Our well-being is determined by different practices and activities that we engage in our daily lives. One of the essential aspects of our livelihoods is our healthcare, and we must strive to ensure that our bodies are free from illnesses and diseases which might affect our well-being. Therefore, access to healthcare services is one of the most essential necessities. Societies must strive to ensure that all their members have access to free and quality healthcare services. Unfortunately, this is not the case, for often, healthcare services are available to the individuals who can foot the bills. This leaves out a considerable number of society members suffering significantly because most people live in poor conditions. Advocacy for free healthcare services seeks to ensure that every person can be attended to without paying money which has barred most people from accessing the services in the past. Free healthcare could benefit our society extensively, especially by helping minimize the social differences caused by unequal distribution of resources. Despite the benefits of ensuring that free healthcare is available, some people are against the advocacy for free healthcare services. We will discuss the advantages of free healthcare to societies and explore some of the counterarguments presented by the opponents.
One reason pushing us to advocate for free healthcare services is that access to quality healthcare services is considered a fundamental human right. International bodies like the UN and the World Health Organization (WHO) encourage societies to work toward ensuring that all people access free quality healthcare services (WHO). All people must be treated with dignity and not subjected to suffering as provided by the UN Charter. People who cannot access free healthcare services will likely suffer significantly from their ailments. This is a bad happening considering we should ensure our colleagues live comfortably. It is wrong to have people suffer from conditions that can be treated, and the only barrier is their inability to foot the medical bills that come with the treatment. Providing free healthcare services helps improve people’s quality of life because people can engage in other practices that better their livelihoods. When one must have some money to receive medical services, they are likely to stay for long with their conditions as they strive to get the money, which eats into their productivity. It is vital to ensure that people have access to free healthcare services because this allows them to live dignified life.
In addition, providing free healthcare services helps ensure public health outcomes are realized. Most public health goals and objectives are not realized because of the barriers erected, especially the high cost of the services. Some diseases have continued to affect our societies despite the availability of medications (Hunt et al., p.3691). Again, other diseases have continued to affect our livelihoods despite the availability of vaccines developed to boost people’s immunity and help them improve their health. These diseases and illnesses continue affecting our societies because some individuals cannot afford healthcare services. When some people can pay for healthcare services, they are likely to get new infections from those without medical services. This way, it is difficult for public health to be improved and ensure that the set goals, like eradicating some diseases from societies, are realized. With free healthcare services, people are likely to seek medical services before their situation worsens and it becomes difficult for them to heal. Some diseases and conditions become resistant when measures are not initiated to treat all society members. Therefore, providing free healthcare services is vital to people’s determination to realize public healthcare goals.
Further, free healthcare services go a long way toward reducing the social injustices rooted in our societies. Our societies have an unequal distribution of wealth, and most people are poor. This leads to the inability of most society members to access medical services because they can pay for the available medical insurance services (Di Cesare et al., p.586). The gap between the poor and the rich keeps growing with the insistence that people pay for medical services. The provision of free healthcare services helps remove the barriers that have ensured that marginalized and poor society members have been unable to access medical services since immemorial. Statistics show that some communities are affected by diseases whose cure has already been discovered. This has ensured that some community members are left behind and continue suffering because of their impoverished status, whereas the rich continue thriving for they can afford medical services regardless of the cost. Free healthcare services will remove the financial burden, which has seen people and communities rely on loans to access medical services. Sometimes, people lose their property to creditors when they cannot pay their debts, worsening their condition. Therefore, people need to develop strategies to ensure that healthcare services are freely available to the people and help address the inequalities already existing in our society.
Additionally, free healthcare services will help reduce the cost of healthcare services (Chen et al., p.212). It is said prevention is better than cure, and the availability of free healthcare services will ensure that people can seek medical services before their condition worsens. Again, individuals will be able to receive the necessary vaccines on time and boost their immunity. This ensures that they do not suffer from the diseases later in life and reduce the amount of money that could be used to attend to the illnesses if they strike later. Some chronic diseases like cancer are easily manageable when diagnosed in their initial stages. Free access to medical healthcare services will help ensure that people can visit healthcare facilities quickly and get the necessary services before the disease spreads. However, the unavailability of free healthcare services will make these people continue suffering and spend more resources attending to the diseases, which they could not have done if the medical services were freely available.
Despite the numerous benefits of free healthcare services, some individuals opine against this idea as they feel it could be too expensive. They submit that it will be difficult for governments and authorities to continue providing other services their citizens need if they provide free healthcare services. However, we find this assumption unfounded, mainly because it goes against governments’ main roles and responsibilities. Most governments are tasked with protecting the lives of their citizens. Therefore, when the citizens are left to suffer and sometimes die because of their inability to afford medical services, the governments usually fail. Again, free healthcare services will help save the money spent treating illnesses not attended to in their initial stages, as discussed above (Newhouse, pp.3-21). Therefore, people should not use the cost of providing free healthcare services to advance their argument because people’s suffering because of their inability to afford medical services cannot be equated to any amount of money.
Again, the opponents of free healthcare services argue that it could lead to a decline in the quality of services provided in healthcare facilities. The opponents state that more people could be admitted to the facilities, which could easily overwhelm the healthcare professionals because the facilities are not prepared to handle many people. We find this argument against free healthcare disturbing because it seems that some people must suffer while others continue their activities without challenges. With adequate funds and resources, more healthcare facilities will be developed to attend to the increase in the number of patients seeking the services. Again, more healthcare professionals will be employed in the facilities to offer services and handle the high number of patients streaming into the facilities. Individuals should not be seen to erect artificial barriers and use excuses to bar their colleagues from accessing healthcare services. Every individual has a right to quality healthcare, and governments should work toward actualizing this requirement.
In conclusion, all healthcare professionals and stakeholders should prioritize access to free healthcare services. This is because it affects people’s well-being and ensures optimal productivity. Access to free healthcare reduces the inequalities in society and the amount of money spent attending to patients. Again, ensuring that individuals can access free healthcare services helps preserve human dignity because they are protected from suffering that could emanate from their inability to afford medical services. Claims by opponents of free healthcare services should not be given room to thrive because they are often caused by pessimism and a failure to look at the bigger picture. Free healthcare services are the way to go; everyone must strive to realize this dream.
Works Cited
Chen, G. John, and Steven R. Feldman. “Economic aspect of health care systems: advantage and disadvantage incentives in different systems.” Dermatologic clinics 18.2 (2000): 211-214.
Di Cesare, Mariachiara, et al. “Inequalities in non-communicable diseases and effective responses.” The Lancet 381.9866 (2013): 585-597.
Hunt, Lauren J., Krista L. Harrison, and Kenneth E. Covinsky. “Instead of wasting money on aducanumab, pay for programs proven to help people living with dementia.” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 69.12 (2021): 3690-3692.
Newhouse, Joseph P. “Medical care costs: how much welfare loss?.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 6.3 (1992): 3-21.
World Health Organization. “WHO global strategy on health, environment and climate change: the transformation needed to improve lives and well-being sustainably through healthy environments.” (2020).
write