Drug Policy: Safe Injection Sites (SIS)
in Health ·
But what’s the actual upside here? Does he just die, or do we save him only to have his brain fried, leaving him to live off taxpayer money for the rest of his life?
Regarding this:
That wasn't quite my point. I was thinking more about how someone constantly exposed to specific risks might actually want better coverage for the health issues naturally linked to their line of work. It’s not saying others shouldn't get help if the same thing happens to them, but I honestly believe those facing the highest risks should be the ones paying the premium for it.
Regarding this:
Look, anyone can get into a car wreck without being at fault. You don't think emergency care for a crash victim should depend on their tax contributions, do you? When someone's hauled into the ER covered in blood, do they wait to figure out if there was any liability involved—like whether they hopped in with a drunk driver—before treating them? If they aren't "compliant" with some standard, do they just let them die while sorting out the paperwork? No. If they survive the initial trauma, they get treated.
That wasn't quite my point. I was thinking more about how someone constantly exposed to specific risks might actually want better coverage for the health issues naturally linked to their line of work. It’s not saying others shouldn't get help if the same thing happens to them, but I honestly believe those facing the highest risks should be the ones paying the premium for it.