Medical ethics in the future

[Six of Twelve]

I've always seen Voyager's Critical Care as a social commentary on the US health care system, which remains the only first world nation without universal health care.

Nothing Human is another good episode about medical ethics. FWIW, I would have done the same thing Janeway did.

 

[The Wormhole]

Nothing Human is another good episode about medical ethics.

I'm sorry, but Nothing Human is an episode which so severely bungles the message it's trying to convey it's not even funny. First of all, the Doctor was only using the likeness of a Cardassian scientist, there's no indication he was actually using his research. Are we really supposed to believe the pious and holier-than-thou Federation just blithely took research from a Cardassian doctor stationed on Bajor and assumed his findings were found through legitimate medical procedures and put that into their starship databases? It is stupid of the Doctor to choose a Cardassian likeness for his friend given half the ship's crew, including the patient he's treating were terrorists fighting them, but the information itself is Federation databases and likely acquired through proper methodology. So, in the end critical information which was used to save an officer's life is deleted from the database just because the Doctor chose to create a holographic friend based on a douche.

And don't even get me started on the Bajoran engineer who tries to resign because of the hologram. So because the Doctor wants to hang out with a Cardassian, this guy wants to jump ship and live the rest of his life in the Delta Quadrant without ever returning home?

Thankfully, the interaction between the Doctor and Moset, before we learn the real Moset is a colossal douche is what makes this episode watchable.

 

[Mattadd]

^^^
I have to second that. Nothing Human was littered with so many problems it was impossible to take any kind of message from it.

OTOH Critical Care was a fantastic episode. The US health care system makes little sense to anyone outside the US, but Americans have their own unique culture, and they are the ones that keep voting to sustain that system, so it must be popular there.

 

[Six of Twelve]

^^^
I have to second that. Nothing Human was littered with so many problems it was impossible to take any kind of message from it.

OTOH Critical Care was a fantastic episode. The US health care system makes little sense to anyone outside the US, but Americans have their own unique culture, and they are the ones that keep voting to sustain that system, so it must be popular there.

I'm an American and it doesn't make any sense to me and a lot of us want it changed. But it's never been put to the population to vote on and big money corporate interests keep us from universal health care.

 

[Mattadd]

I'm an American and it doesn't make any sense to me and a lot of us want it changed. But it's never been put to the population to vote on and big money corporate interests keep us from universal health care.

Isn't Sanders running on a platform of universal healthcare? Shouldn't he be a shoo-in for president if most Americans wanted the health care system changed? Of course I would imagine a lot of people would want it changed, there's going to be minority opinion on pretty much everything in a democratic country. Just seems like the majority are happy to vote for candidates that dislike universal health care.

 

[Six of Twelve]

Isn't Sanders running on a platform of universal healthcare? Shouldn't he be a shoo-in for president if most Americans wanted the health care system changed? Of course I would imagine a lot of people would want it changed, there's going to be minority opinion on pretty much everything in a democratic country. Just seems like the majority are happy to vote for candidates that dislike universal health care.

A lot of people in this country have been persuaded to vote against their own interests on many issues, as there is a strong anti-intellectual undercurrent here. Sanders is getting on in age and will be close to 80 in 2020 and we've never had a president that old. He's also been an independent (neither Democrat or Republican) for most of his career which works against him. Unlike in Europe, we've never been able to get a multi party system to work here. Of course, with the 2016 elections, Europeans must think we've lost our minds over here. The antiquated electoral college system is what allowed that to happen, as 45 did not win the popular vote, being nearly 3 million votes behind.

 

[Mattadd]

A lot of people in this country have been persuaded to vote against their own interests on many issues, as there is a strong anti-intellectual undercurrent here. Sanders is getting on in age and will be close to 80 in 2020 and we've never had a president that old. He's also been an independent (neither Democrat or Republican) for most of his career which works against him. Unlike in Europe, we've never been able to get a multi party system to work here. Of course, with the 2016 elections, Europeans must think we've lost our minds over here. The antiquated electoral college system is what allowed that to happen, as 45 did not win the popular vote, being nearly 3 million votes behind.

Lots of countries have systems where you don't need to win the popular vote to win the election, but the US electoral college does seem to be a particularly terrible way of electing a leader.

 

[Tenacity]

but the US electoral college does seem to be a particularly terrible way of electing a leader.

Not at all, under the current system the entire country get a say in the selection of the President, instead of just the people in a few large cities, mostly in the eastern portion of the country.

Isn't Sanders running on a platform of universal healthcare? Shouldn't he be a shoo-in for president if most Americans wanted the health care system changed?

While many would like to see changes (like getting rid of the mandate), not everyone of those many want the particular version that Sander says he want to change to.

If you look at multiple polls, people will support universal health care only up to the point it's explained to them in detail, then the polls show a negative position on the matter.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

^^^
I have to second that. Nothing Human was littered with so many problems it was impossible to take any kind of message from it.

OTOH Critical Care was a fantastic episode. The US health care system makes little sense to anyone outside the US, but Americans have their own unique culture, and they are the ones that keep voting to sustain that system, so it must be popular there.

The only Americans voting to sustain that health care system are the ones in Congress who owe it to the big pharma campaign donors who own their souls.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

If you look at multiple polls, people will support universal health care only up to the point it's explained to them in detail, then the polls show a negative position on the matter.

That depends entirely on whether the person who wrote the detailed explanation is for or against it. It's a case of determining the poll results by the way the questions are worded.

 

[Mattadd]

Not at all, under the current system the entire country get a say in the selection of the President, instead of just the people in a few large cities, mostly in the eastern portion of the country.While many would like to see changes (like getting rid of the mandate), not everyone of those many want the particular version that Sander says he want to change to.

If you look at multiple polls, people will support universal health care only up to the point it's explained to them in detail, then the polls show a negative position on the matter.

1) All Presidential systems have a system where the entire country gets a say in the selection of their President. Even if you went purely by the popular vote (which is one option but not the only one) then the entire country would still get a say in the selection of the President. People that live in large cities wouldn't have any more of an influence than people in small cities. Each individual vote would be equal. The fact that there are less people in Montana doesn't mean a person from Montana doesn't get a say in the selection of the President, in fact they would get exactly the same say as someone from Philadelphia.

2) Your second paragraph is basically reaffirming my previous post. Most countries' citizens like universal health care. For some reason most Americans don't. That's fine there's nothing wrong with that, every democratic country gets to make decisions like that for themselves, that's the wonderful part of democracy. I just noted that the US has a unique culture since they are alone among developed countries for making that decision.

 

[Kor]

What people don't like are the aspects of taxation and central government control.

Kor

 

[Mattadd]

What people don't like are the aspects of taxation and central government control.

Kor

Yikes, if that's the reason people are against it then there hasn't been enough honest discussion around health care policy. The US pays more per capita than any other country for health care, meaning taxes should actually go down with a universal health care system. Some government control is necessary, but it doesn't necessarily have to be the central government, it could just as easily be state governments. But for those opposed to any governmental control, then that's a fair ideological decision.

 

[1001001]

Okay folks, we've gone way far afield here....

Feel free to discuss this stuff in Misc if you wish.

 

[Kor]

Yes, back to how medical ethics work in Star Trek... I think we can assume that universal health care exists on Earth and in the Federation, so there won't be the same ethical concerns surrounding availability or lack of coverage. That's definitely an aspect of today's medical field that won't apply any more.

Kor

 

[Tenacity]

^ I would ask if universal health care exists in the Federation, and in what form. Or at all.

I thing we can assume that Starfleet personel are provided health care during their time in the service, spouses and minor children as well. Veterans perhaps.

But what about the civilian population? And would it be through their home world, by species, or through the Federation. I could see the Federation not being involved.

Health care could be a personal affair, and whether a individual/family has insurance the same. If health care costs were low enough, insurance might be un-necessary (you simply directly pay), except for catastrophic medical events.

 

[Six of Twelve]

I don't think money is an issue for those seeking health care in the 24th century on Federation worlds. It would be seen as a basic right for a civilized society. There's a reason why the EMH was so offended by the TC system in Critical Care

 

[Tenacity]

^ Perhaps Nyotarules, they might prefer not to be controled at all?

It would be seen as a basic right for a civilized society

That doesn't mean it's free.

 

[Nyotarules]

^ Perhaps Nyotarules, they might prefer not to be controled at all?

That doesn't mean it's free.

Unless people plan on treating themselves whatever medical system they use will be controlled by somebody.

 

[Six of Twelve]

That doesn't mean it's free.

Sure it does. Remember Picard explaining to Lily in First Contact about the economics of the 24th century, that people don't have to work for basic survival needs, but to better themselves and their culture.

To those in the 24th century, the patient having to pay for their health care or else being denied treatment is akin to the idea of having to pay for the air they breathe.

They don't operate on a scarcity model in the. 24th century.