TO THE EDITOR:
[The 11/27] DTH column argued that human rights language is divisive and antagonistic when used during health reform debates.
Contrarily, I believe there is much to be gained from conceptualizing health as a human right during these debates. Using a human rights framework to structure and evaluate health policy will create a more equitable healthcare system—something we sorely need in the United States.
The U.S. has historically avoided using rights language in healthcare reform. At the same time, our current healthcare system perpetuates healthcare disparities based on income, employment, race and geographical location, to name a few.
Any reform must prioritize the elimination of these disparities—yet they continue to be overlooked and even accepted in our current system.
No wonder health policy debates become heated when we begin to ask whose right to health is actually being realized.
A human right to health is more than rhetoric: it is a tool used to place the needs of the most vulnerable populations at the center of health reform.
It guides reform which “seeks to provide a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being” of every person. It necessitates conversations about equity and moves us from conceptualizing healthcare as a commodity towards viewing it as an entitlement rooted in dignity and autonomy.
The DTH column calls for health policy that includes “a range of gray positions,” to move beyond divisiveness and antagonism. I could not agree more. Any reform requires compromise.
