Health Insurance: Privilege or Right?

Another of the arguments by proponents[1] for a Federally subsidized health care “option” is that health insurance is a right. This position forces me to question what exactly what is a “privilege” and what is a “right”.

Without pulling out Miriam Websters, a right is a universally accepted morality which all citizens of a particular society are in agreement of being entitled too.

A privilege is anything that can be afforded which is not a necessity and which is considered beyond the income of those who make the median income of those within a given country.

I don’t think anyone would argue that providing health care is a moral virtue on the order of a right, which any society should practice and provide. And it just so happens that in America we do, in fact, provide health care-free of charge if necessary-to any who need it. But the idea that insurance, of any kind, is a right, I have to question.

This time quoting Websters, the definition which applies is “a protective or compensatory measure”.

Traditionally, insurances-whether they be for a car, a life, a home or a body- have been considered luxuries. When “health” insurance was popularized by the unionization of American workers in the early 20^th century it was seen as another great accomplishment of American society reflective of America’s overall wealth relative to the rest of the world, in that jobs were so plentiful, and paid so well, that workers and employers could “afford” health insurance. And even though most, if not all, American workers had health insurance throughout most of the 20^th century. The fact that Americans, as individuals, could afford the luxury of health insurance for most of the 20^th century became lost out of a laissez faire attitude towards our collective health being insured because it was “guaranteed” via full time employment.

And so now we have a political movement afoot to provide a governmentally subsidized health care plan, through which all Americans will have health insurance, and one of the arguments used by supporters of this idea is that health insurance is a right.

If all American’s were to agree that health insurance is a right, then there would need to be a universal concurrence of opinion as to what that right should entail: how much coverage do we all deserve and what quality of basic services are we entitled too. But more so, if we were to all agree that health insurance is a right, and no longer a privilege, then we would be compelled to also agree on what level of “health” we should all strive for.

Knowing that those who are obese and whom smoke cigarettes and who drink too much alcohol have more health expenses-particularly when they get older-would have to be addressed as a nation. The costs of these behaviors being so high as it relates to our health, there would be a need to regulate them to some degree, if for no other reason than to control costs.

A further concern is that in America our rights are guaranteed by law within our Constitution. Therefore, if we were to deem it necessary for health insurance to be considered a right, to guarantee that right an amendment to our Constitution would be required for its maintenance.

Under these criteria, how could we as a nation ever expect to classify health insurance as a right?

The fact of the matter is, health insurance has never been, and never should be, a right. Health insurance has always been a privilege-a privilege traditionally reserved for the wealthy who could afford to “insure” things against loss or damage, for those who could afford to take risks with things-including their health. Our health has never been guaranteed-not from day one and certainly not when measured against the lifestyle decisions most make through out the course of their lives. Based on these realities it is a wonder how so many people can believe that they have a right to health insurance.

---

[1] I have been told that I should stop referring to those who support the current health care reform option as “lefties” or liberals for a multitude of reasons. Needless to say, based on journalistic integrity alone (I am a professional writer after all) I should not be so biased or derogatory towards proponents of a federally subsidized health care plan.