Choice and Accountability

The problem with combining freedom and social engineering is simple. Social engineering seeks to remove the consequences of one's actions. Once the natural consequence is removed, the incentive to do what's right is destroyed. In order to fix the problem, the choices must then be controlled in order to create correct outcomes. So one must either forfeit freedom or learn to live with the consequences of one's actions. To do otherwise destroys natural law, natural rights and God's natural system of choice and accountability. If you choose your actions, you must also be choosing your consequence.

Our culture has attempted to change consequences without forcing correct choices. The result has been the complete destruction of morality.

Coming Apart By: Charles Murray

Rights vs. Responsibilites: Healthcare and the Corruption of Morality.

Growing up, my dad was a mechanic. He supported his six kids on a very small income. But whether we were rich in dollars made little difference, because my dad instilled in his children a wealth of character. It used to drive my mom nuts, but Dad was absolutely unable to see someone by the side of the road with car trouble and not stop to help. It didn't matter where he was going or what the consequences were to him; he always stopped. If I asked the general population whether these unfortunate travelers had the “right” to my dad's services, I think the consensus would be that they did not. But that did not matter to Dad because he felt he had the “responsibility” to help these strangers.

Fast-forward to yesterday. My life has changed a little bit. I'm married to an incredible man who also happens to be an emergency room physician. We have six kids, just as my parents did, but a somewhat larger income. That income is only recent, however. It came to us after twelve years of marriage in which we survived on virtually nothing and at the cost of a third of a million dollars in student loans, which we will be paying for the next thirty years. Like my dad, my incredible husband wants to help people with the skills he has so painstakingly, and expensively, acquired.

Yesterday, my husband handed me an article about how ridiculous it was that doctors make a lot of money. After the article was a spirited debate on whether healthcare was or was not an inherent human right. Those who said it was not, argued that no man has the right to the skills of another and that everyone should be able to use those things with which they have been blessed to benefit themselves and their families. Those saying it was a right gave sob-stories about people dying because they were not given their “rights.” They clearly thought they had the moral high ground.

What neither side seemed to understand was the difference between a right and a responsibility. And certainly those who argued that the sick have the right to the services of a physician seemed to misunderstand. It is they who degrade the morality of our society. Indeed, one of them argued that we should all picture a man dying of a heart attack outside of an emergency room because he could not be treated without insurance. Of course, this doesn't happen. I have, however, read about physicians and hospitals donating healthcare, individuals sending money to charities that support the research and treatment of various diseases, doctors traveling to undeserved areas to work for free, children being sent on dream vacations after and during cancer treatment, and many, many more examples of the goodness of the people of this country. These people do not give service because of another's rights, but because of their responsibility. And this responsibility does not come from the power of government, but from the Christian values with which this country abounds.

Unfortunately, these responsibilities become harder to swallow when those we would serve, demand our charity as a “right.” Let me share with you two true examples, which are only a tiny fraction of those I had to choose from. First, a man came into the emergency room with what he claimed was a broken toe. The physician said, “I can do one of two things here. I can x-ray the toe, tape it to the other one and give you something for the pain. Or I can not x-ray the toe, tape it to the other one and give you something for the pain. The prognosis will be the same either way, but the second option will save you a bunch of money.”

The response? “Doctor, I'm on medicaid. Do the x-ray.” The toe was not broken, but this man did exercise his right to spend money he had not earned.

The other example involves a young, able-bodied couple who came into the emergency room with upper respiratory infections. They, also, were on medicaid and told the doctor that they wanted to be admitted to the hospital. He examined them and determined that they were suffering from a common viral illness that required no treatment and would clear up in a couple days. Exercising their “rights” they insisted that they wanted to be admitted to the hospital for recovery. The doctor explained that there are certain conditions required for admission and that they would have to be discharged from the emergency room. The couple eventually stormed out, asking the front desk for the phone number to hospital administration and exclaiming that they were going to “get that doctor fired.” Such is the attitude of those who have been told healthcare is their unequivocal right.

You see, when healthcare becomes a right, rather than a responsibility, the perception of being entitled to another's work and services becomes the norm. The morality of giving is destroyed and hostility begins. I know a lot of healthcare professionals, being married to one. I can say that most of them feel the desire, even the need, to serve. They cannot see other people suffering without wanting to make them feel better. It is love and empathy that made them want to become doctors and nurses in the first place. They know that they have a responsibility to those who they consider to be their brothers and sisters. They know that they have been endowed by God with their abilities and that such an endowment is a stewardship.

It's ironic that the people who claim healthcare is a right think that they hold the higher ground. Indeed, these are they that honestly believe that the human race is full of evil, selfish people (themselves excepted, of course). They, therefore, think they receive some sort of moral bonus points by giving freely of what others have. All they really do is decay the moral infrastructure of our society by taking away the responsibility of healthcare providers who give out of love and transferring that as a right to those who feel entitled and demand service of others. They make charity work worthless and nothing more than what is required. Indeed, they destroy the concept of love and responsibility between God's children. I can't help but wonder, where is the morality in that?

Let's stop demonizing doctors and assuming that our desire to help others is unique. Instead of considering whether someone has the right to anything, let's start asking ourselves to examine our own responsibility to serve. It's only by changing the focus from rights to responsibilities that we can help those in need without creating an entitlement attitude devoid of the Christian morals on which our country is based.