#1A) In his paper “Rights to Health Care, Social Justice, and Fairness in Health Care Allocations: Frustrations in the Face of Finitude,” H. Tristram Engelhardt makes a distinction between the unfortunate and the unfair. According to him, injuries, disabilities, and diseases arising from natural causes are considered unfortunate. On the other hand, those situations become unfair when brought about by the doing of others. Engelhardt also notes that the result of someone’s unfair action should not be attributed to the society as a whole. This means that such bad outcomes are unfortunate rather than unfair because other people are being blamed for the actions of a few. Take, for instance, vehicular accidents are usually caused by a single person.
…show more content…
He asserts that it is impossible to guarantee equal and optimal care to all. According to him, delivering the best possible care to everyone while limiting the costs of such health care is an unattainable goal. Moreover, the concept of equal distribution of health care will violate the right of individuals to choose which health care is best for them or how to allocate their resources and energies. It will also be challenging for everyone to receive the same level of care because the resources available to us are limited in the first place. Engelhardt argues that the health care system must recognize that there are moral and financial limitations to providing care. He states that in order to respect the private resources and freedom of others, we must embrace the idea of unequal access to health care. Also, we must be open to the concept of “setting a price on saving human life” to ensure that everyone can afford proper care (Vaughn, 2016, p. …show more content…
With a federal system, the government does not have the upper hand in decision-making. They can only attempt to influence which direction the policy will take by providing financial support or offering ideas, but the decision regarding which services will be covered is still up to the provincial or state governments. In addition to this, there are also several issues that arise from having a federalist government. The first problem has to do with financing the system. In order to contain the costs of health care, the burden of expenses must be transferred to someone else. In doing so, the national and provincial/state governments as well as providers find themselves in conflict with each other and resolving it leads to significant increases in reimbursement. This then will put pressure on the other provincial/state governments to improve their contracts as well. Another issue that a federal system of health care face is the delivery of services. In such system, physicians can choose “where they will work and in the volume and mix of services they choose to deliver” (Vaughn, 2016, p. 762). Lastly, two opposing trends of allocation has been observed in provinces. Some are more concerned about integrated services, better planning, and greater efficiency. On the other hand, there are provinces who take on a
He asserts that it is impossible to guarantee equal and optimal care to all. According to him, delivering the best possible care to everyone while limiting the costs of such health care is an unattainable goal. Moreover, the concept of equal distribution of health care will violate the right of individuals to choose which health care is best for them or how to allocate their resources and energies. It will also be challenging for everyone to receive the same level of care because the resources available to us are limited in the first place. Engelhardt argues that the health care system must recognize that there are moral and financial limitations to providing care. He states that in order to respect the private resources and freedom of others, we must embrace the idea of unequal access to health care. Also, we must be open to the concept of “setting a price on saving human life” to ensure that everyone can afford proper care (Vaughn, 2016, p. …show more content…
With a federal system, the government does not have the upper hand in decision-making. They can only attempt to influence which direction the policy will take by providing financial support or offering ideas, but the decision regarding which services will be covered is still up to the provincial or state governments. In addition to this, there are also several issues that arise from having a federalist government. The first problem has to do with financing the system. In order to contain the costs of health care, the burden of expenses must be transferred to someone else. In doing so, the national and provincial/state governments as well as providers find themselves in conflict with each other and resolving it leads to significant increases in reimbursement. This then will put pressure on the other provincial/state governments to improve their contracts as well. Another issue that a federal system of health care face is the delivery of services. In such system, physicians can choose “where they will work and in the volume and mix of services they choose to deliver” (Vaughn, 2016, p. 762). Lastly, two opposing trends of allocation has been observed in provinces. Some are more concerned about integrated services, better planning, and greater efficiency. On the other hand, there are provinces who take on a