Health Care as Citizenship Development: Examining Social Rights and Entitlement
Year:
2002
Author :
Volume and number:
, 35
Collection:
, 1
Journal:
, Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue canadienne de science politique
Pages :
, 103-125
Abstract
L'importance politique des droits dans les démocraties libérales, et de l'accessibilité aux soins de santé au Canada est bien connue. Toutefois l'utilisation de plus en plus fréquente du langage des droits pour défendre les régimes publics de soins de santé au Canada est un phénomène curieux sinon alarmant. Que veulent dire les citoyens lorsqu'ils affirment qu'ils ont droit aux soins de santé? Comment peut-on définir le droit aux soins de santé d'un point de vue philosophique et politique? Cet article montre que la revendication du droit aux soins de santé est de plus en plus populaire et soutient que ce droit, de nature normative et non possessive, est en contradiction avec la revendication légaliste et individualiste des droits dans les démocraties libérales. Ce constat est important du point de vue philosophique car il permet d'éclairer le débat politique sur les soins de santé, en révélant que la revendication légaliste de droits n'est pas suffisante pour défendre les programmes sociaux. L'approche conceptuelle proposée dans cet article suggère des avenues de réforme. Elle indique qu'une citoyenneté différenciée constitue un modèle d'orientation des efforts de réforme plus adéquat que celui des droits légaux.
The political importance of rights in liberal democracies, and of universally accessible health care in Canada, are trite observations. However, the increasing use of the language of rights to defend existing patterns of health care in Canada is a curious if not alarming phenomenon. What do citizens mean when they say that they have the right to health care? How can health care rights be defined philosophically and politically? This article examines the increasing popularity of rights claiming for health care, and argues that the "right to health care" has a non-possessive, normative nature that is at odds with legalistic individualistic rights claiming. This is a significant philosophical finding, one that informs the political debate over health care by revealing that legal rights claims are not sufficient to defend social entitlements. The conceptual project undertaken in this article illuminates directions of reform and suggests that differentiated citizenship provides a better model than legal rights to guide reform efforts.
The political importance of rights in liberal democracies, and of universally accessible health care in Canada, are trite observations. However, the increasing use of the language of rights to defend existing patterns of health care in Canada is a curious if not alarming phenomenon. What do citizens mean when they say that they have the right to health care? How can health care rights be defined philosophically and politically? This article examines the increasing popularity of rights claiming for health care, and argues that the "right to health care" has a non-possessive, normative nature that is at odds with legalistic individualistic rights claiming. This is a significant philosophical finding, one that informs the political debate over health care by revealing that legal rights claims are not sufficient to defend social entitlements. The conceptual project undertaken in this article illuminates directions of reform and suggests that differentiated citizenship provides a better model than legal rights to guide reform efforts.
Theme :
CitizenshipHealth and Wellness
Database: This is a bibliographic reference. Please note that the majority of references in our database do not contain full texts.
- To consult references on the health of official‑language minority communities (OLMC): click here