This begs for a response, but I'm so steamed I don't know where to begin.
Help! --Ocean
---------------------------
Cowichan Valley NewsLeader
http://www.cowichannewsleader.com/
"Shouldn't we pay for our bad health choices?"
By Patrick Hrushowy
Apr 05 2006
If there is an expectation that government should pay the total shot for
health care, does that mean government should have the authority to regulate
individual behaviour that increases health risks?
I doubt anyone is brave enough to go there politically but a discussion
does make sense, particularly since we are engaged in a broad dialogue here
in B.C. over the principles contained in the Canada Health Act. Premier
Campbell has added sustainability to the discussion.
I don't know how we can logically avoid that discussion. If lifestyle
has such a huge impact on an individual's state of health (and it does), how
can it not have an effect on accessibility, comprehensiveness and
universality - three of the five criteria shaping our public health care
services?
The medical profession is currently exhorting the population about
obesity, surely something firmly anchored in lifestyle choices. We are told
there are significant health and wellness risks associated with obesity that
are totally within the control of the individual, i.e. diet and exercise.
One particular health risks involved with obesity is Type Two Diabetes;
again something we are told is quite manageable through lifestyle choices.
Are we to provide free medical care to people whose lifestyle choices
expose them to health risks? After all, it is tax dollars that pay the bill
and we don't need to look very far to see who is paying the taxes - that
would be you and me.
What about drug and alcohol abuse? What about sexually transmitted
diseases? What about injuries associated with participation in extreme
sports? The list can go on -.
I can hear the screams already about human rights.
But, hang on a moment - the principle is already established. The Canada
Health Act does not apply to members of the RCMP and Canadian Forces and
does not include workers covered by provincial workers' compensation
programs. These people have their medical coverage paid for in another way
because it was felt that the health care system should not bear the brunt of
the costs of these targeted areas of activity.
All I'm saying is that if people engage in behaviour that puts their
health and well-being at risk, they should not be asking you and me to carry
the financial burden of that risk. People are always going on about holding
politicians to account. Well, how about holding individuals accountable for
their own state of health and well-being? How about setting up a system
similar to our car insurance that would assess lifestyle risks and charge
premiums accordingly?
I know, I know; it is conventional wisdom that people have limited
control over their own health and well-being, what with all that nasty junk
food advertising, and with cigarettes and booze so readily available, not to
mention all those toxins poisoning the environment.
It's the same old story: I would if I could, but I can't, so I won't.
It's someone else's fault.
-------------------
Problems/Questions? Send it to Listserv owner: [log in to unmask]
To unsubscribe, send the following message in the text section -- NOT the subject header -- to [log in to unmask]
SIGNOFF SDOH
DO NOT SEND IT BY HITTING THE REPLY BUTTON. THIS SENDS THE MESSAGE TO THE ENTIRE LISTSERV AND STILL DOES NOT REMOVE YOU.
To subscribe to the SDOH list, send the following message to [log in to unmask] in the text section, NOT in the subject header.
SUBSCRIBE SDOH yourfirstname yourlastname
To post a message to all 1000+ subscribers, send it to [log in to unmask]
Include in the Subject, its content, and location and date, if relevant.
For a list of SDOH members, send a request to [log in to unmask]
To receive messages only once a day, send the following message to [log in to unmask]
SET SDOH DIGEST
To view the SDOH archives, go to: https://listserv.yorku.ca/archives/sdoh.html
|
