Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

No, Barack, Medical Care is Not a 'Right'
humanevents.com ^ | 10/08/2008 | Dr. Lee Hieb

Posted on 10/09/2008 7:40:49 AM PDT by K-oneTexas

No, Barack, Medical Care is Not a 'Right'

by Dr. Lee Hieb (more by this author)
Posted 10/08/2008 ET
Updated 10/08/2008 ET

At last night’s presidential debate, Barack Obama led the charge for government run health care by declaring in no uncertain terms that health care is a “right”. I suppose he thinks Tom and the boys accidentally left that one out of the Constitution. Or maybe it is an extension (in his mind) of the right to life.

But let’s think about this a minute. When our American form of government was created to form “a more perfect union” by insuring the “rights” of its citizens, it recognized only the “inalienable rights”. And to protect those rights, which I’m pretty sure only included life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the government was empowered to use force if necessary.

We created armed forces (and finally an adequate border patrol) to protect our people’s life and liberty from foreign invasion, and then police to protect our pursuit of happiness in the form of private property. So how will we insure medical care?

We can pay for care -- we’ve begun doing that in Medicare and Medicaid. We can set up an army of doctors to attend the unattended. We have done that in the form of Public Health Service scholarships that recruit medical students, who, after graduation work in inner cities, reservations, and prisons, etc. But ultimately, when inducements fail, will we draft young people to become doctors and nurses to fill the need to supply medical services? Will we shackle doctors at the job for 36 hours at a time, without sleep or food because there are not enough physicians to meet the “rights” of the people? Will we violate truly inalienable rights of our citizens by taking more and more of their private property through taxation to pay for an inefficient system of government run health care?

No, health care is not a right. It is a service, just like the food service, or transportation. They may be important to out lives -- hey, food is more critical than medicine. But they are not rights. We cannot demand food at the grocery store, and pay according to our ability. We cannot force a care dealer to sell us a care at “Medicare” discount rates because we need transportation to get us to work.

Barack Obama is a smart guy. He’s Ivy League-educated and is surrounded by a bevy of similarly bright educated people. Yet he promotes a policy that has failed everywhere it has been tried -- Universal Health Care.

Now I grant you that there are other bright people who believe in this Universal Health Care nonsense, but most are taken in by the slogans and cosmic ideals -- they have not really delved into the historical details. Viewed from 30,000 feet a cesspool may look like a sylvan lake. Sweden looks reasonably good if you look at global numbers such as perinatal mortality -- but this does not disclose the nightmare in Swedish Emergency Rooms where children die for lack of nurses to administer an IV. In Britain, only 42% of patients had brain imaging to confirm their diagnosis of stroke within 24 hours of the onset of symptoms,-- a number they themselves deemed "unacceptably low". By contrast, a study in North Carolina was distressed that only 11% of people had a CT scan within 25 minutes! Over 44% had a CT within 2 hours, and by 24 hours over 60-70% of patients in the US will have received a CT scan.

We continue to hear how miserable American medical care is, and how expensive it is. Yes, there are problems -- some that are inevitable, and most dating to the sixties advent of Medicare and Medicaid. It is fine to look for improvements, but why do Barack, and his predecessor Kerry, look to socialized Europe or Canada for solutions? During peak times, an American may wait 6 hours to be seen in the ER. In Montreal, he would be on a gurney in the hall for three days. The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) ranks Canada in the bottom third of its 29 member countries for availability of medical technology such as MRI and CT scanners. In fact, there are more MRI scanners in Seattle than in all of British Columbia. And, Canadians are not getting this poor access to care at a discount. The OECD ranked Canada fifth (out of 29 member countries) in national health expenditures in 1997.

Universal health care appeals to the well, but fails the sick. Socialized systems allow young, generally healthy people to obtain free low level medical care. But God help you if you need surgery! You’ll wait a year in socialized countries for total joint replacement, and the Ontario Medical Society’s official recommendation, at one point, was to leave the country to get a cardiac catheterization because you might die while waiting in Ontario.

Unfortunately the right answer is not amenable to a sound bite as is the call for free and universal health care. The answer is returning to the free market medical system, which was in place before 1962. Senator McCain is correct in proposing removing tax breaks from corporate health plans. In the past, insurance was insurance, not pre-paid health care. You, not your employer, owned the insurance. You could buy the type and level of insurance you wanted and could afford. You, not your employer, was the insurance customer, so you could vote with your feet against bad policies. (We didn’t need a patient’s bill of rights, nor a portability act until corporations owned your health insurance.) And you didn’t expect insurance to pay for every runny nose or stubbed toe. Charity hospitals, family, and private altruism -- not the government -- helped to care for the indigent.

The final truth is, politicians who devise these government run systems never have to live with the consequences. Barack Obama will never wait in a crowded inner city Emergency Room. When Boris Yeltsin had his open-heart surgery -- he didn’t go to the lousy Soviet universal care hospital, but to a hospital just for the politburo. His Russian doctors were American trained, and even then, he flew Dr. Debakey from Texas to supervise. He knew intuitively what Ayn Rand had stated was true --“It is not safe to trust your life to a man whose life you have throttled.” Trust me, Barack will declare you have a “right” to mediocre medicine, but he will insure his own right to seek out what privilege brings.

Lee Hieb is an Orthopaedic Surgeon, in solo private practice. Her first-hand experience in medicine began in the 1950's, when she accompanied her father on his housecalls in Iowa.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bloat; marxist; pinko; stockpile; stockpilesong; stooge; unamerican

1 posted on 10/09/2008 7:40:49 AM PDT by K-oneTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

There is a difference between medical care and FREE medical care.


2 posted on 10/09/2008 7:44:48 AM PDT by eccentric (a.k.a. baldwidow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

Barack Obama also supports a Human Right to Housing...

This man is a socialist... I guess the folks need some ‘tough love’ if this guy gets in. Vacation, anyone?


3 posted on 10/09/2008 7:45:00 AM PDT by griswold3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eccentric

There is a good argument to be made that you cannot have a right to something you cannot provide for yourself.


4 posted on 10/09/2008 7:50:20 AM PDT by Old North State
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

If we had Govt run health care, Im absolutely positive everyone would be treated the same. Of course Obama would get the same as you and I. His and
all congress would shuck their greatness and wait in line just like you and me.


5 posted on 10/09/2008 7:50:33 AM PDT by owlbird
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old North State

Put simply:

You have no “rights” that impose an involuntary burden on another individual.


6 posted on 10/09/2008 7:51:18 AM PDT by MrB (0bama supporters: What's the attraction? The Marxism or the Infanticide?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: griswold3
Emergency rooms will treat anyone in dire need of help at no cost(if the injured person can not pay). That's the extent of it. Where in the Constitution does the word entitlement appear. I know we have the right to pursue happiness, but not given a home,free money or a new pair of shoes.
7 posted on 10/09/2008 7:51:19 AM PDT by shadeaud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

“Vacation, anyone?”

Yes, because vacations are a right. We should all be able to vacation where we want. I say federalize all travel agencies. And food. Who can argue against our right to have food. All means of farming and food production in this country should therefore also be federalized. No more independent farmers. We need a nationalized farming system. Should I continue??


8 posted on 10/09/2008 7:51:40 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas
No, health care is not a right. It is a service, just like the food service, or transportation.

Damn straight. It's a service and a very specialized one. These "rights" have encroached into everything from free housing, food, healthcare, etc. How long until we start arguing for free cars, insurance, and repairs for everyone? What about the actual rights we have, Senator Obama? Your goon squad is trying to suppress the 1st Amendment in Missouri and who knows where else. The only reason you don't repeal the 2nd Amendment is, as he's said, it's not politically viable right now.

9 posted on 10/09/2008 7:51:46 AM PDT by edpc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shadeaud

The Constitution was based on “negative rights” -

what someone CAN’T DO TO YOU.

There is no “positive” right defined therein. You have no right to anything that belongs to others.


10 posted on 10/09/2008 7:52:54 AM PDT by MrB (0bama supporters: What's the attraction? The Marxism or the Infanticide?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: griswold3

All part of the New Party platform I think.


11 posted on 10/09/2008 7:53:09 AM PDT by freespirited (We have met the enemy, and he is the MSM.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: edpc

It’s also kind of ironic that the candidate who wants the government to intervene and control everything is the same candidate who opted out of he public campaign financing for this election.


12 posted on 10/09/2008 7:54:27 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

Obama wants to rewrite the second amendment to say Each person has the right to healthcare.


13 posted on 10/09/2008 7:54:51 AM PDT by mlocher (USA is a sovereign nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

Even scarier is the fact a disturbingly large number of people actually want the government overseeing these things. After all.....they’ve done such a great job with everything else like retirement (Social Security) and housing (Fannie & Freddie). Go figure.


14 posted on 10/09/2008 7:58:15 AM PDT by edpc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MrB

I read that somewhere before...


15 posted on 10/09/2008 7:59:13 AM PDT by pgyanke (You have no “rights” that require an involuntary burden on another person. Period. - MrB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle

You make a very good point about food. Good healthcare (as they define it) is an incidental need. Food, on the other hand, is a daily requirement. How often do we hear of kids going to bed hungry at night? Surely, it isn’t a hard stretch to see them bridging to this argument next...


16 posted on 10/09/2008 8:01:53 AM PDT by pgyanke (You have no “rights” that require an involuntary burden on another person. Period. - MrB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

Good article. The debate question, as worded, was an idiotic question (”Is health care a right, a privilege, or a responsibility?”) that ensured a wrong answer no matter how you respond. The correct answer would be “None of the above — it is an economic good that must be purchased.”


17 posted on 10/09/2008 8:03:25 AM PDT by VRWCmember
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

Did you write that to me on the last thread about this issue?

Hey, I’ll steal good ideas and verbiage where I can.


18 posted on 10/09/2008 8:04:43 AM PDT by MrB (0bama supporters: What's the attraction? The Marxism or the Infanticide?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: freespirited

They’re gonna need a whole new Constitution!
Our Constitution gives us only the right to pursue, not to obtain.


19 posted on 10/09/2008 8:05:05 AM PDT by griswold3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

” . . . hey, food is more critical than medicine. But they are not rights. We cannot demand food at the grocery store, and pay according to our ability.”


I thought food stamps were there to train the public psyche into believing that food is a right. Do you mean food stamps are for something else?


20 posted on 10/09/2008 8:05:11 AM PDT by John Leland 1789
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

No... check my tagline. I stole it from you yesterday.


21 posted on 10/09/2008 8:06:38 AM PDT by pgyanke (You have no “rights” that require an involuntary burden on another person. Period. - MrB)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

“Surely, it isn’t a hard stretch to see them bridging to this argument next...”

Yes. After all, it worked really well in the USSR, didn’t it? I mean, didn’t they have all those grain surpluses every year that they sold to the rest of the world?


22 posted on 10/09/2008 8:07:08 AM PDT by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: pgyanke

wow... I’m flattered.


23 posted on 10/09/2008 8:08:01 AM PDT by MrB (0bama supporters: What's the attraction? The Marxism or the Infanticide?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

Bookmarked!

Obama is wrong in so many ways on this one that I have no idea where to start.

i heard the sound bite where Obama says “a nation as wealthy as ours should be able to afford universal health care.” First off, it’s NOT the government’s money! But even more important, Obama has it totally backwards: maybe we ARE as wealthy a country as we are precisely because we reward work, savings, investment, risk-taking and innovation in ways that a “cradle to grave” mommy state cannot. We CREATE more wealth by expecting people to be self-reliant and rewarding them for doing so.

Why work if the government will just give you what you need - or what they decide for you that you need? And why work to pay for the health care of those not working, or those not even legally in the country?

Obama doesn’t understand a damned thing about basic economics. And they call Palin ignorant! Sheesh.


24 posted on 10/09/2008 8:16:02 AM PDT by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

Basic question for the future. Do we want educated and healthy citizens to compete with the world?


25 posted on 10/09/2008 8:18:20 AM PDT by ex-snook ("But above all things, truth beareth away the victory.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-snook

If we could get back to ‘educating’ citizens, rather than indoctrinating them. Education means ‘bring forth from within’, not conditioning them to be good little serfs.
Our health care system is in a death spiral without individual fiscal and physical responsiblity. If citizens understood what ‘overtreatment’ and ‘undertreatment’ were, we could fix the system. Mandates will kill us, literally.


26 posted on 10/09/2008 8:44:19 AM PDT by griswold3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas
I suppose he thinks Tom and the boys accidentally left that one out of the Constitution.

Tom and the boys?? If you mean Thomas Jefferson then think Declaration of Independence, not Constitution. Jefferson was in France when the Constitution was put in place. Jefferson, one of the democrat party founders didn't much like the Constitution and felt there should be a second revolution to throw the Constitution out and make it right by establishing a more proletarian democracy. He did not like the representative republic the founding fathers established and wanted to change to a democracy because he understood that the masses of asses would sell their votes for a pint of ale.

27 posted on 10/09/2008 8:44:42 AM PDT by RJS1950 (The democrats are the "enemies foreign and domestic" cited in the federal oath)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

obama “rights” bump............


28 posted on 10/09/2008 8:50:49 AM PDT by indthkr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

By extension we should also have a “right” to food, clothing and housing all furnished by the government. Sounds suspiciously like the old Soviet Union and Mao’s China


29 posted on 10/09/2008 9:04:17 AM PDT by The Great RJ ("Mir we bleiwen wat mir sin" or "We want to remain what we are." ..Luxembourg motto)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas
Yet he promotes a policy that has failed everywhere it has been tried -- Universal Health Care.

They are aware it's a failure and that's why they want it. They are too cheap to purchase premium medical services for themselves and too envious to let you continue to do so. They want you to stop having it better than them as they believe they will then finally able to feel happiness. It's all about equal outcome, not equal opportunity, and the fact that misery loves company. These people secretly would like to see everyone shot on their 65th birthday so that no one gets to live longer than others.

30 posted on 10/09/2008 9:19:52 AM PDT by Reeses (Leftism is powered by the evil force of envy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: K-oneTexas

What’s the author’s views on Bush’s free pills for granny act? Is it socialism only when a Rat is proposing it?


31 posted on 10/09/2008 9:37:06 AM PDT by KantianBurke (President Bush, why did you abandon Specialist Ahmed Qusai al-Taei?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mlocher

2nd amendment: The right to bare arms for a free blood tests?


32 posted on 10/09/2008 10:32:31 AM PDT by eccentric (a.k.a. baldwidow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson