Need help with your Assignment?

Get a timely done, PLAGIARISM-FREE paper
from our highly-qualified writers!

No Duty Principle

No-Duty Principle


Various societies in the world have different views on the roles of physicians. Following the multiple perspectives, physicians are essential for social change by maintaining healthcare ethics. It should be noted that some countries have specific medicine laws that make medication a right for the citizens (Gilbar, 2016). The no-duty principle in America has various reviews from healthcare stakeholders in the United States of America.

Do you need an original copy of the ” No Duty Principle”? Contact us

No duty principle

The no-duty principle is defined as an individual’s right to healthcare service. Country U citizens generally have no possession of any healthcare service legal right. Moreover, the care provided to citizens is not a legal duty in this country (Hand, 2016). This makes it mandatory for medical companies in this country to obtain a license to provide medical care to citizens legally.

Although the research indicates that country U is the most developed regarding medical factors, it does not consider healthcare a fundamental right. There is no medical care concern that country A has for the individuals. Unlike country U, country A provides healthcare as a social good. This indicates that health care is considered an essential part of life in this country. The care provided is standard regardless of race, faith, social, and economic factors. Considering the nation’s weight on human healthcare, it is necessary to make healthcare a fundamental right (Civaner, 2017).

In conclusion, the research revealed that countries with low economic had their citizen guaranteed healthcare. These countries have healthcare legally listed as one of the fundamental rights. However, the study also revealed that high-income countries do not consider the individual’s health a fundamental right.

Other Related Post: Examining Communication Strategies


Gilbar, R., & Foster, C. (2016). DOCTORS’LIABILITY TO THE PATIENT’S RELATIVES IN GENETIC MEDICINEABC V St George’s Healthcare NHS Trust [2015] EWHC 1394 (QB). Medical law review, 24(1), 112-123.

Hand, D., Davies, C., & Healey, R. (2016). The right to healthcare: A critical examination of the human right of irregular migrants to access state-funded HIV/AIDS treatment in the UK. In Justiciability of human rights law in domestic jurisdictions (pp. 45-69). Springer, Cham.

Civaner, M. M., Vatansever, K., & Pala, K. (2017). Ethical problems in an era where disasters have become a part of daily life: A qualitative study of healthcare workers in Turkey. PLoS one, 12(3), e0174162.


We’ll write everything from scratch


Unit 7 Discussion No-Duty Principle

Depending on one’s personal experience in obtaining health care, or one’s view of the role of physicians in society, of law as a tool for social change, of the scope of medical ethics, or of the United States’ place in the broader global community, the no-duty principle might seem appropriate, irresponsible, or downright wrong.

Unit 7 Discussion No Duty Principle

Unit 7 Discussion No Duty Principle

Imagine traveling in a country where socialized medicine is the legal norm, and your discussion with a citizen of that country turns to the topic of your country’s respective health systems. When asked, how will you account for the fact that health care is far from being a fundamental right rooted in American law?

Order Solution Now