Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Garnier Fructis View Post
    Societies get to decide their own rights. There are no natural human rights, we're collections of atoms. Why are you getting your panties in a twist if Belgium decides health care is a right?
    Because its being considered by the mindless populace thats misleaded through false assumptions.

    Like the idea that implementing an $18K/mo policy is not only financially feasible but also fair, meaning you have to cover everything less expensive).

    Why are you getting your panties in a twist if I prove that its more practical and ethical to consider the cost when advocating for healthcare?

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Scrooge McDuck View Post
    http://www.deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuw...ctor_follow-up

    This is currently a hot topic in Belgium.

    Basically, a 7 year old child named Viktor has a rare disease that requires medication worth 18,000 EUR per month, medication which is not refunded by the National Health Service. The parents were referred to a communications agency by a patient interest group to bring public attention to this topic. the news made all the headlines and even the federal government got involved: the health minister is now talking to Alexion, the company that makes the medication, to strike a deal. discussions were already underway before the press got involved.

    however, today, it turned out that the agency that the parents got referred to was contacted and paid for by Alexion, in order to put extra pressure on the minister. the parents did not know this, and furthermore it was found out that the company deliberately chose Viktor due to mediagenic profile.

    This just becomes absurd...

    what's your opinion on this?
    I see a huge ethical problem! I see the government of Belgium deciding that a 7 year old child's life is worth less than 18,000 EUR per month. Universal healthcare allows governments to set a price on the life of everyone subjected to it.

  3. #43
    Warchief marthsk's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Iglooland, eh?
    Posts
    2,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82 View Post
    The kid wasn't abused, at worst he was taken advantage of.
    That sort of ties in well together, don't you think?

    That kid didn't walk, he merely put his foot in front of the other, and then did it again multiple times.
    It's time to level up and quit your newbie ways
    You need to go outside and get some new V-rays
    A fresh breath of air will help you talk again
    Inhale, exhale, feel the Oxygen
    - Woodman

  4. #44
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by yurano View Post
    But its not a right.
    Over here it is. I concider the right to healthcare infinitly more valuable then for example, the right to bear arms.

    Quote Originally Posted by yurano View Post
    If the government is obligated to pay for lifesaving healthcare at $18K per month, ought not they be obligated to pay for lifesaving healthcare at $17K per month? How about $16K? It would be unfair to only treat a lifesaving condition at $18K/mo but not at any lower cost ratios.

    As I've discussed above, you can't only consider $18K/mo treatments. You must also consider $17K/mo, $16K/mo, etc treatments that bring about as much "good". It is easily NOT a drop in the bucket for the government of an industrialized nation.
    The government is obligated (at least it should be) to pay for lifesaving healthcare at any cost if it is possible to get said healthcare in any Belgian hospital.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •