Abstract

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights refers to the human right to health and well-being including medical care, but for the majority of people whom are not covered by health insurance this is better said than done. Ensuring the access of all citizens to the needed medical care requires the provision of health insurance coverage to a population pool and gradually expanding the pool to the whole nation. The ethical perspective of pooling resources across various groups of people with different levels of income and different health risks associated with age, genetics, and lifestyle, may raise the issue of individual autonomy versus social solidarity. Governmental, social, private, and community-based healthcare coverage have been used in different countries with varying details in the sources of funding, pooling of contributions, and the purchase of the covered healthcare services; these models have had varying levels of success depending on not only the availability of funds, but also on the political commitment of the state and the social solidarity and cultural attitude of the population towards universal healthcare. Therefore, universal healthcare requires not only a certain level of economic development, but also a strong sense of solidarity among the people as well as a political commitment in their government. I argue that the statement regarding the right to health, well-being, and medical care needs to be rethought, and instead universal access to essential healthcare should be regarded as a basic human right.