Some people think there should be free healthcare for all people, but others disagree. Discuss both sides.

Excessive healthcare costs have led whole families to bankruptcy. No one chooses to be diagnosed with a disease that requires expensive treatment,

thus

Linking Words

access to care must be an undeniable right of every person.

However

Linking Words

, there are critics who oppose

this

Linking Words

view. There is a number of reasons to support free healthcare for all. The most compelling is the unpredictability of life.

For example

Linking Words

, some chronic neurodegenerative diseases have no specific cause deriving from personal habits. Simply put, it strikes the patient without warning,

hence

Linking Words

, it is not possible to prevent or take any measures to mitigate it. As a consequence, families may sell all their possessions when there is any hope of easing the pain. Still, there are those who disagree with unpaid medical aid, even though it is undeniable that preventive measures are not possible in an abundance of cases. These opposers claim that governments will not have enough funds.

Nonetheless

Linking Words

,

this

Linking Words

idea does not hold true.

For instance

Linking Words

, many countries worldwide have shown the contrary. It is not just possible, but

also

Linking Words

better for the economy since there is much less expenditure with private care. To sum up, an unwanted devastating disease is already a heavy burden, so every action to alleviate it should be taken. Nations are made of large communities sharing their fortune, and the overall result of dividing the costs of care is actually beneficial to everyone.