Many people think that every individual is responsible for their own healthy lifestyle, others believe that governments should take care of it. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Why individuals. Justify the stand
It is individuals who are following unhealthy ways of life by embracing faulty food habits, sedentary lifestyles
Even if the state tries to help, people may not follow unless they are convinced. One can take a horse to the pond, but not force it to drink water
They are the ones who are controlling their own life: some may even consider it as an encroachment of their rights.
Government
Health is a state subject, if these people fall sick, the state will have to divert invaluable financial resources to rendering expensive health support. This will also exacerbate the situation, on one hand the sick will drain public money, on the other, they will remain away from work, affecting economic productivity.
People are parting with money while paying taxes, so they expect something in return.
In times when people are leading a stressful life and spending most of their time tied to their professional obligations, they have little time to focus on healthy practices and nutrition, a void which the government can easily fill.
While a school of thought firmly believes that sustaining wellness should be an individual prerogative as it directly impacts them, whereas others profess that policymakers should take ownership in this case. I will delve into this matter profoundly even though I feel this should be a joint responsibility.
An army of people proposes that traditionally, people have been accountable for their own well being as it has an instantaneous implication on their autonomous lifestyle since ailments and illnesses can hinder their activities such as walking, working, or engaging with the work actively; and also rob them of deserving moments of relaxation, even sleeping. Nearly sixty percent of Australians realize this fact and ensure maintaining a robust health at their own devices. Consequently, the health index of Australia ranks fairly high in comparison to several nations in the western hemisphere.
Additionally, there is a general belief that it is possible to take a horse to the pond but one cannot force it to drink water. On a similar note, unless inhabitants are convinced about the necessity of staying healthy, no governmental interventions will be of any avail. Thus, one should be accountable for their well being.
However, despite the former opinion holding substance, the role of regimes in this endeavor can hardly be overlooked. Concurrent times have seen health becoming a state subject by virtue of the wellness of citizens being connected with empowerment and productivity of the nation. A sick society will consume invaluable public resources instead of bolstering economic development; the money will have to be shifted to affording prohibitively expensive health infrastructure.
Therefore, where private citizens can endeavor to embrace/follow healthy ways of life because of the personal benefits they derive, politicians can also contribute by sharing this onus to ensure collective progress.
Intro-1
There is a fierce argument over the issue as to who should take the ownership of sustaining wellness. While some think that it should be an individual prerogative, others profess that policymakers should play a substantial role. I opine that this should be a joint responsibility.
Intro-2
When it comes to sustaining wellness, a debate ensues since some profess that it should be an individual prerogative, while others profess that policy makers should take ownership in this endeavor. This essay shall analyze this matter profoundly and emanate its opinion in favor of both the parties taking joint responsibility.
