Who is responsible if a child dies for lack of health care?

Question

In the richest country in the world, I think it is morally deficient if a child, or anyone, dies because they can't get a specific operation they need or get health care. What do you think?

Answer 1

I'm not sure about the situation but i don't think it is possible for them to refuse service like was said before. If something like that happens it would likely to be best to talk to get legal advice on possibly getting restitution or some type of resolve.

Answer 2

Blame it all on our form of health care. There are many hospitals that will not take you or your child unless you have health insurance and they always ask that question first. You can call it what you want,but a nation as rich as ours, needs national health care, at leat for the kids. But with politicians being so owning to big medicine, that will never happen. Shame that this happens in america, but it happens everyday. And for those who think that you can get care if you try, they have another think comong. Been there, done that. If you are on wefare or rich, you have health care, If you are in between at 15 to 25,000 a year, you do not. 50 million are in that situation. And yet, we have do gooders who want illegals to come here, get health care, food stamps and free schooling, and to h** with our own poor. What a way to believe.

Answer 3

If the child was taken to health care and wasn't given the appropriate care then the hospital would be under fault If not given to other health care.

Answer 4

The parents are responsible..the states already have free healthcare programs for kids.

Answer 5

No element on the 2d in u.s. whilst it has between the industrialised worlds maximum dying expenditures for infants elderly below 5. i'm constantly surprised what proportion human beings look to no longer observe appropriate to the actual healthcare subject concerns based somewhat on FOX and different supplies to unfold lies appropriate to the healthcare equipment of the country and those out of the country. I advise, if healthcare in international locations with huge-unfold coverage is so undesirable, why do they save it? Obama needs to make coverage greater attainable to all and alter the equipment so as that it supplies the yank human beings cost for money [a million]. He additionally needs exchange so as that the coverage companies locate it greater durable to get out of identifying to purchase scientific care. The equipment he's featuring looks resembling that which suits in Taiwan the place private agencies are in contact in offering healthcare [2]. Obama campaigned on reforming the healthcare equipment. He pronounced he had to make coverage greater attainable and he became elected via the yank human beings to try this [3]. fact - the U. S. has bigger dying expenditures for infants the two for infants elderly below one and those below 5 than western ecu international places with huge-unfold well being coverage [4]. fact – American coverage companies push up expenditures and paintings to supply up paying out claims on those they conceal [5]. fact - the country spends greater on healthcare consistent with individual than the different country in the international [6]. meaning that a lifeless American 4 365 days previous might have had a greater proper possibility of existence in the event that they have been born in any western country with huge-unfold well being coverage. in case you do no longer in basic terms like the regulations that Obama became elected to usher in, he can constantly be voted out of place of work in 2012. yet once you disagree with the information, please permit me understand. i'm constantly prepared to learn, yet please grant evidence. None of people who disagree with me have been able to try this so a techniques.

Answer 6

No hospital in America can legally refuse to treat someone due to their inability to pay.

Answer 7

Hospital, the doctor and his team

Answer 8

Saddam