[PASSED] Freedom to Seek Medical Care II

[New Waldensia]

In queue.

[North Soviet EastAsia]

Also didn't you already pass a resolution like this?

That resolution was repealed.

Why is it II now? Can't a better name be chosen?

[Wallenburg]

Believing that individuals possess an inalienable right to seek medical care of their own accord and at their own expense, above and beyond that which may be provided for them by their government or by their nation's laws,‎

And it has the same ridiculous typo as before. Against.

[New Waldensia]

Believing that individuals possess an inalienable right to seek medical care of their own accord and at their own expense, above and beyond that which may be provided for them by their government or by their nation's laws,‎

And it has the same ridiculous typo as before. Against.

Yes, yes, it wasn't there when I submitted it. Not sure why it made it on, as there's nothing from where it got copied to indicate why it would transfer.

So other than a minor coding typo.....?

[Kenmoria]

Believing that individuals possess an inalienable right to seek medical care of their own accord and at their own expense, above and beyond that which may be provided for them by their government or by their nation's laws,‎

And it has the same ridiculous typo as before. Against.

Yes, yes, it wasn't there when I submitted it. Not sure why it made it on, as there's nothing from where it got copied to indicate why it would transfer.

So other than a minor coding typo.....?

(OOC: That is the left-to-right control character in HTML, some browsers just insert control characters for no reason. I recommend copying your draft into word or notepad and disabling special characters, before submitting a proposal in future.)

“This measure has my full support; I hope to see this pass at vote.”

[Terhovistan]

We support this resolution. People should be allowed to get care no matter where

[Wallenburg]

Believing that individuals possess an inalienable right to seek medical care of their own accord and at their own expense, above and beyond that which may be provided for them by their government or by their nation's laws,‎

And it has the same ridiculous typo as before. Against.

Yes, yes, it wasn't there when I submitted it. Not sure why it made it on, as there's nothing from where it got copied to indicate why it would transfer.

So other than a minor coding typo.....?

This issue arose last time you submitted this, and you must have seen the proposal as submitted after you clicked "submit". For these reasons, I cannot accept this "minor coding typo" within basic standards for proposal writing, and likely shall vote against automatically on that basis, regardless of the proposal's content.

[Separatist Peoples]

Yes, yes, it wasn't there when I submitted it. Not sure why it made it on, as there's nothing from where it got copied to indicate why it would transfer.

So other than a minor coding typo.....?

This issue arose last time you submitted this, and you must have seen the proposal as submitted after you clicked "submit". For these reasons, I cannot accept this "minor coding typo" within basic standards for proposal writing, and likely shall vote against automatically on that basis, regardless of the proposal's content.

"Once is a coincidence. Twice is a conspiracy. We agree with the Wallenburgian delegation."

[Dreadton]

My people are in general favor of this, but are concern that there is no protections for the medical personnel in terms of liability. We would seek to restrict any malpractice or liability actions to the nation on which the procedure was performed and govern by the laws of the same said nation.We would refuse to extradite any of our nationals for this reason.


OOC: I’m new and haven’t finished reading all the WA resolutions, so if this is covered by one of them, oops.

[Tinfect]

"Ambassadors, a typographical error is, frankly, a petty reason to oppose legislation. Allow me to provide you with vastly superior alternatives:

This legislation enable child abuse; parents may take their children from their country, and have illegal and damaging procedures such as electroshock 'therapy' or lobotomy performed on them, and this legislation not only allows such, but prevents any legal recourse from falling upon them.
This legislation enables malpractice; experimental treatments are experimental for a reason, their efficacy may be unverified, their procedure may be unrefined, their risks may be unknown. Foreign medical personnel may be willing to utilize our citizens as vessels for simple experimentation rather than treatment, but we are not.
This legislation forbids Member-States from supporting the efforts of their citizens to seek extranational medical care, by mandating that the costs of transit be covered by the citizens.
This Legislation allows Member-States to 'wash their hands' of their citizens, should they choose to seek medical care in a foreign nation, should that treatment result in complications or later illness.

The Imperium is not opposed in principle to legislation such as this, but this proposal is simply dangerous, and very little else."

[New Waldensia]

This legislation forbids Member-States from supporting the efforts of their citizens to seek extranational medical care, by mandating that the costs of transit be covered by the citizens."

OOC: not quite accurate - 7: Notes that member nations are not prohibited from assisting in defraying the financial cost associated with citizens or permanent residents seeking medical care under this measure.

[Borovan entered the region as he]

At vote

[Arasi Luvasa]

"Ambassadors, a typographical error is, frankly, a petty reason to oppose legislation. Allow me to provide you with vastly superior alternatives:

This legislation enable child abuse; parents may take their children from their country, and have illegal and damaging procedures such as electroshock 'therapy' or lobotomy performed on them, and this legislation not only allows such, but prevents any legal recourse from falling upon them.
This legislation enables malpractice; experimental treatments are experimental for a reason, their efficacy may be unverified, their procedure may be unrefined, their risks may be unknown. Foreign medical personnel may be willing to utilize our citizens as vessels for simple experimentation rather than treatment, but we are not.
This legislation forbids Member-States from supporting the efforts of their citizens to seek extranational medical care, by mandating that the costs of transit be covered by the citizens.
This Legislation allows Member-States to 'wash their hands' of their citizens, should they choose to seek medical care in a foreign nation, should that treatment result in complications or later illness.

The Imperium is not opposed in principle to legislation such as this, but this proposal is simply dangerous, and very little else."

It does state "medically necessary", if the procedure is known to have no effect (or just further harm) then I fail to it is medically necessary.
Also I get the feeling that this is meant as a last resort, not the first option to any medical issue, IRL I think we have had enough people dying or suffering because they were prohibited or held up by red-tape when attempting a last ditch effort for experimental treatments that may save their life (or just make what is left of their lives more comfortable).

[Draconic Aiur]

What about those seeking medical attention that have deadly diseases that spread easily?

[Wallacivia]

Wallacivia supports this in principle, though concerns expressed regarding the lack of clause dealing with quarantining and liability does not sit comfortably with our legislators.

[Bears Armed]

What about those seeking medical attention that have deadly diseases that spread easily?

We have at least one resolution that allows quarantines.

[Pedigo]

Esteemed WA delegates,

Do we really want to allow the General Assembly to restrict and prohibit the rights and sovereignty of each individual nation? While of course it is each person's prerogative to seek medical care, wouldn't it be in the best interest of us all to help provide countries that lack medical care the proper resources to care for their citizens?

[Vrama]

Vrama cannot support the resolution in its current form:

1: Prohibits member nations from denying or restricting their citizens or permanent residents from traveling to obtain medically necessary healthcare in foreign nations at their own expense, subject to any restrictions previously imposed by the General Assembly, while allowing member nations to prohibit travel to nations involved in active armed conflict with the member nation,

Just because you are not at war with someone, doesn't mean your subjects should travel there. What if that nation is in a civil war? What if that nation is engaged in a cyber war or promotes terrorism? What if they are known to kidnap nationals from other countries?

If that clause had a broad "national security" exemption, we'd be more likely to support it. At present, however, we cannot.

[New Bremerton]

Clause 5 requires that patients seeking medical treatment abroad bear any financial costs incurred, even as clause 7 permits member states to defray any such costs as they deem fit. Should member states opt not to provide any financial assistance, this would greatly disadvantage patients from poorer backgrounds, in some cases placing the very lives of some of these patients in grave danger. Should the WA change its mind, this resolution would first have to be repealed in its entirety.

We believe that no one should be left out, be they a citizen or a foreigner, manpower, resources and land area permitting. For this reason alone, New Bremerton hereby votes AGAINST this proposal.

[Furry Things]

Esteemed WA delegates,

Do we really want to allow the General Assembly to restrict and prohibit the rights and sovereignty of each individual nation? While of course it is each person's prerogative to seek medical care, wouldn't it be in the best interest of us all to help provide countries that lack medical care the proper resources to care for their citizens?

Any GA resolution restricts the sovereignty of member nations since, by definition, resolutions limit the choices of the member nations to some degree. GA resolutions aren't even valid unless they have an operative clause. As always, if you don't want your national sovereignty to be impinged, you should leave the WA.

[The United Choristers of Doge]

English: Medical care should always be free to use, to go and to see by the peoples. Therefore, even the poorest, most disadvantaged of people should receive it, even if it goes against their wishes. I think the WA is asking the wrong things and they should be overthrown.

However, you could say it would damage a fragile economy like mine: for eg: free healthcare would cost around 17,000,000 Dogecoin (15,000,000 Average CRR) a year, limiting a country's endeavour and enterprise.

Nevertheless, a strong economy would cope well... unlike mine

Listening to Pedigo, I do agree on a certain scale. The General Assembly has lots of control and governs around 80% of all regions. To much control would mean a puppet state

A puppet state, puppet regime, or puppet government is a state that is de jure independent but is de facto completely dependent upon an outside power. It is nominally sovereign but effectively controlled by a foreign or otherwise alien power, for reasons such as financial interests, economic or military support. s.wikipedia

Dogespreck: much sad no band aid, need free band-aid.
it make me broke, much dogecoin lost
might mak a h8 doggo land

A place controlled by someone else or other hooman

[United States of Americanas]

Comment retracted

[Separatist Peoples]

"Stellar discourse here, friends."

[Lauchenoiria]

Lauchenoiria cannot support this resolution for a number of reasons.

As has been said, experimental treatments are experimental for a reason, and a nation wishing to prohibit its citizens from putting themselves in danger in another country can be justified. We also are concerned that citizens could travel to seek treatments banned in Lauchenoiria for good reasons that protect the wellbeing of the individuals in question.

A precise definition of 'medically necessary' is also not given, and thus could be open to a variety of interpretations, some of which could theoretically be used to cause harm. For these reasons, Lauchenoiria votes AGAINST.

[New Bliczi]

While we find the underlying resolution to be admirable in its broadest application, there are ethical and legal implications that are of concern to our nation. Namely, the risk of substandard care provided by foreign medical facilities operating outside the purview of regulations that are otherwise designed to protect patients within our nation’s borders.

The ability to seek medical care outside our nation undoubtedly affords our citizens the ability to seek treatment that is otherwise experimental or limited in availability. This arguably doesn’t mean that such treatments would or could be dangerous, but increases the risk significantly. Barring the review of our regulatory agencies, medical associations and peer review, it’s impossible to say whether such foreign treatments would be beneficial or even safe.

We believe that civil rights are tantamount here and that citizens should be able to seek medical care, but we also have a duty to protect our citizens. We seek to protect them from gray market organs, infection, dangerous procedures or care delivered in substandard conditions by unqualified personnel.

Though we would not seek to strike down this resolution altogether, we should request amendments that afford for national discretion to establish reciprocal medical agreements with other nations. Such agreements would provide for our nation to establish reciprocal peer review of medical standards to ensure that each nation is of the same basic level and standard of care. We welcome such a review of our medical standards to a nation considering such a reciprocal agreement, as should any country with suitable care standards.

In this way, we can provide information to our citizenry as to what other nations they may seek medical care of the same basic quality while also affording them the opportunity to get such care at a lesser cost or pursue otherwise experimental care. This is the best way to provide options with some basic assurances that our citizens are not trading on quality to save dollars.