HIGHLAND, UT | 30 April 2008| Life on planet Earth is fraught with danger. All things and all people living upon the face thereof are mortal and therefore susceptible to death. There are many things that can kill a human being. But until John Bonifield of CNN.com reported on the disease of “lack of insurance” it was unknown that it took its toll on so many individuals. Bonifield reveals that as many as 50 million Americans suffer from this disease; however, his article from April 25 concentrated on the suffering of one man.

The one man is Mark Windsor (52) of Atlanta. And not to make light of Windsor’s real suffering, he has dealt with a rare bone cancer for half his life. By the report, Windsor has had a tough life. Cancer is never easy. Most people contracting cancer suffer great pain and usually end up losing their life altogether within a much shorter period of time than 25 years. Personally, a big hats off to Mr. Windsor. God has blessed him with a much longer life than perhaps he had expected.

This CNN report (there’s your first clue) is full of slanted bias. It is obvious that Mr Windsor is simply a pawn in Mr Bonifield’s much grander scheme of inciting readers to emotionally support a nationalized health care where sufferers like Mark Windsor could get the treatment they “deserve.” This article will not tackle the merits or the follies of a nationalized health care system. That is a discussion for another time. Suffice it to say, that simply put, a nationalized system is immoral and unjust. Far more pressing to this article are the principles that reveal the agency of man and the stewardship of his own life.

Key Points

• Mr. Bonifield reports: “The reason [Windsor] didn’t get care sooner—he couldn’t afford it, because he didn’t have insurance.”
  This reasoning, in the FreeCapitalist frame of mind is called the consumer paradigm. Consumers make decisions based on money, either the lack of it or the abundance of it in the individual’s life. It may be true that Windsor did not have insurance. It may be true that without that insurance he could not afford the treatment. However, it was Windsor’s decision not to be insured. The opposite of the consumer paradigm is the investor/producer paradigm. This person does not allow money to dictate his decisions. He understands that a problem has many solutions, some that require no money out of his pocket directly. A person in this paradigm understands his stewardship and acts accordingly.
• “While he’s found help from a few generous doctors, his efforts to survive have often been desperate. And now he’s learned, largely in vain.”
  Mr. Bonifield does not quote Mr. Windsor directly here, so we can’t tell from the article if this is Windsor’s sentiments or Bonifield’s interpretation and assumption. However, again, appealing to the producer paradigm: one who fully understands that life is his own stewardship and he is a creature of action (i.e., agency), takes responsibility for his agency. In this case, he recognizes that life, whether short or long, painless or painful is his life to make it what he what he can. Was Mr. Windsor’s efforts in vain? Absolutely not. Windsor’s “desperate” attempts to save his life, kept him alive for many more years than those who give up to the disease.
• Bonifield reports Windsor’s condition of the “brutal treatments” Windsor has received. He quotes Windsor: “I don’t know if my body is capable of doing any more. I’m tired. I’ve had a lot of operations in my life. And this radiation treatment wasn’t much better on it. it’s now taken to taste away. My smell is horrible. I feel nauseated every day. And I just don’t think this ever had to get to this.”
  Anyone who has personally witnessed the radiation and chemotherapy treatments of cancer patients recognizes these sentiments. This is not the result of lacking insurance. This is the result of a horrible disease, the treatment of which kills nearly as many patients as the disease itself.
  This is simply dishonest reporting. Insurance does not improve the devastating effects of chemo- and radiation therapy of cancer patients. Had Bonifield had more pure motivations for his story, he may have chosen a different approach to Windsor’s statements.
• “The American Cancer Society says uninsured patients are 60 percent more likely to die within five years of their diagnosis.”
  This claim was unverifiable. However, a perusal of the American Cancer Society’s website did indicate that these uninsured patients indeed suffered more than the insured. The figures presented in Bonifield’s article were not located on the site although Bonifield provided a link to other cancer news stories.
• “Just when Windsor’s lack of insurance started killing him is difficult to say.”
  Again, this is just dishonest journalism. It was not his lack of insurance that did anything of the sort. If anything, Windsor’s lack of insurance is the symptom of another disease that also stopped him from getting the treatment he needed for so long. His belief that he could not afford insurance before the sign of cancer every manifested itself inside his body and caused him therefore not to protect himself financially for such a disaster is the same illness that stopped him from getting treatment, namely the consumer paradigm.
• Finally, “The radiation Windsor is receiving will only prolong his life, not save it.”
  Ultimately, everything good anyone does in this life only serves to prolong his life. In the end, everyone dies. It is the nature of exist on this planet. Whether a treatment cures an illness or simply makes living with it a little more bearable, it ultimately only prolongs the life of the treated. In the article, Windsor expressed some bitterness to his condition. And while all sympathy, or empathy, may be due him in his state, a better answer is available. God, the author of prosperity, has provided a longer life for Mr Windsor than he otherwise might have enjoyed. Windsor was finally able to obtain the long sought-after treatment and his life was prolonged. Rather than be bitter about it, why not thank God and prove it through a productive existence whether short or long?

Conclusion

This article is more about the author’s and his employers bias toward a nationalized health care than it is toward revealing the blight of the profiled cancer patient. He is using emotionalism and sensationalism, not to mention journalistic inaccuracies, to manipulate the reader into believing the only solution to the current rash of illnesses in the world is to have the government fully capture the medical industry.

This life is full of peril, not just for the uninsured. Each individual possesses the innate stewardship of prolonging his own life. No one is entitled to a life free of pain and disease. The socialist mantra, however, would have us think otherwise. Some do live healthy, pain free, and trouble free lives. Many more of us, though, suffer trials throughout our existence. What we do with our lives is more important that the trials we must go through.

Action Steps

1. Because life is unsure, insure.
2. Study the two paradigms as set forth in the FreeCapitalist Project. Refer to the FreeCapitalist Primer or get a good start by reviewing the 13 Principles of Prosperity™ on this website.
3. Be cognizant of the bias in media so you may recognize their motives when they are not what appears on the surface.

MRFC Principles: (1, 2, 3, 4, 11)

Resources

John Bonifield, “Dying for lack of insurance” cnn.com, April 25, 2008.

American Cancer Society, “Late-stage Diagnosis More Likely Among Uninsured,” February 18, 2008

FreeCapitalist Primer (hard copy available at www.freecapitalist.com; online version at primer.freecapitalist.com)