» » Mortal Peril: Our Inalienable Right to Health Care?
hotellemcasadeicervia.it
ePub 1396 kb. | Fb2 1111 kb. | DJVU: 1422 kb.
Medical Books

Mortal Peril: Our Inalienable Right to Health Care? epub ebook

by Richard Epstein

Mortal Peril: Our Inalienable Right to Health Care? epub ebook

Author: Richard Epstein
Category: Administration & Medicine Economics
Language: English
Publisher: Basic Books; 1 edition (June 1, 2000)
Pages: 528 pages
ISBN: 0738201898
ISBN13: 978-0738201894
Rating: 4.6
Votes: 981
Other formats: doc lrf lit docx


FREE shipping on qualifying offers. has been added to your Cart.

FREE shipping on qualifying offers.

Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Start by marking Mortal Peril: Our Inalienable Right To Health Care? as Want to Read: Want to Read savin. ant to Read.

Not so, says distinguished legal scholar Richard Epstein. A fiercely libertarian roommate of mine gave me this book to read, and I was pleasantly surprised to discover that it was about more than health care.

A fiercely libertarian roommate of mine gave me this book to read, and I was pleasantly surprised to discover that it was about more than health care. The beginning is actually a good primer on common law, and an effective encapsulation of the philosophical foundations of libertarian thought. In this seminal work, he explodes the unspoken assumption that a red, universal health-care system would be a boon to America.

of Chicago) claims that the welfare of the general population has been brought into mortal peril by the assumption that a proper health care system requires government controls. He traces the evolution of ideas of rights from the common-law concept of negative rights (freedom from the actions of others) to the more modern system of positive rights-to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and by extension to health, housing, education, and other desirable ends.

4. health care? 4. inalienable health. 4. peril inalienable. 1. care? 1. Member Articles. A case study of potential human health impacts from petroleum coke transfer facilities.

Health; Health Care; Patient Relationships; Right to Health Care; Allocation of Health Care Resources; Quality of Health Care; Artificial Insemination and Surrogacy; Donation, Procurement of Organs and Tissues; Suicide, Assisted Suicide; Prolongation of Life and Euthanasia; Third Party Consent; Economics of Health Care; Managed Care; Health Care for Particular Diseases or Groups; Health Care Programs for the Aged

Mortal Peril: Our Inalienable Right to Health Care? by Richard A. Epstein.

Mortal Peril: Our Inalienable Right to Health Care? by Richard A. The Road to Nowhere: The Genesis of President Clinton's Plan for Health Security. He describes how managers override the recommendations of HMO doctors. HMOs call such reports anecdotes taken from among millions of unremarkable cases and cite the high satisfaction rate reported by their patients. It is not hard to depict HMOs as heartless.

Our Inalienable Right. to Health Care? By Richard A. The effort to transform charitable impulses and ''moral intuition'' into legal rights, like a right to health care, is, for Mr. Epstein, futile

Our Inalienable Right. 503 pp. Reading, Mass. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. Epstein, futile. He is a purist, and he does not want the Government to dabble in health care because, he says, ''noble intentions quickly lead to an endless tangle of hidden subsidies, perverse incentives and administrative nightmares. Thus, Mr. Epstein is skeptical of Medicare for the same reason he scorned Mr. Clinton's health plan.

Mortal Peril: Our Inalienable Right to Health Care? (Addison-Wesley, 1997). cu. "Executive Power in Political and Corporate Contexts," 12 University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law 277 (2010). "Political Bankruptcies: How Chrysler and GM Have Changed the Rules of the Game," 59 Freeman 8 (2009).

Most Americans assume that universal access to health care is a desirable and humane political goal. Not so, says distinguished legal scholar Richard Epstein. In this seminal work, he explodes the unspoken assumption that a government-administered, universal health-care system would be a boon to America. Basing his argument in our common law traditions that limit the collective responsibility for an individual's welfare, he provides a political and economic analysis which suggests that unregulated provision of health care will, in the long run, guarantee greater access to quality medical care for more people. He also authoritatively documents the ways in which government regulation has actually reduced the availability of organs for vitally needed transplants, and has interfered with a sensible policy toward euthanasia.
Reviews (5)
Longitude Temporary
I read the korean translation of this book and though I disagree on the author's view in many aspects, I find this book really interesting as well as informative. So I decided to buy the english version of it. Not being american, I can't understand how americans manage to live in their healthcare system. Some radical arguments of the author are surely hard to struggle against.

Hirah
Good

Anarahuginn
Richard Allen Epstein (born 1943) is a Professor of Law at the New York University School of Law, as well as associated with the Cato Institute, the Hoover Institution, and the Heartland Institute. He has written meny books, including Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain,Why Progressive Institutions are Unsustainable (Encounter Broadsides),Design for Liberty: Private Property, Public Administration, and the Rule of Law, etc.

He wrote in the Preface to this 1997 book, "This book represents my sustained effort to demonstrate that the source of our collective anxiety begins with the elaborate and counterproductive schemes of entitlements that live off the illusion of abundance of scarcity. It deals first with the grand question of health care... Alas, this book is not rich in quick fixes for intractable problems."

He begins by stating, "The central thesis of this book is that the rules of the game as have just been laid out are more likely to lead to a sensible regime for the reform and regulation of health care than the dominant regime." (Pg. 19-20) He adds, "I think that the strongest theoretical argument in favor of a welfare right in health care, or anywhere else, is one that exploits the wedge between maximizing social wealth and maximizing utility." (Pg. 31)

He suggests that "No political system will be able to turn people away once the coverage is made universal." (Pg. 55) Rejecting the notion that "everyone has a right to health care regardless of ability to pay," he asks, "Why is this principle appropriate for health care when it has been rejected for vacation homes and fast cars?" (Pg. 112)

He argues that "Pay or play plans invite strategic maneuvering by employers... Employers with healthy work forces will choose to insure, so all the bad risk accounts are dumped into the public sector with insufficient funds to service them. The single-payer system prevents this strategy, but it invites abuse by a government monopoly that can stifle innovation, squeeze individual physicians, and operate in a slow and arbitrary way." (Pg. 188)

He concludes with the suggestion, "perhaps we might be better off in a world with reduced costs and enhanced access, even if liability is sharply curtailed or totally eliminated... we need open markets, with fully enforceable contracts, no ifs, ands, or buts, to find the best levels of legal protection against adverse medical outcomes." (Pg. 416)

Thought-provoking and controversial as are all of Epstein's books, this one is well worth reading, particularly given the renewed importance of health care in the current political debate.

Rainshaper
A fiercely libertarian roommate of mine gave me this book to read, and I was pleasantly surprised to discover that it was about more than health care. The beginning is actually a good primer on common law, and an effective encapsulation of the philosophical foundations of libertarian thought. Epstein effectively cuts through the platitudes that have been shaping decades of largely ineffective government policy-the sanctity of every single human life, for example-and explains how accepting these commonplaces can lead to results that are worse for everyone.
The section dealing with common law mostly discusses the distinction between positive rights and negative rights. Positive rights are those that grant a people the right TO something: liberty, for example, or the right to a decent standard of living. Negative rights give the people the right NOT to have something happen to them: infringement on their person or property, or unfair treatment by another party. Far from being a small semantic distinction (I'm sure all of us can think of how most laws could be stated in either positive or negative form) Epstein shows how positive rights are much harder to enforce, and generally lead to a variety of perverse consequences when we try. The rest of the book-dealing with the Clinton health care proposal, for example-has dated, but is worth reading for the application of these ideas.
Epstein writes an elegant but dry sentence, with occasional jargon, and except for the times when he gets passionate, the book moves along at a stately plod: I had to reread several sections to make sure I understood them. But he is clear, and avoids the most intolerable feature of many libertarian thinkers: intellectual smugness. He understands that government welfare policies are generally motivated by noble impulses, and that the way to convince people isn't to jump around doing the I'm-so-smart dance, but to illustrate the difficulties of turning a moral imperative into a government edict.
The part of the book I had the most trouble with was that dealing with charity. Epstein points out that private charity was doing an excellent job before the government stepped in and took the responsibility off the shoulders of the individual, who now felt (often) that he had done his part just by paying his taxes. In other sections, however, Epstein maintains that having government welfare discourages people from taking care of their own health, because they now realize that they have a safety net.
Now, I don't understand how a government safety net would discourage people from doing this any more than a private safety net. Epstein could argue that a safety net based on private charity would be more selective, but in my experience this isn't true: a church asks fewer questions than the government. The biggest problem with Epstein's argument is that, if taken to its logical conclusion, it's opposed to the idea of any effective charity at all: anything that tells people that they have help if something bad happens to them will, to some extent, discourage them from trying as hard as possible to avoid that catastrophe.
And not only charity, actually: this idea is technically opposed to the idea of many kinds of medical treatment. Doesn't the existence of angioplasty make people less worried about watching their weight, in the same way that the effectiveness of AIDS medication has made people less worried about contracting HIV? But I hardly think that anyone would want to stop research in these areas, even though the illness is - in most cases -the "fault" of the patient.
Now, a world where everyone is completely responsible for his or her own lack of foresight might be better than the world we live in, but I doubt that many of us would be confident enough in our own judgment to opt for it - which is probably why we leave it up to the government, despite the usual results.

Contancia
This might be a valuable book to read for someone who is involved in working towards the right to health care, as well as for opponents of all economic and social rights. The book's great weakness and dishonesty lie in omission of the relevant context of the author's opposition to all social systems of care (police and fire departments, public education, libraries etc.). The last 7 pages of the preface are all that most people need to read (not the other 500 pages). A one page summary and discussion of this book is posted at [...] click on Discussion -books .

2016-2020 © www.hotellemcasadeicervia.it
All rights reserved