6

31 comments

[–] ScorpioGlitch 1 points (+1|-0)

In socialism, the government controls the means of service and production. By making a system where health care is basically "free", the cost is actually subsidized by a government regulated program. In order to do this and ensure fairness, no doctor can refuse a patient. For any reason. You are taking that control you gave the government over health care and forcing a doctor to treat a patient regardless of whether or not they want to, whether or not a patient is compliant, and whether or not a patient is abusive to the doctor. The doctor cannot refuse to do the work. The word for this is "slavery".

So, to sum that up, you are suggesting that slavery of a serviceman or produce is an acceptable choice. It is not.

[–] [Deleted] -1 points (+0|-1)

I don't think that has anything to do with socialism, we're talking about medical ethics.

Physicians since the 3rd century BC have been working along the lines of the Hippocratic Oath to help the sick and do no harm.

They don't discriminate who they treat, they treat according to need.

[–] ScorpioGlitch 0 points (+0|-0) Edited

What, so doctors should work for free? Because it sounds like you're trying to say that turning someone away for non-payment and the dude dies the next day counts. In the meantime, if doctors are working for free, then how's their family gonna eat?

[–] [Deleted] -1 points (+0|-1)

Where did I say doctors should work for free?

In the UK health care is free at the point of delivery. It's the cheapest and one of the best health care systems in the world. Doctors here are well paid.