Prepare By Choosing A Topic From ThePhi103 Final Paper

Preparebegin By Choosing A Topic From Thephi103 Final Paper Optionsli

Choose a topic from the PHI103 Final Paper Options list. Construct an argument for a position on the topic that you will defend in your Final Paper. Ensure your argument is well-structured, with all premises true and clearly supporting the conclusion. Consider possible objections and revise your argument to strengthen it. Search in the Ashford University Library for credible academic sources that support aspects of your argument. Present your main argument in standard form, with each premise and the conclusion on a separate line, following the example: All men are mortal. Socrates is a man. Therefore, Socrates is mortal. Support each premise with explanations and evidence, especially focusing on those that may be controversial. Use at least one scholarly research source. Explain how your conclusion logically follows from your premises. Refer to the Week One Annotated Example for guidance. If you have questions, contact your instructor.

Paper For Above instruction

The debate over whether universal healthcare should be universally accessible regardless of financial means is a critical issue in contemporary ethics and public policy. This paper constructs a well-supported argument in favor of universal healthcare, drawing on ethical principles, empirical evidence, and philosophical reasoning. The argument is presented in standard form, with each premise systematically supported to demonstrate the moral and practical validity of providing healthcare to all individuals free of charge, akin to access to education. This discussion aims to clarify the moral importance of healthcare as a fundamental human right and evaluate the implications of adopting such a policy universally.

Argument in Standard Form

1. All individuals deserve access to essential healthcare services to maintain their health and well-being.
2. If access to essential healthcare services is a moral right, then society has an obligation to provide such access to all, regardless of income.
3. Society has an obligation to ensure that all individuals have access to healthcare because health is fundamental to human dignity and societal participation.
4. Therefore, universal healthcare should be available to all individuals regardless of their ability to pay.

The first premise posits that healthcare is an essential service necessary for maintaining an individual's physical and mental health. This premise is grounded in the ethical concept that all persons possess intrinsic dignity, which includes the right to access necessary healthcare. Empirical evidence supports this claim; countries with universal healthcare systems generally experience better health outcomes and higher life expectancy rates, indicating that broad access to healthcare services promotes population health (World Health Organization, 2019). Moreover, depriving individuals of healthcare due to financial barriers exacerbates inequalities and violates principles of justice and fairness.

The second premise hinges on the moral rights discourse, asserting that if healthcare is a moral right, then society bears a duty to guarantee that right. Philosophers such as Norman Daniels argue that health is fundamentally linked to fairness and equality of opportunity (Daniels, 2008). Denying access based on ability to pay undermines the moral claim that all persons should have equal opportunities to lead healthy lives. The evidence from countries with universal healthcare systems indicates that where access is guaranteed, disparities are reduced, and the moral rights of marginalized populations are better protected (Gostin & Van IEghem, 2019).

The third premise emphasizes that health is crucial for human dignity and societal participation. Ensuring access to healthcare aligns with ethical principles of beneficence and justice, which mandate promoting well-being and addressing social disparities. Empirical studies demonstrate that when healthcare access is equitable, communities are more cohesive, and economic productivity is enhanced (Baldwin & Goodman, 2020). Furthermore, health inequities disproportionately affect low-income and minority groups, reinforcing social injustices that a universal healthcare system can mitigate.

The conclusion follows logically: since all individuals are entitled to health that promotes dignity and well-being, and society has an obligation to uphold these rights, it logically entails that healthcare should be universally accessible regardless of ability to pay. This system ensures that healthcare is viewed not as a privilege but as a fundamental human right, aligning moral imperatives with social justice and empirical evidence on health outcomes and societal stability.

References

• Baldwin, L. M., & Goodman, D. (2020). Health Care Disparities and the Promise of Universal Coverage. Journal of Public Health Policy, 41(2), 151-166.
• Daniels, N. (2008). Just Health: Meeting Health Needs Fairly. Cambridge University Press.
• Gostin, L. O., & Van IEghem, J. (2019). Global Health and Human Rights: Converging Policies. The Lancet, 393(10177), 1322-1323.
• World Health Organization. (2019). Global Health Observatory Data: Life Expectancy and Health Systems. WHO Publications.