« | Main | Allen's gut check »

July 17, 2009

More on Health Care

At the end of his discussion of Peter Singers call for rationed health care, Fr. Araujo says:   "If the treatment is available and will do good for that person, it should be made available."  Is this always true?  Two further questions:  at what cost and who bears the cost?  Two more:  who decides what is good and by what criteria? 

Even if we get medical and pharmaceutical costs under control, is it the case that a parent ought to be able to take a child to the doctor every time she gets the sniffles (easy to do back in the HMO days with a $5 co-pay)?  Should an otherwise healthy 85 year old be eligible for a heart transplant? 

My intuition is that we have (and will continue to have) health care rationing at multiple levels - government, insurance company, and individual. Am I wrong about this?  I'm more concerned about the criteria for rationing.  Singers criteria, based upon his anthropology, would lead to a furher entrenchment of the culture of death.  A Catholic anthropology, taking into account all that Fr. Araujo discusses, would lead to the building of a culture of life.  Thoughts?

Posted by Michael Scaperlanda on July 17, 2009 at 10:40 AM in Scaperlanda, Mike | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515a9a69e20115711da6ab970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More on Health Care: