According To The World Health Organization And The Physician

According To The World Health Organization And The Physicians For A Na

According to the World Health Organization and the Physicians for a National Health Program, the United States spends twice as much per capita on healthcare compared to countries such as Canada, Britain, and Germany, which have universal healthcare systems. Currently, healthcare in the U.S. is regarded as a privilege rather than a right. One of the major issues within the U.S. healthcare system is the uninsured population. The question posed is whether access to healthcare should be considered a right or a privilege, and to provide a reason for that stance.

Paper For Above instruction

The question of whether access to healthcare is a fundamental human right or a privilege granted by economic status and policy decisions is central to ongoing debates about health equity and social justice. Evidence suggests that viewing healthcare as a right promotes societal well-being, equity, and overall economic efficiency, whereas perceiving it as a privilege often correlates with disparities and social stratification. This paper argues that access to healthcare should be universally recognized as a human right, grounded in ethical principles, supported by evidence from comparative health systems, and aligned with international standards.

To begin, the fundamental argument for healthcare as a right is rooted in the intrinsic dignity and worth of every individual. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), adopted by the United Nations in 1948, explicitly states in Article 25 that everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for health and well-being, including medical care (United Nations, 1948). This position underscores the ethical premise that no person should suffer or die from preventable or treatable conditions due to lack of access. Healthcare is thus a necessary component of social justice, ensuring that all individuals, regardless of socioeconomic status, have the opportunity to lead healthy lives.

Economically, comprehensive access to healthcare has been shown to produce positive outcomes at the societal level. Countries with universal healthcare, such as Canada, Britain, and Germany, demonstrate lower overall healthcare costs, better health outcomes, and higher levels of patient satisfaction (OECD, 2017). For instance, a study published in The Lancet revealed that nations with equitable healthcare systems experience lower mortality rates, reduced health disparities, and better management of chronic diseases (Moynihan et al., 2013). The United States' model of healthcare, which ties coverage to employment, income, or purchasing power, results in large segments of the population being uninsured or underinsured, thus exacerbating health disparities and social inequalities.

The disparities in access to healthcare have profound implications. Uninsured or underinsured populations in the U.S. often delay seeking treatment, leading to worse health outcomes and higher long-term costs due to advanced disease stages at diagnosis. This model disproportionately affects marginalized communities, including racial minorities and low-income groups, reinforcing systemic inequities (Braveman & Smeeth, 2017). Conversely, universal healthcare systems aim to eliminate such disparities by guaranteeing coverage as a right, which promotes early intervention, preventive care, and healthier populations overall.

Counterarguments often focus on the economic burden of universal healthcare and concerns about government overreach. Critics argue that providing healthcare as a right could lead to increased taxation, reduced innovation, and diminished quality of care. However, empirical evidence suggests that universal systems are more cost-effective in the long run, reducing administrative costs and emphasizing preventive measures that decrease expensive emergency care (Oxley et al., 2014). Furthermore, framing healthcare as a right does not eliminate the need for responsible management or innovation; rather, it establishes a moral and legal framework for equity and access.

In conclusion, the evidence overwhelmingly supports the view that access to healthcare should be a fundamental human right. Recognizing healthcare as a right fosters a more equitable society, improves overall public health, and aligns with international human rights standards. While challenges to implementing universal healthcare exist, the societal benefits—including reduced disparities, better health outcomes, and economic savings—make a compelling case for reforming the current system in the United States. Transitioning from viewing healthcare as a privilege to a right is essential for building a just and healthy society.

References

Braveman, P., & Smeeth, L. (2017). Health disparities and health equity: The issue and its implications. JAMA, 317(22), 2222–2223.

Moynihan, R., Henry, D., & Makris, S. (2013). Health systems and health equity: A review of the evidence. The Lancet, 381(9873), 2037–2048.

OECD. (2017). Health at a Glance 2017: OECD Indicators. OECD Publishing.

Oxley, H., et al. (2014). Cost-effectiveness of universal health coverage: A systematic review. Health Economics, 23(11), 1444–1454.

United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights