Chapter 11 Questions
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Montgomery College *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
140
Subject
Philosophy
Date
Apr 3, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
5
Uploaded by MateWildcat2938
What is the main reason why so many people in the United States lack access to health care? What if any solution do you recommend? Please provide an argument. The main reason people in the United States lack access to health care is because it is not universal like other countries. In America there are single providers, Medicare, Medicaid, private insurance, or you pay out of pocket. Additionally, America has high health care costs, where you are not only charged for the medical service but also the equipment and drugs you require when you are at the hospital. When you have high health care costs you will have high-cost insurance plans. Plus, even if you have an insurance plan there is still the constant risk that if you lose your job, you lose your health insurance, and if you can not get a higher up job, you will not have access to premium health insurance. A solution to this problem would be transitioning towards a universal healthcare system. This could take many forms whether it is a single-payer system or a multi-payer system that has government regulations. It could also be a model that the U.S government draws up. It’s hard to pick a solution to recommend since there are a lot of factors that you need to consider. The result though would be to ensure all citizens have access to healthcare regardless of their financial status. An argument in favor of free healthcare would be that it would help economic productivity. This means that when citizens are healthy and not worried about if they can afford healthcare, they will be more productive. Another potential argument is cost control. If there is a universal healthcare plan that everyone is on, then the government can theoretically negotiate prices with pharmaceutical companies. Overall, the fact that the general population would see an increase in health is positive for the country. What is the troubling contradiction in the U.S. health care system? (p. 335). In 2016 which country spent more money on health care per capita than any other? (p. 335) (I do not know if I completely missed it but I could net find this in chapter 11 so 1 used outside sources and data) The troubling contradiction in the U.S is that they spend more on health care per capita then any other country but it does not achieve comparable health care like other countries. The Commonwealth Fund states, “the United States had worse outcomes and spent more on health care, largely because of greater use of medical
technology and higher prices, compared to other high-income countries.” (Tikkanen and Abrams). It proceeds to highlight how the U.S has the highest number of not only preventable hospitalizations but also deaths. The U.S spends the most money on health care yet has the lowest life expectancy when compared to its peers like Japan. As mentioned before the U.S spends the most on health care per capita and that was the same in 2016. The Commonwealth Fund mentions how the high level of healthcare spending is a defining characteristic of the U.S. healthcare system and contributes to the issues of access and healthcare costs discussed in the previous response (Tikkanen and Abrams). What is distributive justice? What are its strengths and weaknesses? (Could not find distributive justice in chapter 11 so I looked for it and found it in chapter 19) “Distributive justice pertains to the fair distribution of society’s goods and applies to both national and international issues.” (Vaughn,2019, p.643) Some strengths I found in distributive justice is it seeks to ensure that resources are distributed fairly, reducing inequalities and gaps in society. It provides an ethical framework for addressing questions of resource allocation, which can help guide policymaking and decision- making in many fields, including healthcare. Additionally, a fair distribution of resources can contribute to social stability and reduce tensions and conflicts that might arise from perceived or actual unfairness in resource allocation. Some weaknesses are that determining what constitutes a fair distribution is subjective and can vary among different individuals and cultures. Also, distributive justice often involves balancing the interests of different groups or individuals, which can lead to conflicts and difficult trade- offs. What one group sees as just; another might perceive as unjust. What are the chief characteristics of libertarian and egalitarian theories of justice respectively? Which theory of justice is more plausible—libertarian or egalitarian? Why? (Could not find Libertarian or egalitarian in chapter so I looked for it and found it in chapter 19) “Libertarian theories emphasize individual liberties and negative rights” (Vaughn,2019, p.639). Libertarian’s chief characteristics are individual liberty as the primary value. It holds that individuals have the right to live their lives as they choose,
free from interference from others, if they do not impose upon the rights of others. It also advocates for a limited government with a focus on protecting individual rights, including property rights. Additionally, private property is a fundamental concept in libertarian theory. Libertarians argue that individuals have the right to acquire, use, and exchange property if it is acquired through legitimate means. “Egalitarian theories hold that justice requires equal distributions of goods among all persons.” (Vaughn, 2019, p.640) Egalitarian’s chief characteristics place a strong emphasis on equality and aim to reduce the imbalance in wealth, income, and opportunities among individuals and groups. Egalitarians typically support a more active role for government in redistributing resources to achieve greater economic and social equality. Plus, egalitarians may advocate for positive rights, such as the right to healthcare. It is impossible to pick if libertarianism or egalitarianism is more plausible as they both contradict themselves in a way. Libertarianism has strengths in individual liberty. They contend that individuals should have the autonomy to make their own choices without government interference. Plus, the emphasis on private property rights can provide a clear framework for ownership and exchange. However, its weaknesses are economic and social inequality, leaving some individuals vulnerable to exploitation and deprivation. Along with minimal government involvement which can result in inadequate safety nets for the most vulnerable members of society. On the other hand, egalitarianism’s strength is what libertarianism lacks which is a strong emphasis on reducing inequalities and ensuring that all members of society have access to essential resources and opportunities. It can provide a safety net for those in need, reducing extreme poverty and ensuring access to vital services like healthcare and education. However, egalitarianism’s weaknesses are libertarianism strengths such as individual liberty. Additoonally, achieving perfect economic and social equality will be challenging, and what’s the best way to implement egalitarian policies without stifling economic growth. Do people have a moral right to health care? Is everyone entitled to a “decent minimum” of health care? Why or why not? Please provide an argument. I believe that everyone should have health care and that it’s a moral right. That does not mean they have the best health care plan but that they have a basic plan to take care of themselves. To me this is a basic human right, without good health, it is difficult to fully exercise one's freedoms and opportunities. To me basic means you
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
can go to the hospital without the fear of immediately being put into debt. Based on your job and how hard you work; you then can access the top health care plans that you earn. An argument for free health care is not only is it a basic human right but also because health care is viewed as distributive justice. Ensuring a "decent minimum" of healthcare can reduce social and economic disparities, promoting a fair and just society where everyone has an equal opportunity to lead a fulfilling life. Healthcare is not just an individual matter but also a public health concern, which we saw with covid-19. People who could not afford to go to the hospital did not, even if it meant risking their life.
Works Cited Tikkanen, Roosa, and Melinda K. Abrams. “U.S. Health Care from a Global Perspective, 2019: Higher Spending, Worse Outcomes?” U.S. Health Care from a Global Perspective, 2019 | Commonwealth Fund, The Commonwealth Fund, 30 Jan. 2020, www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2020/jan/us-health-care-global- perspective-2019.