There was a time when "freedom of choice" seemed to me the opportunistic slogan of a political fringe group. By 1980, I was so turned off by the sloganeering of some laetrile proponents that I banished the topic from The Cancer Syndrome.
It took me years to realize that medical freedom was a basic human right. Throughout history many great philosophers and jurists have endorsed as a fundamental principle of liberty the right to do with your own body as you wish. In Schneider v. Revici (1987), Federal courts explicitly endorsed freedom of choice in cancer therapy. Today, it is heartening that supporters of choice come from all sections of the political spectrum--not just Orrin Hatch, but Tom Harkin as well. Yet, in many ways, the current system makes it impossible for us to fully exercise this fundamental human right.
Freedom of choice between competing medical systems is not only fair to both
health consumers and providers, but a highly practical move. The high
cost of health care is fostered by the monopoly of one school of medicine
('scientific' or 'allopathic,' depending on your point of view). Allowing
other schools to practice freely will drive down medical costs. Reimbursing
for them will lower overall medical costs. That is why "freedom of choice"
must become the slogan of the health care reform movement in America.
