The American healthcare industry has drawn numerous controversies because of the array of changes adopted. The ailing industry has attracted debates on various issues related to circumcision, drug, and vaccination; which have formed the basis of this study. The paper has been divided into three sections; with the first part focusing on whether the drug should have the age limit. There are inadequate studies demonstrating the adoption of age restriction in the use of the drug; hence making it impossible to introduce age limits. The second section answers the question of whether children who are not vaccinated should be allowed to enroll in childcare or not. Based on the findings, it is evident that such coercive measures have far-reaching consequences which the federal government must consider. In the final section, the debate revolved around whether circumcision is organ damage or a medical procedure. It has turned out to be an organ damage based on the legal and medical principles.
Current Topics of Debate in Healthcare
The landscape of American healthcare has experienced various changes that can only be declared as crises. In most cases, the American politicians have highlighted these popular headlines and made political capital out of the controversies. Nonetheless, it is critical to acknowledge that these issues provide a glimpse into the ailing American health care because there are other lesser-known issues which seem to impact the future of American medicine, such as circumcision, vaccination, and drug. To this effect, this paper has highlighted the neglected topics which should define the Americans healthcare politics. They are the current debatable topics that every American must understand.
Should drug have an age limit?
The use of drug remains to be a controversial topic across the world, especially in the United States, where people of different ages have continued to value it. Based on the 2015 survey, the Recovery Village (2017) reported many guardians, parents, and siblings would find it implausible to learn that over 8 percent of kids aged 11-16 or 8th graders are on hard drugs. However, Americans are divided nearly in the middle on whether the government should establish age limits or not. Some quotas see no sense in creating age restrictions on drug usage because the definition of the drug is restricted to medicinal value; while others rely on the social and health harms to push for the restriction. For instance, health practitioners believe that drug dosage regimen should depend on the health condition or disorder of the patient. This has made it difficult for the practitioners to design standardized drug dosage for patients.
Although children will never be small adults, they respond to drugs the way adults respond; it will be counter-intuitive to hold an otherwise view. This is because the basic physiological and cellular receptors and processes are universal similar irrespective of age (Watson, Strike, Kolla, Penn, & Bayoumi, 2015). Like adults, children possess distal and loops of Henle; hence supporting kidney operations. The differences are evident in the consequences but the basic features or responses are common. There are inadequate studies about the pediatric population leading to the negative perception which shows that the effects of drugs on children are incomparable to adults (French & Staley, 2012). The drug dosage should be used to help correct the emerging consequences of drug abuse, instead of limiting the age.
Should unvaccinated children be prohibited from enrolling in childcare in the US?
The threats and costs of the communicable diseases have continued to push the government to pursue stringent measures including prohibiting unvaccinated children from enrolling in childcare centers. Although this measure sounds harsh, it appears to be a good idea to control and prevent further spread of contagious diseases (ABC, 2017). However, many Americans have opposed this policy by interpreting it as discriminatory. In Australia, the Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull continues to push for bans on children who are unvaccinated from attending preschool and childcare as reported in the Guardian in 2017 by the Associated Press. Without a doubt, the policy will be beneficial to the public, as it will protect the American children. Before adopting such drastic policy, the federal government must make the immunization processes public to parents. The federal government has the responsibility to instill confidence in parents so that they can believe that the vaccination is safe.
Parents and guardians must understand that protecting children against communicable or horrendous illnesses will benefit the entire society. This public health measure should be embraced and reinforced. Indisputably, Australia has performed well in its efforts to control infectious diseases. However, the federal government should avoid using coercive measures to intimidate parents and children. For instance, “the No Jab, No Pay policy” (MacIntyre, 2017, par. 7) has increased the date of vaccinating in Australia. Many countries including Canada have achieved high vaccination rates without using coercion, but legislation. Instead of preventing unvaccinated kids from attending preschool or childcare centers, the government should focus on the areas where outbreaks occur. Despite the efforts, children continue to succumb to other vaccine-preventable diseases including hepatitis and whooping cough even after completing vaccinate course. Therefore, I believe that unvaccinated children should not be prohibited from entering or enrolling in preschools in the U.S.
Circumcision is “organ damage”
Circumcision is a non-therapeutic procedure involving the removal of the foreskin. Unfortunately, removing a healthily functional organ devoid of medical necessity violates the fundamental medical principles. The procedure can never meet the cosmetic medical threshold because it involves the removal to a healthy functional organ; hence, making it an organ damage legally and medically (Morris, Krieger, & Klausner, 2016). For instance, if individual consents a doctor to cut any body part to allow him to earn money; such procedures can never be cosmetic medical procedure but organ damage. Similarly, if parents make informed consent which allows a doctor to remove a female child’s prepuce or earlobes, the operation is damage to the organ by legal and medical definition not a cosmetic medical procedure. In fact, there is no existing law or medical science allowing people to damage or remove any healthy and functional organ because the foreskin is a specialized and healthy functional organ; thus, cutting it off can never be exceptional.
Circumcision causes irreversible and permanent damage to the victim’s specialized organ. This procedure violates the principle of fundamental medicine; therefore, can never become a cosmetic medical procedure. According to studies, Frisch and Earp (2016) circumcision can only be medical procedure when a medical necessity is needed, otherwise, it surmounts to organ damage. Removing healthy functional organs is a crime which is defined in the penal code. Since foreskin is not a birth defect, removing it can never be exceptional because it is a functional and specialized organ. It must be understood that non-therapeutic circumcision is a serious crime that if the victim files a charge against the parents for grievous bodily harm, the parents can land into problems. Therefore, circumcision is damage to the victim’s organ not a beauty medical procedure.
- ABC. (2017, Mar 12). Federal Government Pushes to Ban Unvaccinated Children from Childcare Centers. ABC News. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-03-12/government-pushes-to-ban-unvaccinated-children-from-childcare/8347040.
- Australian Associated Press. (2017, March 11). Malcolm Turnbull Pushes for Ban on Unvaccinated Children at Childcare Centers. The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/mar/12/malcolm-turnbull-pushes-for-ban-on-unvaccinated-children-at-childcare-centres.
- French, J.A. and Staley, B.A. (2012). AED Treatment Through Different Ages: As Our Brains Change, Should Our Drug Choices Also? Epilepsy Currents, 12(3), 22-27.