Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Medical Anarchy

chrispacia.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 76 posts

Re: Medical Anarchy

#41

Post by baddox »

chimeracoder wrote: post #9
eli5 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, do you think that if enough people want to peacefully live without government interference at all (e.g. without a government) they don't deserve to do so and they don't deserve, for example, to be sold a piece of land to completely secede from state?

That's a very loaded (but easy) question. In the United States, we fought an entire war over the question of whether or not a state had the authority to secede from the federal government (the Union). The seceding states lost that fight. It would be very hard to argue that individuals have that right when the states do not. You may wish that it were different, but the fact is that individuals do not have this right,…

In the area that would become the United States, we also fought an entire war over the question of whether colonies had the authority to secede from their empire. The seceding colonies won that fight.

Re: Medical Anarchy

#42

Post by baddox »

I think an even better example of potential crypto-anarchist success is legal advice. It could work largely the same as the medical service this article describes, but legal advice fits better than medical advice.

Re: Medical Anarchy

#43

Post by baddox »

kevingadd wrote: post #27

I'm bothered that this article seems to believe that the rise in homeschooling (in large part by unqualified parents using low-quality textbooks and ill-considered strategies) is another example of people 'opting out' of some particular brand of oppression by the State, and that doing so will increase supply, or something? As far as I'm concerned, students have a right to a high quality education because without one…

It seems like your arguments assume that homeschooling is, at least on average, worse for the children than public schools. If homeschooling might be better for the child, then it doesn't make sense to talk about whether "parents have the right to deny" children public schooling.

Re: Medical Anarchy

#44

Post by naturalethic »

chimeracoder wrote: post #9
eli5 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, do you think that if enough people want to peacefully live without government interference at all (e.g. without a government) they don't deserve to do so and they don't deserve, for example, to be sold a piece of land to completely secede from state?

That's a very loaded (but easy) question. In the United States, we fought an entire war over the question of whether or not a state had the authority to secede from the federal government (the Union). The seceding states lost that fight. It would be very hard to argue that individuals have that right when the states do not. You may wish that it were different, but the fact is that individuals do not have this right,…

You forgot the prior war where they fought to secede and won.

Re: Medical Anarchy

#45

Post by baddox »

kevingadd wrote: post #37
dragonwriter wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As far as I'm concerned, students have a right to a high quality education because without one their future will be a trainwreck. Just because they're largely minors doesn't, to me, mean that their parents have the right to deny them a future in favor of whatever their personal reasons may be. Sounds like the solution is to: 1) Define what a "high quality education" means in terms that it is objectively measurable…

The point is not that homeschooling provides a lower quality education than public schools (though I would argue that, on average, it does) - the point is that homeschooling is being done by unqualified people using unverified, quickly-considered techniques, while public schooling is at least largely done by people who got teaching certifications and their methods get public scrutiny. To me, the amount of criticism p…

> the point is that homeschooling is being done by unqualified people using unverified, quickly-considered techniques, while public schooling is at least largely done by people who got teaching certifications and their methods get public scrutiny.

But still, you're assuming that unqualified (according to whose qualifications?) people using unverified (by whom?) techniques are worse on average than public schools.

It's not easy to agree on what objective measurements comprise "good schooling," but I think most people will agree that homeschooling and public schooling both vary wildly in quality if we were to agree upon some objective measurements. It's not fair to implement policies for either type of schooling based solely on the worst examples of that type of schooling.

Re: Medical Anarchy

#46

Post by kevingadd »

baddox wrote: post #43
kevingadd wrote: post #27

I'm bothered that this article seems to believe that the rise in homeschooling (in large part by unqualified parents using low-quality textbooks and ill-considered strategies) is another example of people 'opting out' of some particular brand of oppression by the State, and that doing so will increase supply, or something? As far as I'm concerned, students have a right to a high quality education because without one…

It seems like your arguments assume that homeschooling is, at least on average, worse for the children than public schools. If homeschooling might be better for the child, then it doesn't make sense to talk about whether "parents have the right to deny" children public schooling.

The issue is not whether the average homeschooler is better or worse. The issue is the difficulties involved in ensuring homeschooling does not fail children. I was hoping the parallel between that and my later points about unlicensed doctors practicing over the internet would be somewhat evident.

My post didn't actually say that the average homeschooling education is worse for children than a public school, but I do happen to believe that it is :) This is, however, not based on scientifically-gathered data, so I would welcome data to the contrary.

Re: Medical Anarchy

#47

Post by kevingadd »

baddox wrote: post #45
kevingadd wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is not that homeschooling provides a lower quality education than public schools (though I would argue that, on average, it does) - the point is that homeschooling is being done by unqualified people using unverified, quickly-considered techniques, while public schooling is at least largely done by people who got teaching certifications and their methods get public scrutiny. To me, the amount of criticism p…

> the point is that homeschooling is being done by unqualified people using unverified, quickly-considered techniques, while public schooling is at least largely done by people who got teaching certifications and their methods get public scrutiny. But still, you're assuming that unqualified (according to whose qualifications?) people using unverified (by whom?) techniques are worse on average than public schools. It'…

I think it's reasonable to assume that unless anyone has proven the contrary, which they haven't. If you were replacing a public school with a private school, I'd agree that it is unwise to assume the private school is worse. We're talking about replacing an entire school staff with a couple overworked parents, though.

Many arguments in favor of homeschooling are about parents' religious freedom or about how the public school system has failed the children, and in both cases this does nothing to demonstrate that the parents are going to do a better job.

I do agree that objective measurements would allow this stuff to be considered rationally, but historically it's really hard to come up with useful objective measurements due to all of the different pressures involved.

Re: Medical Anarchy

#48

Post by yaddayadda »

smacktoward wrote: post #39
dragonwriter wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As far as I'm concerned, students have a right to a high quality education because without one their future will be a trainwreck. Just because they're largely minors doesn't, to me, mean that their parents have the right to deny them a future in favor of whatever their personal reasons may be. Sounds like the solution is to: 1) Define what a "high quality education" means in terms that it is objectively measurable…

> Sounds like the solution is to: 1) Define what a "high quality education" means in terms that it is objectively measurable Um, good luck with that.

A collaborative attempt to do so has lead to the Common Core - http://www.corestandards.org/ - which "... define the rigorous skills and knowledge in English Language Arts and Mathematics that need to be effectively taught and learned for students to be ready to succeed academically in credit-bearing, college-entry courses and in workforce training programs." and ability to measure attainment was one of their internal requirements during the development process (http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Criteria.pdf).

Re: Medical Anarchy

#49

Post by psaintla »

So they are hoping people will make medical decisions based on advice from an anonymous doctor whose credentials you cannot verify and who does not have prescribing ability? Is this serious?

Re: Medical Anarchy

#50

Post by joe_the_user »

01Michael10 wrote: post #4

This article is for real? Am I missing something? Sure, people want a diagnosis and other services from an unregulated, anonymous doctor with a reputation built by what? Amazon-like reviews? Come on!

That someone is arguing this gives you an idea of the power of dogma.

Medical services are the place where in-person attention is pretty much generally needed, where consumers tend to be bad judges of their needs and so-forth. It's pretty much the point where the "disruption" paradigm breaks down.

Unfortunately, this paradigm seems to be the hammer that everyone applies to every problem today. Every scheme to make medical more efficient today, not just those of "crypto-anarchists", seems to hinge on giving consumer more choice when medical care is exactly where consumers are incompetent to make choices alone.

Post reply on HN