Should Universal Healthcare Be So ... Universal?

[Vlerchan]

I've always been a strong proponent of the fully universal single-payer healthcare system, but recently I've begun to question that.

It was during a discussion about drug liberalisation that someone brought up how they didn't support healthcare being afforded to citizens who they felt brought it on themselves. So if your illness was a direct consequence of an activity - be it smoking; or coke use; or binge drinking; or over-eating - then it should be up to you to you, and not the tax-payer, to fund whatever treatment is required to treat that illness. It's only fair, right?

My first response was that it'd be impossible so standardise such a policy. How many cigarettes must I smoke before they refused to treat my lung cancer; or how many shots must I drink before they refuse to treat my liver disease; or how many twinkies must I go through before they refuse to treat my diabetes? It's the doctor's decision, was the response. And then we moved on; the whole conversation largely forgotten. It was about twenty minutes ago that I suddenly remembered it, and still unsure I thought it'd be a good idea to take it here. Which leads me to my question: should there be any restrictions on a citizens access to universal healthcare, and if so what?

[conniption]

So we should let people die because they brought it upon themselves?

Someone's life < saving money

[Stronk Serb]

They should get help, healthcare is there to heal, not to be capitalized on.

[Vlerchan]

It's not solely life and death situations that this need apply to. Take dentistry: in Ireland you can mismanage your teeth for years and still get the state to pick up after you. My opinion - which I really didn't state in the OP - is that whilst healthcare should be universal - as a taxpayer you are paying into it, after all - a non-smoker should get priority over a smoker in cases where both need treatment for X smoking-related disease.

Though I'm still looking for other instance where healthcare should be retracted. I was simply only giving an example of a friends thoughts - a friend who would value the effective use of state recourses over lives; no appeal to emotion is going to change his mind there.

[darthearth]

Try to help people out of it, not throw them under a bus. There should be no restrictions on the actual care, but help them out of any bad habit they have, compassion trumps other considerations.

[Walter Powers]

See, the problem is that when you put the government in charge of something, they have no discretion. (unless of course you own a multimillion dollar business, are a member of a labor union, or a congressmen). That's one big reason why I think healthcare should be a private sector industry.

[Vlerchan]

See, the problem is that when you put the government in charge of something, they have no discretion. (unless of course you own a multimillion dollar business, are a member of a labor union, or a congressmen). That's one big reason why I think healthcare should be a private sector industry.
Can you expand on discretion? I don think I'm wholly understanding your point - which means I can't wholly disagree with it.

[Harry Smith]

See, the problem is that when you put the government in charge of something, they have no discretion. (unless of course you own a multimillion dollar business, are a member of a labor union, or a congressmen). That's one big reason why I think healthcare should be a private sector industry.

yeah sure I love paying £4,000 a year to live, discretion is great in the health industry- it means that a company decides whether to keep you alive or not. So many americans pay out for years in insurance then when they get ill their provider says to them sorry we don't cover you for this because you forgot to tell us your great aunt had a cold in 1941.

Insurance companies do not care about providing care-there aim is to make profit. Do you think they would be successful if they always gave treatment to everyone on their coverage

Healthcare is a human right- it doesn't matter if your a billionaire or homeless in Britain- you get given a high standard of healthcare regardless of your class, wealth or race