- Question
- Should healthcare be free?
- Position1 of 3›
- No, healthcare shouldn't be free
Humans would be living without taking care of their health since complementary health services are always available. Therefore, the awareness of being active in living healthily may be taken away.
The argument
Free healthcare may make people less motivated to make healthy life decisions. Healthcare should a last resort. A healthy diet, exercise, and personal development are key to health. If healthcare is freely available, people may start to worry less about preventative measures to protect their health. As a result, more obesity, malnourishment, and bad behavior may begin to crop up in society. Free healthcare is a path to a lazy society.
Context
Humans are risk takers and free healthcare might make them believe they can take more risk that might endanger their lives and livelihood.
Premises
Counter-arguments
Free healthcare has far too many benefits that outweigh the small portion of the population that might abuse this newfound medical freedom. The medical world, since the beginning, has been dealing with a fear of cost to maintaining a healthy life. Some people are so afraid of that cost that they would rather not seek medical help instead of taking on massive debt. Free healthcare would allow for everyone to be able to see doctors and receive care for all their medical needs. While there would be an increase in patients and doctors visits, there would not be a real increase in those with ailments. The only thing that would change is people coming in when they actually need help or advice.
Rejecting the premises
[Rejecting P1] The counter identifies the existing incentive as working the wrong way round: fear of cost has long deterred people from seeking care at all, with some preferring to go without rather than take on substantial debt, so removing the charge brings people to a doctor when they need one rather than removing a reason to stay well. [Rejecting P2] The predicted deterioration is not what the counter expects to follow: more appointments would not mean more illness, only that those already unwell present themselves, and it treats the portion of people who might misuse the arrangement as small against the benefit of universal access.