Tag: heallth care

Is Health Care a Human Right?

Is there a right to health care? Most libertarians and classical liberals would say “no,” and most progressives are shocked by that answer. For progressives, nothing could be more obvious than that everyone deserves access to health care regardless of their ability to pay. Distributing medical care based on wealth is for dystopian science fiction stories, where the underclass gets back-alley doctors and the ruling class gets sleek, modern hospitals. It doesn’t belong in a civilized society. (For more on this topic, see “Government Makes Healthcare Worse and More Expensive.”)

Thus progressives ask, how can libertarians be so heartless as to not believe in a right to health care?

In this essay, I will try to answer that question. While I might not convince you that there isn’t a right to health care, I hope to at least convey that, whatever a “right” to health care is, it is something fundamentally different from the sort of thing we usually call a “right”—so different, in fact, that we probably shouldn’t be using the same word.

I’ll be narrowly focused on that question. This essay is not about how the free market can solve health care, it’s not arguing that health care isn’t crucial to a flourishing life, and it doesn’t claim that America’s health care system is better than systems where people do have a “right” to health care. It’s only about whether it makes sense to call health care a “right.”

What We Mean When We Say, “Rights”

In October 2017, the National Health Service, Great Britain’s single-payer, socialized healthcare provider, announced that smokers and the obese would be banned from non-urgent surgery indefinitely. According to the Telegraph:

[T]he new rules, drawn up by clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) in Hertfordshire, say that obese patients “will not get non-urgent surgery until they reduce their weight”…unless the circumstances are exceptional.

The criteria also mean smokers will only be referred for operations if they have stopped smoking for at least eight weeks, with such patients breathalysed before referral.

The policy change understandably received significant criticism and brings to the fore the true meaning of “right” to health care. 

What is a right? Even though “rights talk” permeates our political conversations, most people have never tried to define a right. Sometimes the term is used as a synonym for “important”—thus we hear about a right to clean water, shelter, education, and healthcare, all of which are undoubtedly important.

Yet having a “right” to something means more than that. Saying something is a “right” describes a relationship between individuals. It makes us think about our obligations to each other and the government’s obligations to its citizens. Rather than focusing on what we have rights to, I’d like to focus on the relationships that a “right” creates and the distinction between positive and negative rights.

Rights describe a relationship between at least two people: a rightholder and a duty-holder. If someone has a right, others have a corollary duty. They’re inextricably linked; two sides of the same coin.

Think of a desert island with only Robinson Crusoe, before Friday arrives. Crusoe could tell the trees and the animals that he has a “right” to life, but would it mean anything? A tiger chasing him through the grass is immune to Crusoe’s right-claim. Tigers can’t be duty-holders, so the term “right” does not describe a relationship between Crusoe and the tiger. When Friday arrives, however, Crusoe’s claim that he has a right to life implies something about the relationship between him and Friday. If Crusoe has a right to life, then Friday has a duty not to murder him, and vice versa.

The nature of the corollary duty is what distinguishes positive rights from negative ones. For negative rights, the corollary duty is an omission—that is, duty-holders are required to refrain from doing something, e.g. don’t steal, don’t punch people, don’t kill. For a positive right, the corollary duty is a duty of action—that is, duty-holders are required to affirmatively act, e.g. provide food, provide health care, or provide resources for such things. Understanding this technical, but crucial, difference between positive and negative rights can help us identify four qualities that make them categorically different.

Keep reading

Everyone Was Just Doing Their Job: How Specialization Enables Systemic Evil

The world’s a screaming match—doctors, economists, influencers, all clawing for their slice of truth. Nobody’s listening, and nobody’s seeing the whole damn picture. We have more information than ever, but we’re dumber where it counts, stuck in a loop of shouting past each other. This isn’t just politics or algorithm nonsense; it’s the cult of specialization—our worship of experts who know everything about nothing. Doctors pushing Covid shots didn’t see the fraud. Economists missed the heist. Engineers built surveillance without blinking. Each turned their screw, blind to the machine they were feeding—a Moral Assembly Line where systemic evil thrives. The system’s not broken; it’s built to break us, and we’re all complicit until we start connecting the dots. As I explored in The Illusion of Expertise, we’ve confused credentials with wisdom, compliance with intelligence. Now we see the deadly consequences: we’re not failing because of bad experts—we’re failing because specialization itself has become the operating system of institutional evil.

A Society Talking Past Itself

Step into any barroom debate, X thread, or YouTube comments section, and it’s chaos—facts flying, no one landing. We’ve outsourced our brains to specialists who slice reality into bits too small to mean anything. A cardiologist can’t talk vaccines. An economist reduces geopolitics to models, blind to the real forces at play. Everyone’s got their PhD in one inch of the world, and we’re dumber for it. Specialization doesn’t just fracture understanding; it’s the architecture of control, ensuring no one sees the crimes—medical fraud, wealth theft, digital chains—unfolding in plain sight. We’re not arguing because we’re stupid; we’re arguing because the system keeps us siloed, complicit, and clueless.

Keep reading

NIH To Build Massive Health Data Platform Linking Health Records, Genomic Profiles, and Smartwatch Data for Medical Research

The National Institutes of Health is quietly assembling a vast digital mosaic of Americans’ private medical histories, pulling sensitive data from both government-run health systems and commercial sources to support autism research tied to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s latest project. The new scheme involves a sweeping plan to integrate diverse streams of health data into a single platform, raising significant concerns about privacy, oversight, and long-term use.

According to NIH Director Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, the data aggregation includes pharmacy transactions, insurance claims, clinical test results, and even personal metrics collected from wearable tech such as fitness trackers and smartwatches.

Health information from the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Indian Health Service is also being funneled in, creating a massive, centralized repository with a wide lens on the US population.

As Bhattacharya told agency advisers on Monday, the objective is to eliminate the fragmentation that currently limits access to existing health data sets. He said the new system would cut down on redundancies and make it easier for researchers to conduct large-scale analysis.

“The idea of the platform is that the existing data resources are often fragmented and difficult to obtain. The NIH itself will often pay multiple times for the same data resource. Even data resources that are within the federal government are difficult to obtain,” he said.

Keep reading

Catholic hospital drops legal argument that a fetus is not a person

Catholic Health Initiatives-Iowa has dropped its argument in a medical malpractice case that the loss of an unborn child does not equate to the death of a “person” for the purpose of calculating damage awards.

The nonprofit, tax-exempt entity is one of several defendants in a Polk County malpractice case involving the death of an unborn child.

Last month, attorneys for CHI and MercyOne Des Moines Medical Center argued an unborn child should not be considered a “patient” for purposes of calculating damages in the case. They also argued that “finding an unborn child to be a ‘person’ would lead to serious implications in other areas of the law.”

That position appeared to clash with CHI’s mission statement and ethics guidelines, both of which are based on the concept that human life begins at the moment of conception.

In Iowa, court-ordered awards for noneconomic losses stemming from medical malpractice are capped at $250,000, except in cases that entail the “loss or impairment of mind or body.” Initially, CHI and MercyOne argued the cap on damages applied in cases where the “loss” was that of a fetus or an unborn child.

However, during a court hearing on Friday, an attorney for CHI and MercyOne, Christine Conover, informed the court it was withdrawing from the motion to cap damages in the case on that basis.

“We are a Catholic hospital and obviously the Catholic faith believes that life begins at conception,” Conover told Polk County District Judge Scott J. Beattie.

“To be honest, I had wondered about that stance,” Beattie told Conover, referring to the hospital’s previously filed motion seeking to cap damages. “It seemed like kind of an odd stance,” he added, noting that it seemed to contradict the position that CHI had taken in other legal matters.

In a written statement issued Friday, Bob Ritz, president and CEO of MercyOne, stated “we are heartbroken that our belief that human personhood begins at conception would ever be called into question. As a Catholic health system, the sanctity of life is not just a belief we hold; it is the foundation of every action we take.

“While the motion (to limit damages) was accurate from a purely legal standpoint, it has caused confusion and concern. That is why we have asked our counsel to withdraw the motion with respect to MercyOne. No courtroom argument should ever cast doubt on the deeply held Catholic values that guide MercyOne.

Keep reading

Face Scanning App Developed to Identify Unconscious Patients Decades After Human Microchips Failed to Gain Traction

The Dubai Corporation for Ambulance Services has announced a smartphone app that utilizes facial recognition technology aimed at identifying unconscious patients in emergency scenarios. By the middle of 2025 it is expected to be operational in the United Arab Emirates’ ambulatory setting.

“With the app, a patient in an emergency situation such as in a state of unconsciousness can have their face scanned by paramedics for their personal identification information to be retrieved, thanks to the system’s integration with the UAE national identity database,” Biometric Update said Friday.

Dubai is undergoing a so-called ‘digital transformation‘ where facial recognition is taking center stage in the areas of public transit and palm print scanning is being implemented in the areas of payments and commerce.

Being face scanned while unconscious may be the least of someone’s worries, as in the U.S. unconscious patients are being enrolled into medical experiments and administered lethal Covid vaccines.

While face scanning may be seen as invasive by some, American company VeriChip Corporation took things a step further, much further, when they developed an Orwellian implantable human microchip called the VeriChip in the early 2000s with the express purpose of identifying patients in the medical setting as well as identifying children.

Keep reading

Judge Dismisses Charges Against Hero Texas Doctor Who Blew the Whistle on Sex Change Program at Texas Children’s Hospital After Trump DOJ Intervenes

The Trump Administration filed a motion to dismiss charges against Dr. Ethan Haim, the hero surgeon who blew the whistle on a sex change program at the Texas Children’s Hospital.

A few hours later, a federal judge dismissed the charges with prejudice.

As previously reported, Biden’s corrupt Justice Department indicted a Texas surgeon who blew the whistle on a sex-change program at the Texas Children’s Hospital.

In May 2023, Dr. Eithan Haim leaked the sex change documents to investigative reporter Christopher Rufo. Dr. Haim was careful not to disclose any patient information but the Biden DOJ indicted him on four felony counts related to HIPAA violations.

One day after Dr. Haim exposed the Texas Children’s Hospital, the Texas state legislature voted to ban transgender medical treatment and procedures on minors.

Keep reading