The rights and freedoms of the individual ensure a person’s decent life and security. At the same time, health is one of the essential components of well-being and dignity, and the right to it can be decisive for the quality of life. However, the American healthcare system is quite fragmented, and the country does not ensure citizens’ access to it (Showalter, 2017). The debate about the need to guarantee the right to health care in America continues. Despite doubts about the consequences of universal access to medicine, such a guarantee must be provided to meet international standards, preserve lives, and improve the population’s well-being.
The United States is one of the most developed and wealthy countries, positioning its healthcare system as one of the best. However, the system is fragmented since it consists of various providers or insurance programs and does not give access guarantees (Showalter, 2017). As a result, laws and programs aimed at providing health services include different, but not all, populations creating conditions for inequality. Differences in the health status of several groups of people lead to a deterioration in the well-being of a significant part of the population and the manifestation of the consequences of lack of treatment, particularly chronic diseases (Zieff et al., 2020). Guaranteeing the right to health care, in turn, will improve the situation by helping to save lives and improve the well-being of Americans.
While the country’s founding documents do not provide for the right to health care, it is contained in international standards. Following the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, everyone has the right to living conditions that promote health and access to health services (The United Nations (UN), 1948). Moreover, the guarantee of the right to health care is consistent with generally recognized medical ethical principles and contributes to saving lives. Society is morally obliged to ensure access to health services for all its members regardless of the legal obligation presence (Harris, 2014). Moreover, access to health care will reduce inequalities in health and improve the general well-being of the population, which will contribute to their economic activity and input to society (Zieff et al., 2020). Consequently, there are solid grounds for guaranteeing the right to health care.
Opponents of the position on the need to guarantee the right to health care present their arguments. In particular, the transition to the new system can be complex and costly, including the costs of infrastructure change, service expansion, and new insurance (Zieff et al., 2020). Changing the system indeed requires much effort and investment from various stakeholders. However, in the long term, they will improve the population’s well-being and, accordingly, decrease medical costs. An unhealthy population is a burden on the country’s economy, and guaranteeing the right to health care can solve the problem.
Thus, the guarantee of the right to health care for American citizens has significant advantages, and therefore this option is worth considering. The government’s actions should combat laws that exclude certain population groups from health care. Changing laws requires lengthy preparation and research to choose the best way to implement them and minimize potential negative consequences (Harris, 2014). One solution for incremental change may be efforts to provide social determinants of health among the entire population (Zieff et al., 2020). However, moving toward establishing the guarantee of the right to health care is a faithful and essential step to building a better society.
References
Harris, D. M. (2014). Contemporary issues in healthcare law and ethics (4th ed.). Health Administration Press.
Showalter, S. (2017). The law of healthcare administration (9th ed.). Health Administration Press.
The United Nations. (1948). Universal declaration of human rights. The United Nations Website.
Zieff, G., Kerr, Z. Y., Moore, J. B., & Stoner, L. (2020). Universal healthcare in the United States of America: A healthy debate. Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 56(11), 1-7.