• Yes, everyone should have the same level.
  • Yes but health care also need to be change at the same time.
  • I understand your question but I think they should be. As long as their taxes ar helping to fund the health care system, yes.
  • Nobody should be entitled to health care.
  • of course
  • They are still human in the end.
  • Yes because even someone that smokes and doesn't exercise or eats fast food pays for health insurance just like anybody else that works and pays for it that is.
  • We may not think so, but legally they are entitled to the same level as everyone else. We don't have the power to judge what others should get in the way of health care and how long they may or may not live. They are harming themselves and statistically it has been proven they will have a lower quality of life and a shorter one.
  • No, I feel that if someone treats themselves poorly they don't deserve healthcare. It is their fault they got in that position and a healthcare company shouldn't have to bail them out. I say that if someone dies from cancer or some other health problem caused by smoking it should be classified as suicide, and most healthcare companies don't cover suicide.
  • If we pass socialized medicine aka single-payer health plans, we may find out. Govt intervention in private lives re diet, exercise, smoking - things that are legal and a question of personal choice - should not be factors in providing health care or levels of health care.
  • That is too subjective to judge. Some people might not take care of themselves because they don't know how, or can't afford it.
  • should someone who judges other people be entitled to the same right of due process of judgement as people who dont? I mean, by your theory, if you ever got accused of a crime, you would be automatically convicted, no judge, no counsel, no jury
  • Even if this person drinks everyday, smokes like a chimeney and eats like a pig... this person deserves the same level of healthcare as everyone else. Life's already complicated as it is... Imagine if we started limiting ourselves in everyday life... to what we ate smoked, drank or forgot to go to the gym.
  • Our personal choices are just that, personal choices. To bestow different levels of healthcare would be discrimination, especially if everyone was paying about the same rates for healthcare. Same question applies to obese people riding in an airplane. Should they pay for two seats, if their rearend will not fit into one seat? If a change is coming, it should not effect people already in a healthcare program. the grandfather clause should apply that only new healthcare customers should be effected.
  • Yes. Its called compassion. Healthcare in my opinion, and in the opinion of many americans is a right for ALL. Just as a hospital cant reject some one for care cause the cant pay,neither should we reject some one because they dont take care of themselves. Theres something that doctors follow, called the hypocratic oath that mandates a doctor to provide care to those in need regardless of what they do. To segregate healtcare based on ones level of health is just as inhumane as segregating healthcare according to wealth . All healthcare should be equal; thankfully we have apresident and a party that realizes this.
  • I believe the government should provide free public health care to all its citizens. Although "free" isn't really the right word, as I think the health care should be partially funded by gov't income generated through taxes. I do realize that unhealthy people would be more of a drain on national resources, but I think the answer to that isn't to deny them health care, but to place heavy sales taxes on unhealthy products, like cigarettes and junk food. The income generated from that can go toward the health care costs.
  • After reading your clarification, being that you and a co-worker are both covered at the same premium rate but his health habits are going to cost the insurance co. more in the long run, I would say he should have to pay more. It's the same in any insurance business. If you are in a higher risk bracket you pay more. Live in a flood plain, you pay more, live in a place that gets hit by hurricanes, you're going to pay more. Same with health. WE all should get the choices to live how we want, but choices carry consequences and that means regarding insurance, higher premiums. Now there are some exceptions. There should also be some rewards to taking better care of yourself, say you lose a bunch of weight and start exercising, then I think they should lower your premium. This is one reason why I'm leery of a government run health care plan. I don't want them telling me what I can and cannot do.
  • Where I'm from we have so called free health care. Every province is different with regards to how much or whether we pay or not, and believe me you pay. Our taxes are sky high. The Province I live in charges us per month, depending on our income. $90 for 2 at a healthy income. It is mandatory. You don't pay, they will get it out of your wages, income tax refund etc. So, the guy who has helped support the medical system, whether he uses it or not, for all the ones that take advantage of it and see a doctor when they have the sniffles or a hang nail, if he has spent thousands over the years and contracts a disease because of smoking or alcohol or some other bad habit. Hmmm. Should we let him rot? I don't think so.
  • Yes. Everyone should get equal levels of health care. Self-inflicted conditions hurt just as much as other types. Getting lung cancer or diabetes is a sufficient punishment for poor health practices, so the patient shouldn't be punished with poor healthcare and high prices. And if you were to instate your policy, where would you draw the line? What constitutes a bad diet? Would you treat someone who eats out at Wendy's once a week and orders a salad the same way that you'd treat somebody who ate 3 meals a day at Wendy's?
  • Generally yes. An argument of equality can always be made, but looking at it from another angle - somebody who doesn't look after themselves will only need healthcare for perhaps 10 years because they will end up killing themself young! Those who look after themselves will need healthcare for 50 or 60 years because they will live so long! That being said, I am staying healthy and fit! :)
  • yes indeed so, because lifestyle might contribute but does not necessarily constitute all outcomes of one's health. Some things like cancer or a faulty ticker or something might be attributed to genetics. If we open the door for someone to decide what an unhealthy lifestyle is, then how long is it before doctors and insurance companies use every little excuse to not give care? Oh you ate a bag of chips? No coverage. You drank a soda? No coverage. You don't go to the gym every day? No coverage. The fact is, some people live unhealthy and live for great grandmosther lived to be 98 and she smoked a pack a day and ate everything cooked in lard...but I had a cousin that dropped dead from a heart attack and he was a marathon go figure. We are all humans, we are all equal and we all deserve to be treated. Sure some people will take advantage of this, they will live unheathily and expect doctors to fix the effects of this...but would you want a doctor to be the one to decide whether to give one of your loved one's that might make the difference between life or death based on what he or some insurance company (who only cares about making money) deciding level of care?

Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC

Answerbag | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy