Timothy Goodman Critical Analysis

Zach Joseph

Dr. Morris

CTI 281

4 March 2015

Timothy Goodman Critical Analysis

Timothy Goodman argues in his article “Is There A Right To Health?” that health should not be viewed as a right, but rather a desire.  He argues against government involvement is the healthcare system and ultimately claims that healthcare should be viewed as a business.  

Goodman argues that providing handouts through the welfare system discourages people from being productive.  He claims that the government giving more benefits for free encourages dependence on the state.  Government also lacks the resources to pay for these benefits, and therefore must take these resources from those individuals who have them.  This redistribution of wealth presents a threat to personal liberty and punishes successful people for the work their contributions to society.

Goodman also refutes the notion that healthcare should be treated as an equal right to those of life and liberty.  He claims that though healthcare is necessary for people to function, it is also necessary that people find jobs, food, water, and shelter.  The state has no obligation to provide its citizens with these resources and should not be required to provide healthcare either.

A market-based system, according to Goodman, allows for more access for healthcare and provides the greatest incentive for the development of new medicines.  The need to be efficient in the private sector is not present in government-sponsored programs.  Therefore, in order to provide the best quality healthcare, the industry must be treated as a business.

One issue Goodman fails to address is defining what aspects of healthcare he deems “essential.”  Goodman claims “Few would dispute that access to essential health care should not hinge on one’s ability to pay,” but does not clarify his views on what constitutes essential healthcare (644).  One might argue that anything necessary to keep a person alive would be essential.  That is why after car accidents, paramedics and hospitals do not check a person’s bank account balance before providing treatment.  The patient would be seen as being in a life-threatening situation, and therefore the treatment he received was essential.  Now consider a man diagnosed with cancer.  Is his need for surgery or chemotherapy any less essential than the man in the car accident?  Both will certainly die if no treatment is given, so would both be considered essential treatment?  Without clear definition of what is essential, all persons suffering from a life-threatening illness must receive treatment regardless of their financial standing.  Goodman saying that society should pay for those who can not contradicts his assertion that healthcare should be a market-based system.