Name:
Tutor:
Course:
Date:
Everyone should have the Right to Public Healthcare
Introduction
A human right is something that people should be able to exercise. By law, no healthcare facility can deny service to any person requiring medical facilities; however, most people do not have access to health facilities because they cannot afford it. World Health Organization’s constitution states in part, “the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health is one of the fundamental rights of every human being” (Daniels 37). On the same note, the United Nations commented that health is a right, which is indispensable for a good living. Despite these assertions, the question on whether there is a right to healthcare continues to be a debatable one in most nations; there are also counterarguments on whether the citizens or the state should pay for the healthcare services. In most nations, there have been numerous calls to treat the right to healthcare as fundamental and most people should have access to it. This paper will support the arguments of philosopher Norman Daniels that the societal health needs must be met fairly as every person has a right to healthcare.
Argument
The first argument is that everybody faces illness and may be prone to day-to-day accidents. Therefore, maintaining and restoring health is important to enabling citizens lead quality life (Erick 8). Thus the access to healthcare becomes integral requirement, which is connected to good human life and dignity. A life, which is deprived of good healthcare, will be full of anxiety, pain, and limitations. The major function of healthcare is to maintain the normal functioning of a human being. Diseases and disabilities impair the normal operation of the body and therefore restrict the person to the wide range of opportunities that would otherwise be open to him / her (Norman 31). By keeping people close to the normal function, healthcare preserves the ability of the people to participate in the social and economic aspects of everyday life. The individual’s share of the opportunities is represented by the skills and talents, which are not used when people are sick. Providing a right to healthcare is ensuring the nation’s workforce is healthy. Although the healthcare industry contributes a large share to the country’s domestic product, it is also important to note that a nation wastes more resources when its people are not able to work and therefore become dependent on others. It is estimated that preventable diseases form about 70% of the burden of illness (Long 5).
Another major reason for healthcare to be regarded as a fundamental right and therefore provided by the state is that the poor and the marginalized in the country cannot afford medical care. The question is whether healthcare should be seen as a private good that people need to purchase using their own money or should it be provided free by the government. If everyone in the society has the resources to access healthcare, it should be regarded as a private endeavor and not a right (Long 9). Through research and findings, the reasons that have been associated to the right to healthcare are mainly represented by the need to access quality health services even by the less fortunate in the society. On the other hand, the costs of medical care have increased continuously and the majority of the miIDle and low income earners do not have the necessary resources (Harris et al. 76). Therefore, if healthcare was left upon the hands of individuals, there would be a huge part of the population that would be disadvantaged. Simply because some people are poor does not mean this right should be taken away. Medical care is not a commodity but a necessity, and because its cost can be beyond the reach of a person, this right should be enhanced through wealth redistribution schemes (Lenard and Straehle 34). In aIDition, health to the public should not be limited to the access of healthcare facilities but should also include education. For example, in preventing a nation from the AIDS pandemic, an important strategy is for the government to embark on educating the public on how to reduce the risks of infection.
Objections
However, opponents who object to healthcare as a right for most people argue that it cannot be a right as it consists of services provided by medical professionals, and it would therefore imply that it places the doctors and healthcare service providers into slavery (Erick 10). They also claim that if healthcare is perceived as an individual right, people would pursue health on voluntary basis. According to the opponents, people should not be entitled the right to healthcare when there are no rights to healthy living. In aIDition, they argue that it does not make sense for the government to provide access to health facilities when people do not enjoy basic facilities such as sanitation and housing (Harris et al. 16).
Replies
The right to healthcare does not mean that medical professionals become slaves. This is because the provision for healthcare services to the people needs not affect their rights in operations. Although the citizens will pay less or no money for the services, they will continue receiving their salaries and benefits. In contrast, the medical professionals will have an easy time in that patients will be able to access health facilities before their conditions worsen, and thus in the long term the medical professionals will benefit from handling less serious cases (Lenard and Straehle 26). Similarly, the right to healthcare does not mean the government neglects its duties of providing clean and hygienic conditions to its people. The right to health means that the state must continue to generate conditions that would enable its citizens to remain healthy. The ease of burden of medical care means that the people will more likely maintain healthier lifestyles as they will afford to live in healthier conditions (Norman 57).
Conclusion
Researchers and scholars recommend that healthcare is a basic right for every person in the world. The paper highlights that healthcare affects the direct wellbeing of people and therefore cannot be treated just like other social goods. This is because the wellbeing of the people is important in ensuring a stable and reliable workforce capable of driving the economy. In aIDition, the poor in the society need to be safeguarded by the social inequalities through the fundamental right to healthcare. Although medical professionals argue that they would be turned into slaves, it is not as depicted for they would continue receive the benefits as usual. Another objection is that the government should not only be concerned in offering access to healthcare facilities but also engage in the provision of basic health services. Therefore, the right to healthcare should be provided to every person to maintain and restore his or her health.

Works Cited
Daniels, Norman. Just Health: Meeting Health Needs Fairly. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008. Print.
Erick Erickson. Is there a right to Healthcare? Redstate: Eagle Publishing, 2013. Print.
Harris, John, et al. Global Health and International Community: Ethical, Political and Regulatory Challenges. London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2013. Print.
Lenard, Patti T and Straehle, Christine. Health Inequalities and Global Justice. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2012. Print.
Long, Roderick T. “Left-Libertarianism, Class Conflict, and Historical Theories of Distributive Justice.” Unpublished manuscript, Auburn University (2010). from http://praxeology.net/historical-justice.pdf. Accessed November 5, 2013.