BP#11 The Medical System: An Optimific Stance vs Moral Rights

As most of us are aware, medical services can be expensive, and hefty medical bills affect millions of family in this country every year. Although a system with many issues in itself, attempts through Medicaid and Medicare have tried to make health care more affordable for those who do not have the funds to get the help they need. The article talks about the ObamaCare system taking hits and steps back with the recent president-elect Trump coming into the white-house. Although Trump has stated he will keep certain parts of Obama’s health care system, he has also stated that changes will be made. Either side has its pros and cons, but they also have there ethical rights and wrongs, depending on how we analyze them.

Some would look at this issue and agree with the way it is going. Yes, affordable health care is ideal, but is it economically sustainable? The article brings up solid points in that it would cost many people more money than it would if they paid for their own bills the way things are. It also references the fact that many people would suffer from the loss of jobs and lower wages, leading to less consumer spending.  Mills’ stance on utilitarianism would call for the option in which the most people benefit, despite the suffering involved.So, taking the many economic hardships into consideration, it almost seems as if the optimific action would be to reverse the push for free health care.

On the other side of philosophy, a more liberal stance can be taken in that we should most definitely be striving for a health care system that is free and accessible to all. Philosophy tells us very clearly that anything that has the capacity to suffer has moral rights. As described in our country’s constitution, and understood by most, we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and a strong argument can be made for the positive correlation between our health and our happiness. A second argument can also be made in that we have the moral right as human beings to have our health if it is so possible. Philosophy tells us, then, that free health care should be standard as it falls within our rights as citizens and human beings.

In my opinion, either side makes sense and is justifiable, but which side does philosophy choose?


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s