|
|
How have any rights come to be widely accepted and legally established?
In the modern era even our most conservative leaders invoke the "Right to Vote" and democratic ideals as fundamental to humanity. Thus President G.W. Bush's speeches on democratic process and the "Right to Vote" in Iraq in 2003. Interestingly, the same President also spoke of the right to universal health care and universal education in Iraq following the bombing campaign. Is he imposing foreign values on Iraqi society? Or, does he believe that these are "natural rights" which belong to all peoples of the world (all of humanity except the low income workers in the USA?). How could these rights be recognized as essential to Iraqis and yet withheld from people of his own nation?
Many people throughout the world accept that "human rights" evolve through history. The idea is that as societies become increasingly civilized and so ruled by law, rather than by the whim of one or several personalities, the just treatment of all members of that society would naturally advance. History shows that "human rights" evolve as a concept as nations become "westernized" or attempt to appear democratic in nature. Governments regularly expand their lists of citizens' rights, although they have various mechanisms and various ways that new rights can be amended to the existing categories of rights. Multinational congresses and courts have also shown little reluctance to slowly expand definitions of "rights" and citizens' protections for all nations.
So much for the concepts and rhetoric of human rights. As most readers have probably already noted, expanding the national or international list of "Human Rights" or even the list of protected civil rights within a country does not necessarily mean that individuals are any more protected or will enjoy any of those new rights in practice. Indeed, the preceding paragraphs deal only with the basis and evolution of the concepts. It is always another matter to have the rights recognized in practice. Nonetheless, no one is going to be able to demand a right within any nation while the concept of that right has never even been put with ink on paper. So there is always the necessary first step, of gaining official recognition for a right.
|
Is there a specific example of a right like the "Right to Health Care" becoming accepted?
We consider the "Right to Education" to be a particularly relevant model for the "Right to Health Care". The "Right to Education" and the concept of "universal education" (UE) for primary and secondary school was not mentioned or considered at the founding of our nation and is still not in the bill of rights (as most of our rights are not). However, it is easy to demonstrate that there is a "Right to Education" or that UE exists in this country.
If one asks a hundred Americans whether their children have a right to go to elementary school, it is unlikely that more than one or two would even hesitate to answer "Yes". If any American were told that their child was not entitled to be educated at their local grade school and that neither was an alternative location recommended by the county or state, there would be very few Americans who would just say "okay, my child is not entitled to an education and he/she can just sit home watching daytime TV instead". Quite the opposite, parents who do not put their children into school are vigorously pursued and questioned. Children can, in fact, be removed from their parents' home for not being prepared and sent off to school regularly.
|
Horace Mann edited the "Common School Journal" [note universal education was known as "common education"] and wrote twelve Annual Reports, including one in which he argued that economic wealth would increase through an educated public. It was therefore in the self-interest of business to pay the taxation for public education.
|
In another he argued that education was a natural right for every child and a necessary responsibility of the State to insure that education was provided for every child. This led to the adoption of the first State law requiring compulsory attendance in school.
Like most of our rights, UE was established during long years of struggle begun by relatively few individuals, but pursued through broad education and eventually demanded by most Americans. This occurred at the state level and it occurred against an opposition very similar to the opposition we face today to UHC so many decades later. The first attempt at UE enactment in a state was in Virginia in the 1770's. The first state to enact UE was Massachusetts in the late 1830's (compulsory attendance was passed later). By the mid-1870's 60% of the states had enacted a UE provision and were attempting to see that all their children were attending primary school. By the end of the 1870's the federal government became involved mandating that every state should provide for universal education, at least for elementary education.
Like UE, UHC is likely to be achieved first within a state, then within many states and finally at the federal level. There are two reasons for this. First, because the chances of defeating the very wealthy opposition we face (with their resultant power to influence legislators) is much greater at a state level, where we have some opportunity to travel across the entire state educating every community and constituency and forcing the legislators to fall in line with the demands of people within their districts. Second, it just stands to reason that conditions will be extremely severe (like hospital closings, ER's diverting ambulances, unaffordable premiums) and solutions adequately clear to the residents of one state years before the entire nation is so fully aware of the problem and what would constitute a genuine lasting solution.
Of course the struggle for UE did not end in the late 1870's either, that's just when it became recognized officially that education was a right in which every American should share. There still remained many struggles for high quality education for African Americans, for girls, for the disabled and for high attendance in education during primary and secondary school (not just for a couple of the most convenient weeks for the parents each school year). These struggles continue in some form today. The reality that a population of a state or country needs to remain vigilant and protective of their rights does not mean that it was not worthwhile to establish that they have those rights. Just the opposite, getting official recognition of a right allows people to successfully protect and assert those rights.
We would expect that even after a "Right to Health Care" were officially sanctioned and protected in law, there would be an on-going effort by the opposition and some of the more priveleged members of our society to underfund, discredit and undermine the right and public access to health care resources. It will become the responsibility of all citizens to protect our right and demand that it be respected.
|
|
