Considered Health Care Essay: The Brit Plan
“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union… promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Are you familiar with quote? I would hope so; after all you are a part of Congress. This is the first line of our constitution, the foundation of our whole country. I have come before you today because "A new drug for cancer has been developed, and 70% of patients that receive it are cured completely." This is a significant improvement from current cancer treatments, which lead to only a 50% survival rate. If I could find a way to provide the new drug to all cancer patients that would be ideal, but alas, the drug is very expensive to produce and cannot be provided to everyone. A distribution plan for the drug needs to be developed and I am here to guide you in the right direction. There are four proposals. The Obamanos Plan requires private insurance companies to cover the new treatment and allows people to purchase the treatment out of pocket. The O'Romney Plan requires private insurance companies to cover the new treatment and requires everyone to buy private health insurance. The Canadia plan abolishes private insurance companies and levies a tax on all citizens so that it can provide healthcare for all including conventional cancer treatment. However, the new treatment is not available through insurance or to buy out of pocket. The Brit Plan levies taxes on everyone and uses the money to provide basic medical care to those who need it. Conventional cancer treatment is included, but not the new treatment. However, the new treatment is still available for purchase out of pocket with this plan. As a member of the United States congress, it is your moral obligation to distribute this drug in a way that best promotes the general welfare and freedom of the people. If the well-being and liberty of citizens is aimed to be preserved, then it is my professional opinion that the Brit plan will best accomplish this when compared to the other proposals.
Welfare is the health, happiness, and prosperity of a person or group. "Preventing or curing disease or disability reduces suffering in ways that contribute to aggregate welfare"(Daniels). In order to promote the aggregate welfare of the USA it means choosing the plan that will make citizens the happiest and healthiest and most prosperous. The Obamanos Plan does not accomplish this. Requiring private insurance companies to provide the treatment will cause the price of insurance to rise and therefore fewer Americans will be able to afford insurance. "We must sometimes make a choice between investing in a technology that delivers a significant benefit to few people or one that delivers a more modest benefit to a larger number of people"(Daniels). Although this plan allows some people to receive the new treatment, it takes away some peoples insurance and potentially all their health care, which does not benefit general welfare. In fact, in cross-national comparative data, it states that “high-technology medicine pale in importance when compared to differences attributable to gender, income, and genetic luck” (Engelhardt). Since this is true, the Obamanos plan would cripple the low-income citizens even further, by diminishing any opportunity to attain any form of health care. This would be immoral because it ignores the fact they started out at a disadvantage and need health insurance the most. The O'Romney plan is essentially the same plan except everyone is forced to purchase the private health insurance. This is beneficial to the welfare of the people because everyone is insured and the insurance rate is less affected by the incorporation of the new treatment. However, this may anger citizens and decrease their happiness because they are being forced to pay for services that are not...
Cited: Daniels, Norman. "Is There a Right to Health Care And, If So, What Does It Encompass?" N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. Print.
Engelhardt, H. Tristram. "Freedom and Moral Diversity: The Moral Failures of Health Care in the Welfare State." Social Philosophy and Policy 14.02 (1997): 180-96. Print.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document