John, and anyone else, quasi-contract question.

Jason · Only in cartoons

RE: John, and anyone else, quasi-contract question.

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

Jason wrote:

The doctor deserves payment. He isn't a slave.

The doctor served you of his own volition, knowing full well you might not want to pay any bill. He isn't acting like a slave.

Jason · Only in cartoons

This isn't a child drowning in a pond scenario. This happens in hospitals all the time.

This is actually the best argument I've heard in favor of universal health care.

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

People make legal statements swearing to respond to these situations no matter what. It's not an argument for universal health care. They know the risk of getting in the business, or at least they should.

No unconscious person can consent to anything.

Jason · Only in cartoons

DEATHPIGGIE wrote:

It's not an argument for universal health care.

If you were to read between the lines, you would find that it is. Under a universal health care system, doctors would never be faced with these dilemmas. Shall I put it in premise and conclusion form for you?

DEATHPIGGIE · I'm fat and nobody likes me

I now get what you're saying, and it's a good argument. Plenty of people come into hospitals, and they do not know their financial records. They just do it with or without the person's proper consent, but I just can't imagine charging someone for something like that, when they do not give permission for it to happen.

Of course, they are already presuming by operating on him.

Jason · Only in cartoons

Even if they were in full knowledge that the patient would be unable to pay, they should feel obligated to provide minimal care necessary to prevent his death. Especially as doctors, they can't just sit there and watch the patient die just because it's not a revenue-generating procedure.

john31584 · Zinc Saucier

I don't really have a problem with the quasi-contract doctrine, as long as its application is limited.