Crunchy Con

Treating illegal alien cancer patients

Wednesday December 5, 2007

Categories: Immigration

The University of Texas Medical Branch has a problem. It's suffering a budget shortfall, and is considering a proposal to quit offering cancer treatment to new indigent patients who are illegal aliens. From the story:

About 5.4 million Texans, or 24.6 percent of the state's population, is uninsured, according to a 2005 report by the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts. Noncitizens are almost three times as likely to be uninsured as native U.S. citizens, the report says. [snip] Medical branch physicians, many of whom work there because of its mission to help the poor, are anguished and conflicted about the prospect of turning patients away, said Dr. Howard Brody, chair of the medical branch's ethics committee.

But unless Texans address the overall problems of the uninsured and funding for public hospitals, cash-strapped institutions must begin drawing lines, he said.

I find it amazing in the first place that Texas public hospitals were offering cancer treatment -- which isn't cheap -- to impoverished foreigners who are in this country illegally. Absolutely they should quit doing so. Unless one believes that everyone in the world is entitled to free medical treatment in American hospitals, it's morally licit to refuse this kind of treatment to illegal aliens. Resources are not unlimited, and we are morally bound to spend our limited resources on treating our own indigent citizens.

I know, I know, "You call yourself a Christian, you heartless conservative turd." Well, look, you tell me, then, what you say to an impoverished American citizen who is not getting cared for properly because public resources are being claimed by foreigners who are in this country illegally. People like our liberal friend and reader Rawlins Gilliland, who writes:

This is one of the few places I’m inclined to agree with Dreher on the so-called 'illegal immigration' issues. Because, as someone only 5 years ago who faced complete financial ruin when I was in a terrible accident without medical coverage, I learned the hard way that much of the so-called societal safety net I was trying to access was completely used up on 1) unwanted/unplanned pregnancy (the single most preventable of all medical conditions) and 2) those who were accessing medical services but undocumented. This, as a quasi liberal, was enormously disillusioning to me.

Meanwhile, across the street, that immigrant Mexican family's brother arrived from Hidalgo, Mexico to be treated for diabetes complications, all of which he received at Parkland [Dallas County's public hospital -- RD.]. The irony was clear; I, a US citizen who has never even filed for unemployment, was not eligible for subsidized medical care but a man who was at best a guest in this nation was.

I made it through...but I knew that in the case of cancer vs. a traumatic injury (where they cannot turn you away) as I then suffered, I would have to wait in bureaucratic lines behind foreign nationals in hopes of seeking life saving treatment. That opened my eyes to the flip side of having an open-border open heart.

Advertisement
Comments
Nickolas K
December 7, 2007 4:23 AM

The $500 I quoted earlier is simply what is taken off of my pay check each month by the government. In Britain we have what amounts to two income taxes. Both are deducted from my pay check each month and the second one of the two numbers is euphemistically called the "National Insurance Contribution". I have absolutely no discretion over this. If I were married and my wife was doing the same job as me then our monthly bill would be $1000. My age and state of health are irrelevant to the amount I pay.

The other two numbers (totalling $210) are discretionary. My school and I don't have to pay them, but we feel that we should so as to get better service. As a teacher, of course, I am considered a good risk so both of these numbers are good, low group rates.

jfruser
December 7, 2007 5:46 AM

I must be the biggest of squares, as I am continually appalled and disgusted by morally preening folks who claim superiority by using other people's money to pay the freight for their beliefs.

Also, let us be clear: government is not a human and is not a moral agent. It is force, plain an simple. In order for it to do something for one person (citizen or no) it must take the means (money/taxes) from another using force. It behooves a citizenry to minimize the amount of force used on fellow citizens.

jestrfyl
December 13, 2007 2:31 PM

For all the posturing and defending of positions it occured to me to read again that in the original article, "Illegal alien cancer patients". Three of those words are adjectives identifying the noun. My understanding from Abraham to Jesus and beyond is that we are to concern ourselves with the nouns of the world and not get distracted by the adjectives. We can attemot to justify, excuse or explain all our attention on the adjectives, but nothing will absolve us from caring for the nouns.

As to one person getting help when another does not, that seems to be a matter of triage more than attenton to care. But proper triage is based on need, not abilty to pay or worthiness for care. The billing for such is in the hands of the medical/insurance realm, subject to change with or without notice except in cases where notice is or is not given.

Anonymous
December 18, 2007 12:27 PM

As long as we remember our priorities, the illegal aliens are more important to our country than our own citizens. We work to support them first and we get anything left over. We must go without medical so they can have it.
What I am wondering is what country I can go move into and get a free ride.

Hendrix
September 13, 2009 2:24 AM

what are you people talking about , how are illegal aliens more important to our country and others are not?? this is ridiculus this is not the case , i have never seen no us citizen get rejected for emergency care nor for care in general , you dismiss the fact the most of the time ilegal aliens get care are mostly in times of an emergency and yet we get the bill because they cant get insurance to begin with ..

Read All Comments

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Please type the text you see in the box below to verify your post and help us prevent spam. You have a limited time to type - you may wish to compose your comment in a separate document and paste it here upon completion.

Type the characters you see in the picture above.

Advertisement

Search This Blog

About Crunchy Con

Rod Dreher is an editorial columnist for the Dallas Morning News, and author of "Crunchy Cons" (Crown Forum), a nonfiction book about conservatives, most of them religious, whose faith and political convictions sometimes put them at odds with mainstream conservatives. The views expressed in this blog are his own.

feed icon Subscribe

RSS Feed

Receive updates from Crunchy Con

Advertisement

Advertisement


About Beliefnet

Our mission is to help people like you find, and walk, a spiritual path that will bring comfort, hope, clarity, strength, and happiness. More about Beliefnet.

Legal

Copyright © Beliefnet, Inc. and/or its licensors. All rights reserved. Use of this site is subject to Terms of Service and to our Privacy Policy. Constructed by Beliefnet.

Advertisement

Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.