Dr. Schilling is opposed to nationalized health insurance replacing private health insurance because the rising costs of medical care fail to consider the high human costs that consumers pay in countries with nationalized insurance, e.g. access to high technology medicine is restricted. We are told that many life saving procedures are rationed, and so people are denied their right to treatments that they want and need.
Dr. Laforte responds by explaining that private health insurance actually denies access to basic, conventional medicine to all the people who cannot afford adequate health coverage. Further, if nationalized health insurance were to be adopted, then the rich and poor would have equal access to life saving medical procedures. Dr. Laforte finishes by exclaiming that with nationalized insurance, people's right to decent medical treatment would not be violated regardless of income barriers.
Dr. Schilling bases his argument on the claim that switching to nationalized health insurance would deprive people their right to treatments that they want and need because access to high technology medicine would be restricted. Laforte responds to him explaining that the "access" Dr. Schilling is referring to is the access of those who can afford private insurance, as opposed to access to adequate health insurance and medicine in general by the entire population, regardless of economic status.
Thus, Dr. Laforte, in his response, points out that Dr. Schilling's use of the term "access" is limited to those who can afford private health insurance. Switching to nationalized insurance would limit the access of those who can afford private insurance, but would broaden the general populace's access as a whole to basic, conventional medicine.
Answer choice (E) states: "Showing that the force of Dr. Schilling's criticism depends on construing the key notion of access in a particular limited way." This is exactly what Dr. La forte is doing.
Dr. Laforte points out that Dr. Schilling is construing his key notion of access only in assessing what will happen to the rich who can afford private insurance, i.e. construing the key notion of access in a particular limited way.
Answer choice (C) states: "producing counterexamples to Dr. Schilling's claims that nationalized health insurance schemes extract high human costs from consumers."
Dr. Laforte never discusses high human costs, let alone produces counterexamples to the claim that nationalized health insurance schemes extract high human costs from consumers. Dr. Laforte merely points out that Dr. Schilling's views are myopic and do not look at the whole of the populace, rich and poor.
Dr. Schilling is ignoring the fact that private health insurance denies access to even basic, conventional medicine to the many who cannot afford adequate health coverage. Dr. Laforte explains that with nationalized insurance, the rich and poor have equal access to life saving medical procedures--this is not to say that everyone has access to life saving medical procedures, merely that the access will be equal.
Hope that clears things up! Please let us know if you have any more questions.
