Right  to  Health  Care  Basics

 HOME

PHILOSOPHY & HISTORY

LEGAL ARGUMENTS

  LEGAL   DOCUMENTS

  SEARCH   US

  WHAT'S NEW

Making  the Right to Health Care a  Reality  in  the  USA

 RELATION TO  BEING A FUNCTIONAL DEMOCRACY

RELATION TO UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

LINKS

GRASSROOTS WORK ON THE RIGHT TO HEALTH CARE

STATE  WORK  ON  UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE

ORGANIZATIONS UNITING

Current  Controversies

FREQUENTLY  ASKED  QUESTIONS

FOR  THIS  RIGHT

 AGAINST  THIS  RIGHT

 DISCUSSING  THIS  RIGHT

 INTERNATIONALLY

Related

 ADMIN

 

Opposition to the "Right to Health Care". 

We welcome statements from any opponents, or "undecideds" who could improve on these. Please join our discussion group and send in your additional statement against the "Right to Health Care", or any suggested improvement over those already listed below.  Statements in support of the "Right to Health Care" are also being added continually.

See also our review and summary of the major text published against the "Right to Health Care" by Richard Epstein.   CLICK . and our list of books and references.

  1. There is no historical basis for such a right.  CLICK

  2. There is no legal precedent in the US for such a right..  CLICK

  3. There is no one single compelling reason.  CLICK

  4. Not even health care providers support this idea of health care being a right.  CLICK

  5. It is ridiculous to claim Right to Health Care has been thus far overlooked.  CLICK

  6. We would have to restrict health care providers' rights to select patient clientele if we gave all residents this right.  CLICK

  7. There is no basis for comparing the "Right to Health Care" with the "Right to Education"  CLICK

  8. There is no "Right to Education" officially.  CLICK

  9. Obviously such a right is not essential for effective democracy.  CLICK

  10. Where is the convincing moral argument that would appeal across the board?  CLICK

  11. Cultural perspectives like the "Right to Health Care" cannot be forced  CLICK

  12. The "Right to Education" has not been precedent setting.  CLICK

  13. Your so-called precedent in the "Right to Education" actually suggests "Right to Health Care" is a remote possibility.  CLICK

  14. The documents you cite have no relevance.  CLICK  

  15. Granting a Right to Health Care has nothing to do with achieving access to health care for everyone.  CLICK

There is no historical basis for demanding the "Right to Health Care" and so this work of yours to originate such is really foreign to all legitimate American processes.  Response     More from Opponents

There is no legal precedent for considering health care a right in the US. Rights do not arise by popular demand.  Response.     More from Opponents

There is no compelling reason that the "Right to Health Care" should be recognized for all Americans, or be included as one of our civil rights.  Every other right we have recognized has had one such reason.  The right of women to vote, for example, had the recognition that women are complete human beings capable of participating fully in society.   Response.     More from Opponents

Not even health care providers support this idea and they deal with our system and dozens of patients every day. In fact, the American Medical Association and the state medical societies are opposed to this idea of a "Right to Health Care". If you can't convince them what chance do you have with the general public?   Response     More from Opponents

It is ridiculous to claim that the "Right to Health Care" was somehow overlooked for all these years after all these other rights were being debated and recognized.  Health care would already be a right along with all our others if it were appropriate to include it.  How could you explain that the right to vote, or the right to education was granted while the right to health care was "overlooked" for another 50 years?  Response     More from Opponents

Making it a right, means withdrawing a health care providers' right to decide who they will take on as a patient.  If the Right to Health Care is granted to all Americans, then they can simply show up at any clinic, for any procedure which that clinic is offered and demand to be treated.  You are thereby also just increasing further our already excessive costs for litigation associated with health care provision and regulation.  Response     More from Opponents

There is no historical basis to compare this right to the right to education, which never had strong opposition.  Response     More from Opponents

There is no "Right to Education" either.  It's not in the Constitution, Bill of Rights or any other document.  It's a fiction that you have invented.  Using this supposed "Right" as your "precedent par excellence" demonstrates how weakly the "Right to Health Care" is related to any genuine civil right, like the right to vote, or to bear arms.  Response     More from Opponents

Unlike the right to health care, the right to vote or for education were obviously essential to an effective democracy.  That's why it was left aside at the time and that's why it's still inappropriate to add in with the others.  Response     More from Opponents

Where's the "beef"??  Why can't you offer a convincing moral argument?  If it were appropriate to add the "Right to Health Care" to our other recognized rights, then you would be able to come up with some argument that would appeal to Americans (and legislators) across the board.  If you had such an argument it would quickly become a right (or would have been one already).  Response     More from Opponents

You can't just force or legislate something cultural like the "Right to Health Care" to take root or blossom in the American consciousness - through your political action.  Response     More from Opponents

If the "Right to Education" is to be the precedent for the "Right to Health Care" then how do you explain the origination of the "Right to Education" so long ago without anyone ever seriously considering a "Right to Health Care"?  Response     More from Opponents

According to your own explanation the "Right to Education" took some 150 years to get established, why should anyone care now that you want to start work towards the "Right to Health Care", so it can get established by 2150 ?   Response     More from Opponents

The documents you cite have no relevance.  They were signed long ago and no one takes them seriously or interprets them as you do.   Response     More from Opponents

Even countries which have universal health care, have not often found it necessary to explicitly grant their citizens a "Right to Health Care".  Obviously the granting of this right is a separate agenda from getting everyone access to health care.  Response     More from Opponents

 Back to Discussion Central      **     Browse the Opponent Responses