Everyone has the choice of being a smoker or not. The people who choose to smoke do so knowing there is a risk of causing harmful damage to themselves. However, I do not entirely agree that these people should have to pay more to receive all the medical treatment they need.
I think there are many situations in which a medical problem has nothing to do with whether a person smokes or not. In these cases, where an illness has no relation to smoking, then I believe that smokers should not be required to pay more than other people for their medical treatment. Most car accidents, for example, have no connection with smoking, and the people who are injured ought to have the same medical help, regardless of the cost. And what about the common flu - it does not seem justifiable to me that a smoker should have to pay more to see a doctor for an illness we can all contract.
On the other hand, I agree that a smoker should pay more than a non-smoker for the necessary treatment of any condition which has been caused by smoking. The principle that people should take responsibility for their own actions is a good one. Consequently, if a person chooses to smoke knowing that this habit can cause serious health problems, then there is no reason why the community or an insurance company should have to pay for medical treatment for an illness which could have been avoided.
In many countries, cigarette packets have a clear warning that smoking can cause health problems and so no smoker can claim not to know the danger. Lung cancer is sometimes a fatal disease and the treatment is both lengthy and expensive, and it is unfair for the smoker to expect the hospital or the community to carry the cost. In fact, it could also be argued that those who smoke in public should be asked to pay extra because of the illness caused to passive smokers.
In conclusion, I feel that smokers should pay more in cases related to smoking, but for any other illness they should pay the same as anyone else.
Everyone has the choice of being a smoker or not. The
people
who choose to
smoke
do
so
knowing there is a
risk
of causing harmful damage to themselves.
However
, I do not
entirely
agree
that these
people
should
have to
pay
more to receive all the
medical
treatment
they need.
I
think
there are
many
situations in which a
medical
problem has nothing to do with whether a person
smokes
or not. In these cases, where an
illness
has no relation to
smoking
, then I believe that smokers should not
be required
to
pay
more than other
people
for their
medical
treatment
. Most car accidents,
for example
, have no connection with
smoking
, and the
people
who
are injured
ought to have the same
medical
help
, regardless of the cost. And what about the common flu
-
it does not seem justifiable to me that a smoker should
have to
pay
more to
see
a doctor for an
illness
we can all contract.
On the other hand
, I
agree
that a smoker should
pay
more than a non-smoker for the necessary
treatment
of any condition which has
been caused
by
smoking
. The principle that
people
should take responsibility for their
own
actions is a
good
one.
Consequently
, if a person chooses to
smoke
knowing that this habit can cause serious health problems, then there is no reason why the community or an insurance
company
should
have to
pay
for
medical
treatment
for an
illness
which could have
been avoided
.
In
many
countries, cigarette packets have a
clear
warning that
smoking
can cause health problems and
so
no smoker can claim not to know the
danger
. Lung cancer is
sometimes
a fatal disease and the
treatment
is both lengthy and expensive, and it is unfair for the smoker to
expect
the hospital or the community to carry the cost. In fact, it could
also
be argued
that those who
smoke
in public should
be asked
to
pay
extra
because
of the
illness
caused to passive smokers.
In conclusion
, I feel that smokers should
pay
more in cases related to
smoking
,
but
for any other
illness
they should
pay
the same as anyone else.