2006-06-24 11:28:30 · 29 answers · asked by a_wee_broon_troot 1 in Health ➔ General Health Care ➔ Other - General Health Care
I believe that anyone that acts in an irresponsible manner with their own health should be fully responsible for any costs associated with repairing said health. This would include smokers who get lung disease, cancer etc., extreme sports persons who do not take the appropriate cautions, drinkers that drink to excess and cause themselves harm via liver damage and the such and any other avoidable personal harm. If people were more accountable for their own actions, then perhaps our health care would be able to help those who do not willfully attract personal harm such as children with cancer. Another side effect of a system like this may be to drastically reduce the number of smokers and drinkers and risk takers; they would think twice about doing these things that may harm them.
Just my two cents.
2006-06-24 11:36:24 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 10⤊ 0⤋
Hmmm...Interesting question. Initially I was going to give an emphatic yes, but then I remembered a family I know that has an alcoholic in the family. To force the man to pay every time he has an ambulance ride would be an extreme financial hardship on the family. I guess I would say yes, but that the family should have the option of putting him in a rehabilitation program instead of paying.
2006-06-24 12:28:37 · answer #2 · answered by davemackey 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes. It's completely self-inflicted, unnecessary and a waste of resources that may well be needed elsewhere. Believe me, ambulance crews have much more important things to do with their time than scoop up drunks. The least the drunks can do is pay a fine.
2006-06-24 12:05:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I know all private ambulance services charge regardless of the reason for the ride. Some cities used to provide transportation for life threatening emergencies only at no charge, but I think a lot of them are even charging now.
Regardless, being drunk does not negate your financial responsibilities. If you incurred services while intoxicated from a cab, the cab driver would still charge you. Why is this different?
2006-06-24 11:35:43 · answer #4 · answered by Erin S 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, seems the right answer, the problem would be in enforcing it, and drawing up the rules as to what constituted drunk.
Would you extend it to people on drugs, unfit people who run marathons, base jumpers who get it wrong. Where would you draw the line, and if you broke a finger drawing the line would you have to pay for the ambulance.
2006-06-24 12:41:47 · answer #5 · answered by dopeysaurus 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes i do if they have refused help from AA (Alcohol Anonymous)or from some other organisation.There are far too many pressures on the NHS to be wasting valuable time,resources,& money on people who wont seek help or want everyone to do everything for them,lets concentrate on those genuinly in need of this service.There isnt a bottomless pot of money out there for this.
2006-06-24 12:29:24 · answer #6 · answered by terry 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
definite a brilliant style of scholars are ineffective wankers yet a brilliant style of them additionally artwork damn tense at weekends and nights to pay for their training, i do unlike paying tax as plenty because of the fact the subsequent guy/woman i won't be able to even artwork time beyond regulation on the clock as i won't be able to handle to pay for the energy expenditure so i take the undemanding fee for my job. you could attempt and get interior the heads of actually everyone else even though it rather is pointless, existence is a by no potential ending apprenticeship we are constantly gaining awareness of all the time and it took me 2 a protracted time of self loathing and bitterness to parent that out from once I left college at sixteen. A buggered knee abdomen like a sieve and scars throughout my physique i'd substitute that in the time of an instantaneous to get the prospect to get below the impression of alcohol on some pints and stick a cone on my head. does no longer you?
2016-12-13 18:37:45 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who called the ambulance? Maybe he was happy to sleep on the street.
2006-06-24 12:27:00 · answer #8 · answered by rachel_waves 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Great idea !!! They already charge for rescues on the great lakes if people get stranded when the weather service has put warnings out. I think you're limiting the issue though, why just because they fell asleep? Make them pay even if they were awake!!!
2006-06-24 11:33:53 · answer #9 · answered by pickle head 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
YES!!!! and the fine should be double, because there might be someone who really needed that ambulance at that time.
2006-06-24 11:31:51 · answer #10 · answered by nemraC 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋