“There Is No “Right” to Healthcare,” by John David Lewis
Thesis: Healthcare is not suitably a guaranteed right for persons because it would infringe on the rights of doctors, is paradoxical, and it goes against the freedoms defined by the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
Premise 1: The basis of all rights that are laid out in in the US Constitution are to protect the individual, not the wishes of the society or of other individuals. Requiring a doctor to perform care that other’s wish for would infringe on his or her rights to pursue the career envisioned.
Premise 2: It is not right to force one person to act in helping another person at their own expense, even if the other person needs the help to survive. The person …show more content…
Lewis states the analogy as follows: “Suppose one lived on an island that was deserted of other human beings. One would need many things, but would have no "right" to receive a hot meal, a new home, or the alleviation of an ailment. The universe would not be beholden to fulfill such need”. While this statement is more or less true, it is also not an adequate representation of the real world. The universe is unable to fulfill any needs, seeing as it is an inanimate being. However, humans do not live on an island with no other humans, we are surrounded by other humans. Furthermore, within those other humans is a myriad of humans who are able to help others when they are unable to fulfill their own needs. In fact, this is what our society is built upon; we each provide a service that we are skilled at and expect others to do the same so that everyone is able to receive any service they need from a skilled person. In the end, this cycle helps every human to survive and meet his or her needs. Just because the universe in Lewis’ analogy would not help the human survive alone on the island, does not mean another human does not have a moral obligation to help another human in today’s
Thesis: Healthcare is not suitably a guaranteed right for persons because it would infringe on the rights of doctors, is paradoxical, and it goes against the freedoms defined by the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.
Premise 1: The basis of all rights that are laid out in in the US Constitution are to protect the individual, not the wishes of the society or of other individuals. Requiring a doctor to perform care that other’s wish for would infringe on his or her rights to pursue the career envisioned.
Premise 2: It is not right to force one person to act in helping another person at their own expense, even if the other person needs the help to survive. The person …show more content…
Lewis states the analogy as follows: “Suppose one lived on an island that was deserted of other human beings. One would need many things, but would have no "right" to receive a hot meal, a new home, or the alleviation of an ailment. The universe would not be beholden to fulfill such need”. While this statement is more or less true, it is also not an adequate representation of the real world. The universe is unable to fulfill any needs, seeing as it is an inanimate being. However, humans do not live on an island with no other humans, we are surrounded by other humans. Furthermore, within those other humans is a myriad of humans who are able to help others when they are unable to fulfill their own needs. In fact, this is what our society is built upon; we each provide a service that we are skilled at and expect others to do the same so that everyone is able to receive any service they need from a skilled person. In the end, this cycle helps every human to survive and meet his or her needs. Just because the universe in Lewis’ analogy would not help the human survive alone on the island, does not mean another human does not have a moral obligation to help another human in today’s