Ethics of Influencing Policymaking

Ethics of Influencing Policymaking
Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date

A significant reason for the disagreement between parties supporting and opposing Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been individuals’ philosophy on the nature of the relationship that should exist between the government and the people. One of the reasons that cause opposition to the ACA is a perceived paternalistic nature. Those who support the bill consider the State Government as an institution that has the best intentions of the citizens at heart. It is therefore expected that the suggestions of the state will be formulated so as to suits the needs of the people. However, some people feel that the government should not able to decide what an individual should do with their health (Doherty, 2013). They, therefore, feel that ACA is paternalistic in determining the limit of what a person can pay for their insurance. This view was also raised by religious leaders who felt that the federal government was forcing people to pay for services that were not coherent with heir believe. In my view, ACA is not paternalistic.
ACA is formulated in a manner that will help Americans have a better choice when it comes to healthcare. The chief intention of ACA is to regularize negative impacts of uncontrolled health insurance markets. It makes services cheaper and therefore does not limit individual’s choice but rather increases it. While the state controls the consumers’ behavior, it plays a larger part in regulating the behavior of the service providers.

Every relationship must have its limits that provide security for the other party. It is therefore appropriate that the government enacts some measures that ultimately have more benefits that damage to the citizens. The view that the policy is paternalistic is therefore not factual.
My thinking philosophy favors egalitarianism. This is a trend of through which favors equality. It, therefore, requires that institutions implement policies that eliminate stumbling blocks to social equality (Skipper, 2012). In fact, I would say that systems should act to seek equity rather than equality. Equity would suggest that those who are disadvantages be provided with more opportunity and resources so that they can be a par with the rest of the society. Equality has been paradoxically compared to a race between individuals that have been previously maimed at the same conditions with those who are still physically fit. Undoubtedly, the ones who are fit will only continue to advance the gap between them and the disadvantaged (Sen, 2011). This might explain the reason why the gap between the rich and the poor continues to grow.it is also the reason why the majority of minorities continue to lag behind the mainstream society. When the law becomes color, gender, and situational blind, the losers are the minorities because they do not have the same resources to compete with the wealthy.
This is the primary reason for supporting ACA. The biggest beneficiaries ACA have been the low-income earners. Through ACA, there has been a 47% reduction of individuals without a cover. This shows that having a cover is a desired goal for many people. The only reason why people do not have covers was that they were not able to afford it. ACA eliminates previous stumbling blocks towards healthcare insurance for the poor. It favors egalitarianism which is coherent with my desire. If anyone is given an equal opportunity with regard to their capacities, the entire society will grow. With regard to nursing, egalitarian principles will help a person implement policies and practices that benefit every individual in the society.

References
Doherty, B. (2013). Is Obamacare paternalistic?. KevinMD.com. Retrieved 20 April 2018, from https://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2013/11/obamacare-paternalistic.html
Sen, A. (2011). The idea of justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Skipper, R. (2012). Obesity: Towards a System of Libertarian Paternalistic Public Health Interventions. Public Health Ethics, 5(2), 181-191. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/phe/phs020