
Health is a human right - baybal2
https://www.dawn.com/news/1450968/why-public-finance-is-key-to-delivering-the-human-right-to-health
======
nyc111
Was it Nietzsche who said such similar things in one of his books? We are born
as indentured servants to the state. The state let's us live as long as we
continue to pay our debt which is called euphemistically "tax." The implicit
agreement between the baby and the state is that the state promises to protect
and to create pleasant environment for the baby to live a healthy and happy
life. It's no surprise that we keep our side of the agreement and pay our
taxes but the state never completely keeps his promises. Under these
circumstances it would be useless to talk about human rights.

------
m0llusk
This gets complicated in the details. One good example is colorectal cancer
testing. Recently in the US testing has been recommended for people ages 45-50
even though detectable colorectal cancer in people under the age of 55 is
extremely rare and happens only in an extremely small fraction of the
population. Based on cost of tests and expected results this regimen will cost
society over $6 million per cancer found and current treatment regimens are
not expected to save most of those people. Where are the lines drawn? Should
we spend millions per case on people with colorectal cancer when we don't even
have a fully reliable treatment regimen? What about other rare diseases? This
idea that health is a human right implies heavy handed decisions about who
gets what care. Pretending that there is plenty of money for all potentially
needed care is ridiculous. This raises extremely awkward issues regarding the
balance between preventive care and treatments and should force us to
reevaluate how we treat elderly sick people.

------
squozzer
On what basis is health care a human right?

I would claim that rights either provide some protection to the ruling class
(the right to life means not executing unpopular leaders) or are derived from
other rights.

So in this case, we could claim the right to life provides the basis for the
right to health care.

Note the right to life is not absolute, e.g. capital punishment and military
drafts (being forced into life-threatening situations at gunpoint.)

But googling "on what basis is health care a human right?" yields nothing
convincing on the pro side, i.e. they all just assume health care is a human
right.

>HEALTH is a human right. When people are not able to access the healthcare
they need, especially if this is for reasons of cost, their human rights are
denied.

Continuing...

>Universal health coverage is built on principles of equity and fairness, with
health services allocated according to people’s needs and the health system
financed according to people’s ability to pay.

That statement has a familiar ring.

Here's an anti-right argument -

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1126951/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1126951/)

>To propose that health care be considered a human right is not only wrong
headed, it is unhelpful. Mature debate on the _rationing and sharing of
limited resources_ can hardly take place when citizens start from the premise
that health care is their right, like a fair trial or the right to vote.

I would test the rights argument with a few questions --

1) Would the right to health care justify certain impositions on the
population, a la jury duty? Would governments have the right to draft people
to work in medicine?

2) If we could keep someone alive forever at the cost of $1 bil/day, would we
be required to do so?

3) Would the right to health care provide governments the justification to
override market mechanisms?

Or said another way -

4) Would governments have to repeal anti-competitive laws that limit the
supply of health care?

------
xupybd
I couldn’t disagree more. Health care is great and I want everyone to have it
but how can it be considered a right. Is food a right? Is shelter a right?

I support socialised healthcare but a right is very different to a reasonable
service for a society to provide to those in need.

~~~
ucosty
The UN recognise food and shelter as human rights, along with health. See
Article 25 [http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-
rights/](http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/)

~~~
mruts
So if the UN declares something, it is a priori true?

I haven't heard any good arguments for the existence of positive rights (the
system becomes inconsistent).

~~~
ucosty
I don't think that distinction is particularly useful. 'Negative' rights can
be reframed as positive rights, and often need a positive enforcement
component to even be useful.

Consider your right for property ownership. Strictly defined as a negative
right, others have an obligation not to infringe your property rights. Great
if everyone is cooperative, but if somebody violates your rights you need
somebody to assert a positive duty.

I'd like to think we've advanced, as a society, enough to consider more than
just enforcing survival rights. Would you suggest people should have no rights
to education either? This is also a positive right.

~~~
beatgammit
Not OP, but yes, I agree that education is not a right. It's something a
society should provide, but it's not a right.

And with a negative right like property, you are free to defend that right
yourself, no need for an external force. You can't do that with healthcare or
education, which requires someone else's labor to exercise. That's an unjust
basis for any service, since all labor should be voluntary.

~~~
vyodaiken
That's nice. So when the Zetas take your land, it's all good?

