Public Health and Individual freedom Essay Sample

An individual’s health at risk halts their opportunities for personal independence.  The community should strive to maintain a cohesive balance between physical well-being and personal and societal freedom. With their health consistently at risk, individuals can never fully bask in their own righteous freedom. While some health-risking acts can not permanently come to an end, methods have become available in order to prevent them. To ensure a well-maintained balance between freedom and personal health, everyone must act upon the conditions interfering with society as a whole. In doing so, individuals should exercise autonomy through personal actions whilst demonstrating concern for the health of others. 

Today, conditions including smoking and car emissions affect the public. Smoking not only causes personal health issues, but second hand smoke can cause quite the conundrum for surrounding individuals. Car emissions lead towards aggressive combustion causing abnormal amounts of pollution. Chronologically, pollution acts as the antecedent of destruction, only demolishing the world brick by brick. While, cutting down on car emission and or prohibiting smoking in certain areas can make an impact, it greatly restricts people from doing as they please. Therefore, such changes can take away an individual’s freedom. 

The right to avoid health risks is a freedom. Individuals should not have to worry about putting their health in the hands of others. When allowed to make decisions that harm others, both freedom and health exist in jeopardy. From personal experience, having a multitude of decisions provides moments of exhilaration and the best opportunities for personal freedom. However, it’s obvious that some of these decisions have negative consequences. Aware of the repercussions, individuals continue to smoke, drive, etc. Altogether, the prevention of such repercussions depends on the willingness of the person. 

For example, one may continue to smoke in order to guarantee their freedom, but can choose to opt out of smoking in crowded areas to prevent affecting another’s health. One can also continue to drive as they please, but could possibly cut down the amount of time on the road. Another alternative includes riding a bike, walking, or participating in other modes of transportation. These alternatives will only positively affect society, especially if they continue into the future. Once a generated routine has become established, great changes in personal and societal well-being will follow. 

To conclude, conflict will always subsist when referring to the comparison of public health and individual freedom. Nevertheless, maintaining a balance between the two will allow for individuality and independence as well as the improvement of societal health. Both freedom and public health exist in value, but the two must coincide cohesively in order to truly develop mankind. Once an obvious equilibrium prevails in regards to public health and individual freedom, worrisome individuals will no longer feel the need to choose one over the other.