When Healthcare Goes up in Tobacco Smoke: A Selective Healthcare System from a (European) Human Rights Perspective

This contribution sets out to answer the question to what extent fundamental rights may act as a constraint for states to employ lifestyle differentiation, particularly between smokers and non-smokers, regarding the access to their healthcare systems. In human rights treaties a tension is palpable b...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Christopher Borucki
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Utrecht University School of Law 2019
Materias:	human rights right to healthcare lifestyle differentiation self-determination smoking behaviour Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence K1-7720
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/b87811a80f9a42ac985046ea6dd4c64c
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:b87811a80f9a42ac985046ea6dd4c64c
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:b87811a80f9a42ac985046ea6dd4c64c2021-11-08T08:17:04ZWhen Healthcare Goes up in Tobacco Smoke: A Selective Healthcare System from a (European) Human Rights Perspective1871-515X10.36633/ulr.539https://doaj.org/article/b87811a80f9a42ac985046ea6dd4c64c2019-12-01T00:00:00Zhttps://www.utrechtlawreview.org/articles/539https://doaj.org/toc/1871-515XThis contribution sets out to answer the question to what extent fundamental rights may act as a constraint for states to employ lifestyle differentiation, particularly between smokers and non-smokers, regarding the access to their healthcare systems. In human rights treaties a tension is palpable between the obligations of states, which represent the general interest, and the rights of smokers, who attempt to hold on to their individual freedom. On the one hand, states have to guarantee the health of their citizens. On the other hand, they are unable to mandatorily enforce health standards as smokers do not have to tolerate unbridled state interference in their private lives. However, this right to self-determination is not absolute. If the smoker persists in using tobacco products, states are granted a broader margin of appreciation in their socio-economic obligations, which in itself is already wide, out of respect for that individual choice beyond their control. As a result it is possible that a state differentiates between lifestyles and imposes mandatory conditions for the right to healthcare, which require smokers to alter their behaviour, even though the right to healthcare should be guaranteed to all without discrimination. For example the Belgian state explicitly settles the tension between the individual and the general interest by viewing the solidarity of the social security system as a double-edged sword. Every individual, including smokers, has to contribute to the realisation of equitable rights for all. With rights, come responsibilities. As always, however, state interference has to be proportional to the desired, legitimate goal.Christopher BoruckiUtrecht University School of Lawarticlehuman rightsright to healthcarelifestyle differentiationself-determinationsmoking behaviourLaw in general. Comparative and uniform law. JurisprudenceK1-7720ENUtrecht Law Review, Vol 15, Iss 3, Pp 6-26 (2019)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	human rights right to healthcare lifestyle differentiation self-determination smoking behaviour Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence K1-7720
spellingShingle	human rights right to healthcare lifestyle differentiation self-determination smoking behaviour Law in general. Comparative and uniform law. Jurisprudence K1-7720 Christopher Borucki When Healthcare Goes up in Tobacco Smoke: A Selective Healthcare System from a (European) Human Rights Perspective
description	This contribution sets out to answer the question to what extent fundamental rights may act as a constraint for states to employ lifestyle differentiation, particularly between smokers and non-smokers, regarding the access to their healthcare systems. In human rights treaties a tension is palpable between the obligations of states, which represent the general interest, and the rights of smokers, who attempt to hold on to their individual freedom. On the one hand, states have to guarantee the health of their citizens. On the other hand, they are unable to mandatorily enforce health standards as smokers do not have to tolerate unbridled state interference in their private lives. However, this right to self-determination is not absolute. If the smoker persists in using tobacco products, states are granted a broader margin of appreciation in their socio-economic obligations, which in itself is already wide, out of respect for that individual choice beyond their control. As a result it is possible that a state differentiates between lifestyles and imposes mandatory conditions for the right to healthcare, which require smokers to alter their behaviour, even though the right to healthcare should be guaranteed to all without discrimination. For example the Belgian state explicitly settles the tension between the individual and the general interest by viewing the solidarity of the social security system as a double-edged sword. Every individual, including smokers, has to contribute to the realisation of equitable rights for all. With rights, come responsibilities. As always, however, state interference has to be proportional to the desired, legitimate goal.
format	article
author	Christopher Borucki
author_facet	Christopher Borucki
author_sort	Christopher Borucki
title	When Healthcare Goes up in Tobacco Smoke: A Selective Healthcare System from a (European) Human Rights Perspective
title_short	When Healthcare Goes up in Tobacco Smoke: A Selective Healthcare System from a (European) Human Rights Perspective
title_full	When Healthcare Goes up in Tobacco Smoke: A Selective Healthcare System from a (European) Human Rights Perspective
title_fullStr	When Healthcare Goes up in Tobacco Smoke: A Selective Healthcare System from a (European) Human Rights Perspective
title_full_unstemmed	When Healthcare Goes up in Tobacco Smoke: A Selective Healthcare System from a (European) Human Rights Perspective
title_sort	when healthcare goes up in tobacco smoke: a selective healthcare system from a (european) human rights perspective
publisher	Utrecht University School of Law
publishDate	2019
url	https://doaj.org/article/b87811a80f9a42ac985046ea6dd4c64c
work_keys_str_mv	AT christopherborucki whenhealthcaregoesupintobaccosmokeaselectivehealthcaresystemfromaeuropeanhumanrightsperspective
_version_	1718442846573297664

When Healthcare Goes up in Tobacco Smoke: A Selective Healthcare System from a (European) Human Rights Perspective

Ejemplares similares