What do you see as the purpose of health insurance? Should there be limits on the amount of health care provided? If yes, what criteria should we use to ration health care? If no, how should health care be financed so that everyone has access?

Isn't the purpose of health insurance to pay the major portion of medical treatment?

Yes, there should be limits on the amount of health care provided. However, there should be no limits on the quality of health care.

The next question is loaded! Rationing implies that a governmental body sets rules that apply to everyone regardless of age, life expectancy, and quality of life. Today, families, doctors, and patients agonize over how much care to provide to terminally ill patients. Most people believe the quality of life is just as important as prolonging life indefinitel. Tough decisions! Please read this article to help you form your opinion.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/19/magazine/19healthcare-t.html

I strongly believe that all health care should be financed by taxes paid by everyone. We taxpayers provide free education for children through high school. We also pay for roads, defense, police and fire protection, government, and public parks. Shouldn't we also pay for our citizens medical care?

Aren't healthy citizens as important as educated citizens? Aren't healthy citizens as important as being safe from criminals and fire?

The purpose of health insurance is to provide a financial safety net for individuals and families in the event of a medical need or illness. It serves to share the financial burden of healthcare expenses and minimize the out-of-pocket costs for individuals.

Whether there should be limits on the amount of healthcare provided is a complex question. Balancing the need for accessible and affordable healthcare with the limited resources available is a challenge. It is important to ensure that healthcare is allocated efficiently and effectively.

If limits on healthcare provision are implemented, criteria for rationing should be based on objective and ethical considerations. Some possible criteria include medical necessity, cost-effectiveness, patient priority, and prognosis. However, deciding on specific criteria for rationing healthcare services would require a broader societal discussion, incorporating values, ethics, and the views of various stakeholders.

Alternatively, if there are no limits on healthcare provision, it raises questions about how healthcare should be financed to ensure everyone has access. One possible approach is implementing a universal healthcare system where healthcare is funded through a combination of taxes, government programs, and other funding sources. This ensures that everyone has access to necessary healthcare services regardless of their financial situation. However, the specific financing mechanisms would also require careful consideration and depend on the priorities and resources of a given country or society.

In summary, the purpose of health insurance is to provide financial protection for healthcare needs. Whether there should be limits on healthcare provision or not depends on societal considerations. If limits exist, criteria for rationing should be based on objective and ethical factors. If not, healthcare could be financed through a universal healthcare system to ensure access for everyone. The details and implementation of these approaches require deeper analysis and consideration.