Q. I have a 32-year-old friend – single, healthy, earn a good salary – who do not have employer health insurance and refuse to buy his own. He believes that this is not possible, he will need expensive medical care, and on what he calls a new individual insurance mandate his freedom violations. His position is ethical?
The Supreme Court will mandate health care law of the Constitution rule in, but for me, ethics is an important principle of life is their own responsibility, rather than a burden.
The vast majority of people – including your friends – will never be able to pay out of pocket a very expensive medical needs. Before family members, friends, doctors and hospitals are not reimbursed, or the insurance needs of taxpayers and fellow citizens who have paid appearance for a long time
Only the wealthy – – it was hit by falling costs D others who can personally pay for organ transplantation, or very preterm children $ 100,000 a-year cure – you can choose to moral health insurance naked
Hospitals to provide long demanded by law (ethics and motivation). Emergency everyone who comes through their doors, regardless of insurance. I did not hear This has been questioned task.
Similarly, the polls show that some people who oppose individual mandate also approved the government’s plan to force insurance companies to accept new customers with existing health pro blem. This seems to be the moral match.
In the absence of a separate task, many people will simply wait until they get really sick pay to have the ability to start their vault. There are some restrictions, their recent medical costs will be more responsible citizens who contribute to the premium payment system has been a long period of time.
Moral symmetry – as well as economic sense – health care system for everyone must accept, and to everyone who is economic capacity, need to do this contribution.