Should we pay for smokers lung cancer treatment? Or should we make them pay??

Question

What about a combination... like a user fee, where someone who smokes will be required to pay 20% of the treatment cost....

gotta think that people would think twice before smoking if smoking related illnesses were not covered

Answer 1

Well, almost everyone is on that bandwagon. Do we pay for treatment for drug addiction? Yes. Do we pay for treatment for alcohol addiction? Yes. How about treatment for people with heart disease because they're so fat they can barely move? Yes. How about knee replacement for the same people, who are carrying around so many pounds that their knees give out? There's no end to the list of ailments that people cause themselves. And yes, we all end up paying for it, through insurance costs and rising medical costs. Society is not qualified to decide who will receive medical care and who will not, based on what they may or may not like. Nor are lawmakers.

Answer 2

Back when a lot of these old timers started smoking, they had no idea what the consequences would be. They simply did not understand the cancer risk etc..... Nowdays, everybody knows what the outcome of tobbacco abuse is and we still have those dumb asses out there trying to preach that they have the right to smoke if they so desire. GET REAL!
Smokers are insured and they cost the people on the insurance plans who don't smoke dearly to pay for the smokers health care problems such as inhalers that cost hundreds of dollars and repeated hospitalizations because they have breathing problems and cancers related to smoking.
I think a smokers health insurance should cost about 4 times what a non smokers health insurance cost. Its not that non smokers don't have health problems, they do, but not nearly as bad a smokers.
Come work with me. I administer chemo to people in their 30's with lung cancer who have smoked since they were 10. The evidence cannot be denied.

Answer 3

Smokers pay a much higher premium for their insurance, so in a way they do pay. Also, at least in NY, the mayor put a $5 tax on cigarettes which would allow smokers to pay for the health care costs that the state endures because of them. So in that case they are paying for their care as well, their taxes offset/replace the money the government puts into their care. So, cigarettes cost around $8 in NY, but lots of smokers just buy their cigarettes online or out of state, but many don't. I like the idea of that tax though and think it should be done all over to offset the medical costs that the taxpayers end up covering.

Obese people as well should have to pay higher insurance premiums (which right now is not legal because it is considered discrimination for whatever reason), but insurance companies are evil and concerned with money and will find a way to make them pay more I am sure.

Answer 4

This is a UK site and we pay national insurance contributions from our salary to the NHS for all free medical treatment so why should we pay for health insurance? As for your question what proof do you have that smoking causes lung cancer and there is various types of lung cancer and if you search the medical books you will find that smoking puts us at a higher risk of smoking but exhaust fumes that seep into our car when driving puts us at a higher risk of lung cancer just the same as alcohol, junk food, radon gas, various chemicals and lack of exercise so before you preach to us smokers research your information, Good Luck

Answer 5

That is just one question I have asking my self since health insurance rates have gone up so much. There are people that take care of themselves and do everything right; do not smoke, drink only occasionally, eat right, exercise etc. They should not have to pay for someone who has lung cancer or emphysema or asthma and keeps smoking. They should not have to pay for people who have diabetes and keep eating junk food, they should not have to pay for people who have liver disease and keep on drinking. If a person has something wrong there is enough information out there somewhere where they can find out how to help themselves. It is just plain ignorant and ridiculous to treat everyone the same.
PEOPLE SHOULD BE REWARDED FOR TAKING CARE OF THEMSELVES PROPERLY. It makes sense. More people would take care of themselves.

Answer 6

I don't have an answer to your question but a question to those that posted answers. How many of you that think the smokers, drinkers and non-exercisers should pay extra are of "normal weight" and in good health? What about the people that may take care of themselves but because of heredity find they have a health condition they have no control over. I'm no angel, I smoked for 30 years and recently underwent surgery for lung cancer. I'm not happy about the prospect of "paying" for the health care of people who don't take care of themselves but who do you think is paying for the benefits for those on welfare. We do, the taxpayers.

Answer 7

I wish there was another way, however, we do have to pay for them by the cost of insurance going up.

I would like to think that it shouldn't be covered, however. But it might then carpet people who got lung cancer due to second hand smoke as well.

Answer 8

obviously WE won't be paying for their treatment, their insurance will.... and if they were insured while they were smoking yes they should pay for whatever percentage the plan covers..... if you start putting stipulations like that into health care then when does it blend into people who eat at McDonald's or who eat to many carbs or fatty foods, and what about caffeine, or alcohol.... heck anyone who doesn't eat exactly what the food pyramid suggests should not be fully covered by their insurance because they did not take proper care of themselves.... if you don't do some form of daily exercise then insurance shouldn't cover your heart condition..... it would go on and on until eventually it directly affected you....BTW i am not a smoker and I can't stand to be around it.

Answer 9

Then we should do that to everyone that breaths the air too. We are all guilty of putting contaminants into the air and ground. And no, I don't smoke but use too. Trust me they pay enough with the pain they indure for treatment. What makes me laugh is the government sure loves the taxes it brings in.

Answer 10

I tend to agree. My Mom died from lung cancer. I would sincerely like to see things like $25.oo a pack tacted onto the sale price of each pack and the proceeds distributed to children's health research hospitals. Also I would like to see a total ban on smoking within a half mile of a non smoker. Or even within city limits.