Q. I have a 32-year-old friend -- single, healthy, earning a good salary -- who doesn’t have employer health insurance and declines to buy his own. He thinks it’s unlikely he'll need expensive care, and he calls the new individual insurance mandate an infringement on his liberty. Is his position ethical?
The Supreme Court will rule on the constitutionality of the health care law’s mandate, but to me, the key principle of ethical living is taking responsibility for oneself and not putting a burden on others.
The vast majority of people -- including your friend -- would never be able to pay out-of-pocket for a very expensive medical need. So the cost would fall on someone else -- family members, friends, unreimbursed doctors and hospitals, or taxpayers and fellow citizens who have been paying for insurance long before a need arose.
Sign up for Kiplinger’s Free E-Newsletters
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice on investing, taxes, retirement, personal finance and more - straight to your e-mail.
Profit and prosper with the best of expert advice - straight to your e-mail.
Only the rich -- those able to pay personally for an organ transplant, very premature baby or $100,000-a-year miracle drug -- can ethically choose to go naked on health insurance.
Hospitals have long been required by law (and motivated by medical ethics) to provide emergency care to everyone who comes through their doors, regardless of insurance. I don’t hear that mandate being challenged.
Similarly, polls show that some people who oppose an individual mandate also approve of the government’s plan to force insurers to accept new customers with a preexisting health problem. That seems ethically inconsistent.
In the absence of an individual mandate, many people would simply wait until they get really sick to start paying into an insurance pool that has to take them. With some restrictions, their near-term medical costs would be covered by the premiums of more-responsible citizens who had been contributing to the system for a long time.
There is ethical symmetry -- as well as economic sense -- to a health care system into which everyone must be accepted and to which everyone who is financially able to contribute is required to do so.
Have a money-and-ethics question you’d like answered in this column? Write to editor in chief Knight Kiplinger at ethics@kiplinger.com.
-
Senior LIving and Memory Care Facilities Are ImprovingHere are the best senior living communities in 2024, according to a J.D. Power survey.
-
Like the ETF? Check Out the Cheaper CloneName-brand ETFs are offering lower-cost, higher-returning versions of their famous funds. For long-term investors, they might be a better deal.
-
Should All Student Debt Be Forgiven?student loans My favorite reform would be making the repayment of all student loans proportional to the borrower’s future earnings.
-
Should Lenders Mail Unsolicited Checks to Potential Borrowers?credit & debt When it comes to preying on weak credit risks, it looks like Wall Street is at it again.
-
Do Adult Children Have an Obligation to Support Needy Parents?savings Even if some siblings can afford to help more than others, no one should shirk the obligation to assist in some way -- financial or otherwise.
-
How Can the Approval Process for New Drugs Be Speeded Up?investing There are many reform proposals, including some from free-market think tanks.
-
Should Ethics Determine Who You Do Business With?Smart Buying Consumers seeking to do business only with ethical companies should ask these questions.
-
Should Colleges Use Collection Agencies for Overdue Student Bills?college Colleges have many potent options for getting students to square their accounts.
-
Hold Soda Makers to Account for Health Woes?Business Costs & Regulation A strong case can be made that it’s unethical for companies to target the very customers who shouldn’t be heavy consumers of a given product.
-
Ways to Protect Borrowers From Predatory Home Lendingreal estate Land contracts drain low-income communities of resources.
