The idea is bound to trigger controversies

Mar 11, 2009 11:13 GMT  ·  By
The American health care system needs a complete overhaul, before it collapses due to high costs and small coverage
   The American health care system needs a complete overhaul, before it collapses due to high costs and small coverage

A medical ethicist from the Michigan State University says that the current path on which the American health care system is going is completely unsustainable, as evidenced by the fact that costs have soared to more than $2.5 trillion, and yet 48 million citizens remain uninsured. He states that such disparities do not offer any kind of justification of keeping the current layout of the system, and that, if a complete overhaul is impossible, then health care should be rationed. This means that some citizens would have to give up some facilities, so that others too receive at least basic coverage.

“When it comes to health care in America, we have limited resources for unlimited health care needs. We want everything contemporary medical technology can offer that will improve the length or quality of our lives as we age. But as presently healthy taxpayers, we want costs controlled,” MSU Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences philosophy professor and faculty member Leonard Fleck, the author of the recently-published book “Just Caring” (Oxford University Press), adds.

He argues that, while thousands of citizens die each year on account of the fact that they cannot afford health coverage, millions of dollars from taxpayers' money are spent on procedures that do not cure diseases, but simply prolong life by a few weeks or months. This approach, the author stresses, is unsustainable for those who are without insurance. Individuals must not die just because others are too selfish to share their benefits and take no time to wonder how they have come to be poor.

“This is the 'just caring' problem: Why should anyone else pay attention to my demands for justice in meeting my health needs when I refuse to pay attention to their demands for justice in meeting their health needs? No one has a moral right to impose rationing decisions on others if they are unwilling to impose those same rationing decisions on themselves in the same medical circumstances,” Fleck underlines.

“What we have to identify are marginally beneficial, non-cost-worthy health care options that we would be willing to deny to our future selves to guarantee we have sufficient resources to provide health care to everyone. If we are unable to control health care costs, we have no chance at health care reform,” the author concludes, pointing out that the new book features numerous examples of paradoxes in the American health care system.