The Right to Health Care

If current campaign rhetoric is any indication, neither Republican nor Democratic leaders will come even close to working out a better approach to health care in this country than the one we now have and that we have long bemoaned. Part of the problem is us. For most Americans, "better" must include at least three things not achievable in combination: universal access, unlimited choice, and low cost. The other part of the problem is the politicians. They are unwilling to own up to the facts conveyed in the previous sentence.

Is there a Christian way to think about this two-fold problem? Sure. The second part of the problem is easy. One thing that it means to acknowledge that "all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God" is that we put our own concerns first more often than we should, and that we are generally unresponsive when others, temporarily in better control of their own self-centeredness, try to persuade us that we need to be better in control ourselves. Today's political fall-out from humanity's primordial falling-out is that greedy leaders continue to get themselves elected by promising equally greedy citizens what, deep-down, everybody should know they should not have: the best things of life at somebody else's expense.

The first part of the problem is harder: if it is true that our society cannot provide everyone affordable health care that also offers complete freedom to choose one's caregivers, then what will our society provide? Juxtaposing can/can'ts with will/won'ts is deliberate here. Sometimes, what we say we will do really is something that we just cannot do; other times, what we say we can and cannot do turns out to be merely what we will and will not do; and at all times, it is the better part of wisdom to respect the difference. If this is not complicated enough, an even more important question will make it so: if it is true that our society cannot provide optimal health care for all its citizens, then what should our society do instead?

From the standpoint of the Christian faith, it is difficult to find any justification for a system of health care that does not provide equitably for the needs of all, especially a system that makes needed care more readily available, and at a higher quality, to people who can afford to pay for it than to people who cannot. Further, it is difficult to find any justification for allowing the health needs of the poor in any society to go unmet while further enhancing the general well-being of that society's wealthiest members. Does this imply that financing universal health care in America will have to include the systematic redistribution of at least some of the country's wealth? Of course. Can it be done equitably? Possibly. Current redistribution efforts are strongly directed toward the already-have-a-lots. Given the momentum, changing the direction will not be easy.

It may well be, as some economists contend, that we can provide affordable health care for all Americans, as long as we put the primary emphasis on preventative care and restrict freedom of choice somewhat. If an approach like this is sound financially, is it also justifiable "Christianly?" It would seem so. The God of the Bible is a God who most certainly is interested in the well-being of each and every creature --- human and non-human --- that make up the world he is continuously creating. But this God is also, and more so than a ruggedly individualistic American society is, interested in the well-being of the whole society, even if its individual members do not always gain everything to which they consider themselves to be entitled. One unpopular implication of this perspective is that the rationing of health care for some may be necessary for the good of the whole. The alternative, though, is just about what we have now: the rationing for some --- the poor --- for the good of the still fewer --- the better off.

In spite of the unwillingness of government leaders across the political spectrum fully to ensure it, the right to health care will still exist in this society for all the generations to come. From the standpoint of the Constitution, it derives from "unalienable" rights to life and the pursuit of happiness. From the standpoint of faith, it derives from the promise of Christ himself, that we shall not only have life, but that we shall have it "abundantly."