Responsibility? I Think Not.

Most of us (especially as it refers to our health) would say that we are very
responsible in the management and care of our health and would take it as an
insult for someone to hint that we were otherwise irresponsible. Perhaps many
of us like the idea that we are in control masters of our own ships sort of
speaking and anything contrary would be unthinkable.
So let us test this idea or belief that we are responsible. Before we begin,
allow me to make this bold statement: Most Americans living in North America
and abroad are in fact irresponsible in their normal lives and routine activities
and have entrenched themselves in such behavior that they are unaware of
what it means (in law and in practice) to be responsible. Again, much of what
we know or believe to know to be true is incorrect flat wrong.
Let us first look at car insurance. Most of us would say that someone is
financial responsible when he has automobile insurance. I, on the other hand,
would vehemently dissent this idea. Perhaps you too will agree with me after
reviewing the facts.
When one is involved in an automobile accident, who pays for the damage? Is
it you or the insurance company? The average damage insured drivers suffer is
approximately (cite number). (This is only the mean average. Some are higher
and some are lower.) So you find yourself involved in a car accident and the
total damage to the car of the other driver is $1,800. Who pays for the
damage?
The insurance company pays for the damage all of it. It is the insurance
company that handles the transaction and who deals directly with the
insurance company of the other driver whose car you just damaged. You are
essentially left out of the equation while your insurance provider handles the
entire transaction. You simply pay is a penalty (a deductible or a fee) as
reimbursement to the insurance company for its time, effort, and energy to
handle your affairs.
Think about it. Who do you first call when you are involved in an accident? It is
not the insurance company? If you were responsible, would you not do all the
work yourself (e.g., assess damages, total damages, secure at least three
estimates to repair damages, pay for repairs, supply the other car owner with
a rental car while his car in repair, etc.) Would it not be you who would manage
the daily operations of ensuring that the owner of the car you damaged
receives the necessary care to restore his car and any additional expenses he
might need in the process? Is not that what your insurance company does for
you handles your business?
Is that responsible on your part or on the part of the insurance company? Allow
me to express this yet another way. If you were an insurance company or let

us say that you are in a financial position to pay a claim and a family member
got into a pickle (trouble). Let us say that he cause several thousand of dollar
worth of damage. He contacts you because you are the only one he knows
that has the money to bail him out to determine whether you will help him.
He explains what happens and after the conversation, you decide to help him
because he is family. Do you give him the money to handle the matter or do
you handle it yourself?
If you answered that you would most likely handle the matter directly, my
sense is that would be the wise thing to do because you therefore guarantee
that the monies requested will go to the correct injured party. The question still
begs to be answered as to who is the identifiable, responsible party in this
particular scenario. Is it you or is it your family member? What say you?
One does not need to be a rocket scientist to determine that you would be the
responsible party, not your family member. Hence, the insurance company
who holds your policy is, in fact, the responsible party for any damage you
may caused to property of another. Hence, in this scenario, you acted
irresponsibly by limiting your (financial) liability and thereby causing a chain
reaction whereby others policy holders need to ante up to cover the costs for
repair. You essentially spread the cost for repairs amongst the other policy
holders without their written consent or approval. Is that acting responsible?
I do not want, at this time, to address the reason why we do what we do or
what the solution is to our knee-bending to these monolithic institutions of
insurance. My only point is to demonstrate that the use of insurance places
one in the position of being (acting) irresponsibly regardless of whether he is
ignorant of this fact. Instead of one being fully liable (responsible) for his
damages he may cause to another, he instead voluntarily chooses to limit his
liability, enter into a guardian-ward relationship 1 with the insurance company,
and allow someone else ( i.e., the insurance company) to handle his affairs. As
a matter of law, insurance companies view such an individual as incompetent
to handle his own affairs by the prima facie2 evidence that he runs to them to
clean up his mess, his damage.

1 Guardian-Ward Relationship: A legal inference denoting the clear

common law rule that the guardian has a fiduciary duty to act in the best
interests of the ward, including of course the wards financial best
interest. The protected individual, known as the ward, is considered
legally incapable of acting for himself or herself. [The Columbia Electronic
Encyclopedia, 6th ed.]
2 Prima Facie: A legal term denoting evidence that is sufficient to raise a
presumption of fact or to establish the fact in question unless rebutted.
[From the 'Lectric Law Library's Lexicon]

Would it be any different if a teenager called his parents to have them pay for
property he damaged? There is little difference. Only the characters are
different. The child is incapable of handling his affairs. He therefore is
incompetent in that regard and needs assistance in repairing damage he
caused. The responsible thing to do would be for the teenager to pay for the
damages without the assistance of his parents.
What is that you ask? What teenager has the ability to pay for considerable
damage he caused? Such questions are and should be considered collateral
to the issue at hand and yet speaks to the notion of one acting irresponsibly. It
is precisely my point that this question therefore strengthens. When one
purchases insurance whether he is aware of this fact or regardless of what
the law may dictate he makes the statement that he is financially incapable
of servicing the cost for repairs for any damage he may cause to either himself
or someone else. He therefore needs (financial) assistance to cover his
damages.
Let us see whether we can connect the dots to determine the connection if
any at all between our health, responsibility, and insurance. However, before
we dive into this potentially vociferous argument, allow me to create a
backdrop. A drunken man steps into his car, gets behind the steering wheel,
takes off down the road, and eventually crashes into another parked car. Both
his car and the other car receive extensive damage. The insurance companies
involved will certainly consider both cars totally damaged, beyond repair.
Replacement costs will most certainly range upwards of fifty thousand dollars.
Was the drunken man aware that he had insurance coverage that would bail
him out sort of speaking in case he got into an accident? He sure did. Was
he also aware that would pay higher premiums in case it was his fault when
(and if) he got in an accident? Without a doubt, he knew. Would it be good to
say that his insurance would most likely raise his annual premiums by at least
$1,200.00 if not more? Ok. Let us agree that his insurance company raises
his annual premiums $1,200.00. How then can we compare his $100/per
month increase over the next three to five years to the cost to replace both
cars ($50K)? More importantly, outside of his annual insurance premium
increase, what is there to deter this man from doing the same thing again? He
has not killed anyone yet. He has damaged only property.
I continue addressing the role of responsibility each of us has within society.
Hence, these are no deterrents for the irresponsible man who wishes to drive
while he is intoxicated. He not only is irresponsible in his actions of driving
while he is inebriated, but is irresponsible in his allowing (and preferring)
someone else to shoulder his financial burdens for which he alone should be
held responsible. It is only natural and makes all the sense in the world that
such a man will oftentimes be a repeat offender, doing what he has always

done until he himself dies or he kills someone else. The latter is only
temporary while the former is permanent.
Let that same man be responsible for any and all injury he causes to property
of another (and for any lives he takes). Let him have to work to cover the cost
to replace both cars. I am certain that he might think twice before driving his
car while he is intoxicated. If not, he risks much more than the nominal $100
fee increase he would have to pay to the insurance company. He stakes are
much greater his life, his time, and his money.
Similarly, when it comes to our health, we act irresponsibly. It is only part our
fault that we act responsibly. We all have been educated. Unfortunately, few of
us have received the necessary education to maintain good health and enjoy a
high quality of living with strength and vigor. Instead we suffer miserably (and
often endlessly) from unnecessary causes due to our ignorance. In legal
parlance, we are the proximate cause of our demise.
This is not to suggest that the medical industrial complex has not had a hand
in our education. They have indeed had a major presence in our knowing (and
believing) today what we believe to know. It is through their use of the media
(i.e., news papers, television, commercials, advertisements, etc.) that we have
a constant and consistent message of how (not) to take care of ourselves. This
message is simply: Contact (see) your physician. It not this the massage we
have learned to accept as our standard practice? Let us test it.
Just as a side note: This is not my opportunity to brow beat medical
practitioners (or the industry) and scorn them for their entrepreneurial skills
and marketing geniuses. No. I applaud and appraise them for their ability to
captivate and capture such a large and increasing market where they stand
alongside other kings and priests, doling subsidies to the poor and
unfortunate.
They perform a service; I do not deny. They make a great deal of money and
profit for those services; to this I agree. So how has that benefited you, the
reader, after all these years of receiving their services? Have you learned to
become more responsible for your own health? Have you acted as your own
insurance company who would manage your financial/health affairs and see to
it that your body was in tip-top shape so as not the incur unnecessary, future
medical expenses? Have you sought to educate yourselves or should I say
reeducate yourselves to better understand the cause and effect nature of
sickness and disease?
For those of you who are able to respond with a resounding Yes! I salute and
congratulate you on accepting responsibility for your own health. You are
unfortunately in the minority.
Perhaps, at present, you still are experiencing some disconnect between your
health, insurance, and responsibility. That is understandable. Let us go back for

a second and ask the question of who you believe your doctor or family
physician to be. Or perhaps more aptly placed: What do you believe he can do
for you?
Do we not go to him for information for a particular symptom we may
experience to have him assign some medication or prescription to remedy or
ease our discomfort? If so, I therefore have two questions. 1) Is this information
that we could have obtained through our own research? and 2) How do we
know whether our doctor/physician knows what he ought to know what he
should know? (What are those criteria by which we can accurately judge how
well a doctor knows what he ought to know? Do we have are we aware of
some existing standard? What information do we have prior to going to the
offices of the medical practitioner whereby we can access his knowledge
base?)
I would submit to you that we could obtain the necessary information through
our own research in diagnosing certain illnesses and diseases. Moreover, we do
not have often because of our lack of interest to know or discover any
criteria other than how we may feel to judge a medical practitioner. In the
final analysis, we tend to judge doctors on how well they make us (physically
and emotionally) feel better, for other method do we, the unlearned, have
whereby we can accurately access them? We have none.
We therefore blindly accept their words as gospel. Very few of us do our due
diligence to research the matter, compare notes, make a determination, and
look for alternative remedies (solutions) for the cause of the symptom. Hence,
we are irresponsible for our own health and wellbeing in this regard and rely
to a great degree on the advice of our friendly, family physician who is, in the
final analysis, an entrepreneur who is in business to make a profit. (See
chapter __ on The Business of Business) Should we consider such actions as
these as those that epitomize responsibility? I should say not. We have not
only been fiscally irresponsible for the our health but also intellectually
irresponsible in not wanting to know or how to accurately judge our own
personal health matters (concerns).
Should it be any wonder why we have such a rising number of sick and
diseased people living in the most technologically and medically advanced
nation in the world with little hope in sight? It should not be a surprise when
one looks objectively at the cause and effect relationship we have because of
our participation in insurance and our blind obedience to medical professionals
and the medical industrial complex.
Although I do not offer solutions in this chapter, I do however, wish to
articulate that central idea that responsibility or for that matter
irresponsibility is a choice. It is the choice that each of us has. We can either
choose one or the other. We however cannot choose both.

If however you are still not convinced that your behavior to see your physician
to manage your health and wellness is prima facie evidence that you are
acting in an irresponsible behavior and within a guardian-ward relationship,
ask yourself purely from a business viewpoint of that of the insurance
company how you could reduce your costs, raise your profit margins, and
stop the hemorrhage of lost revenues. Simply disallow those with preexisting
conditions and unnecessary health risks (i.e., overweight, obesity, heart
conditions, family predispositions, etc) into the plan and/or raise the premium
costs of all insured to cover the excess potential loss for those high risk
individual grandfathered in the plan. Although this may be a temporary fix and
one that would not withstand congressional (constitutional) scrutiny, for a
more permanent fix, one might consider compelling the insured and his
medical provider (medical practitioner) to invest in preventive care where
the patient becomes aware of the need to change his thinking on how he
should access the medical industrial complex.
Instead of the patient visiting his family medical practitioner once a year or
once every two years, preventive care suggests he see his family physician
more frequently, say three or four times each year. That way you, acting as the
insurance company, can reduce the occurrence of major medical expenditures
costing your company a great deal of money and cutting into your profit
margins. Hence, preventive care is your attempt to stave off potentially
unnecessary major medical operations and complicated surgeries for your
policy holders that in turn saves your company a gob of money.
These internal schemes to pursued consumers do little in developing someone
in becoming more responsible for his health. In fact, it keeps him wanting and
irresponsible. Responsible persons manage their own financial, health,
educational, marital, legal, and family affairs. They only seek advice to
compare notes with those who they deem as their peers or better qualified.
They are well educated and informed in all the disciplines of life and are
prepared and able to judge a matter because of their training on how to be
responsible in all things.