Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
S. Wiles & S. Hendy, claim against Auckland uni
#58
(09-01-2022, 01:56 PM)Me+Me Wrote:
(03-01-2022, 06:28 PM)harm_less Wrote: That's a slippery slope that most probably wouldn't agree with if adopted generally.

Do you drink soft drinks or eat sweets? Right there goes your government funded diabetes medication and hospital care.
What, you were driving or a passenger not wearing a seat belt? Sorry, the ambulance is needed elsewhere.
So, you were a smoker and enjoyed the odd tipple? This cancer treatment is going to cost big time.
Didn't use sunblock? Line up behind that ex-smoker with your melanoma.
Tooth decay? Best we sue your local council for failing to fluoridate the water supply.

Do you really want our healthcare system to go down this route?!!
since when is Diabetes an infectious disease which can and does kill people ?  Since when is cancer infectious ? Since when is getting melanoma infections to others   Since when is tooth decay going to impact and infect others ? 

All VERY different to the infection ramifications of Covid

(03-01-2022, 08:14 PM)king1 Wrote: Do you extend the same special treatment to smokers? Alcoholics?  Drug addicts, those that work in high risk occupations.  Would you deny them hospital treatment because of their self inflicted choices.  As has been mentioned, it is a slippery slope that I don't believe New Zealanders want a bar of...
But those things while they're a drain on the health system etc are NOT likely to infect others and potentially kill or otherwise injure them ?


People who refuse to be innoculated against a worldwide pandemic disease which is VERY infectious to others once you have it are WILLFULLY being very dangerous to others in society.
As most, but not you obviously, can see I'm referring to mandatory health measures and costs being a dangerous road to go down. The case in question is of an infectious disease but to implement such measures on this occasion lays the foundations for the same thing being done on whatever 'public health education' grounds in the future. The instances I mentioned are just examples of where such an approach could head once tried in the current climate of general fear and knee jerk actions.
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: S. Wiles & S. Hendy, claim against Auckland uni - by harm_less - 09-01-2022, 02:36 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)