Med., 38, 288.
Oberlander, J. (2012). The future of Obamacare. New England Journal of Medicine, 367(23),
2165-2167.
