Age-Based Heath Care Rationing
Death is the final destination of all human beings. No one has ever escaped the claws of death and the same trend is going to continue in the future. The older members of our society are more likely to die as a result of biological aging than other factors. In a market driven society like the US, Health care rationing for the old has become a subject of controversy. With inadequate and scarce health care resources, proponents of health care rationing argue that the government should deny the life sustaining medical care for those above the age of 70. The point of view taken by pro health care rationing has come under severe criticism from various factions of the society including the elderly. The Congress resolved to provide health care for all members of the society.
David Callahan argues that the elderly are a new social threat. Health care rationing has to be applied to eliminate that social threat. 12% percent of the American population is above the age of 65. The total population estimate of those above the age of 65 is projected to reach 21% in 2020. The elderly require intensive medical care to sustain their lives. Callahan further argues that the health care system is overburdened the care for the old. Taxpayers are heavily taxed to sustain the Medicare for the aged. To avoid overstretching the health care system, vital life sustaining services such as organ transplant should not be provided to the aged. The aged should only be provided with routine checkups to relieve their pain.
Medical conditions for the elderly are very expensive since they require advanced medical technologies. Callahan argues that it would be for the greater good if the health care for the aged is rationed. The expenditure saved from the budget cuts would be transferred to other sectors such as education that directly benefit the young members of the population. Proponents of age based health care rationing propose that the aged have few economic benefits, and it would be prudent and economically beneficial if the government focused its spending on the younger generation.
Statics shows that the government spends more than $9000 on medical expenses for the elderly per year and less than $ 900 dollars per child. Proponents of age- based rationing such as Callahan argue that the elderly exploit the heath care resources at the disadvantage of the economically viable members of the society. Callahan argues that, by the age of 70 or 80, most people have lived the better part of their life and achieved most of their goals; it would be unfair to allocate a lot of funds to cater for their treatment and sustenance at the expense of those who have not reached half of the normal life span. The Congress escaped the moral and ethical dilemma by funding health services for all.
Every American citizen has an unconditional and unalienable right to life. Both the young and the aged have a right to life, and none is an exception to this fundamental right. Age based rationalization of health care discriminates against one sector of the society in the provision of medical services. Our current political system provides no guarantee that any of the savings generated from rationalization of health care would be directed to the young. The aged should be treated with dignity and respect because they helped to build the union when they were economically viable. They should not be subjected to the fear of neglect due to their advanced years. The Union owes its success people who have risked their lives in battle zones, inventors and business leaders who have done everything in their power to ensure the success of the union. Some of those heroes are the aged. They sacrificed for the success of the future generations. It would a grand betrayal of trust if the government rationizes health care to their disadvantage.
The increased demands of our current health care system can be comfortably handled without instigating genocide on the aged members of our society. The congress can reduce the extravagance seen in military spending to provide a basic need to its senior citizens. Heath policies that increase efficiency in the health sector should be adopted. The federal government should reduce unnecessary costs in the health sector to reduce costs in the sector.
Age based rationing of health care fails to meet the standards of justice. Justice requires that all members of the society should be treated equally. The proposition seeks to discriminate against the aged for their medical liabilities. The Congress was prudent in providing health care services to all. Proponents of age based health care system argue that the elderly are in their sunset years and their death is inevitable. Using the same criteria it would mean heath care services for patients’ diagnosed with terminal diseases such as cancer should be rationalized. Their intellectual trajectory does not lead to this conclusion hence exposing the apparent fault in their reasoning.
Natural life span is the average period an individual is expected to live before death occurs. Human beings have become increasingly aware of their own mortality. A person can die way before he or she reaches the life expectancy period as a result of extenuating circumstances. The concept of natural life span is intricately intertwined with the concept of a tolerable death. People hope for a peaceful death. However, the force of life in human beings does not just hop out of a person. Physical senescence makes the body susceptible to illnesses. Most families watch their loved ones pass away in pain. It would be very unfair if the government rationalizes heath care to deny medical treatment to the old.
Managed health care is a program implemented by the federal government to reduce the billions wasted in the health sector through unnecessary costs. Under the managed care, the elderly re taken to nursing homes where doctors come to attend to them from time to time. Non profit making organizations provide preventive measures to the aged to prevent hospitalization. Management care organizations do not live up to the standards they advertise. The operational redundancy in the institutions makes patients to suffer. It is difficult to find out whether physicians help patients to commit suicide.
Heath care is a scarce national resource and if it were possible it would not be rationed. Rationing of heath care has to be done well to avoid discriminating against certain groups of people. United States of America should shift from rationing health care by price, to rationing heath care by need or the anticipated benefit. Such rationing will avoid medical bankruptcy that has been witnessed over the years.
In conclusion, the moral respect accorded to the aged should be upheld. All the precepts of justice should be incorporated in the provision of health care services. One sector of the society should not be denied medical treatment for being closer to death than others. There is no discrimination in providing education for the young, in a similar manner; the medical liabilities that come with advanced age should be covered by the government.
References
Hoffman, B. (2012). Health Care for Some: Rights and Rationing in the United States Since 1930. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kongstvedt, P. (2012). Essentials of Managed Health Care. New York: Jones & Bartlett Publishers.
Patel, K., & Rushefsky, M. (2006). Health Care Politics and Policy in America. New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Shi, L., & Singh, D. (2008). Delivering Health Care in America. New York: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Williams, I., Robinson, S., & Dickinson, H. (2011). Rationing in Health Care: The Theory and Practice of Priority Setting. New York: The Policy Press.
