I'm responding to Rick Smith's letter regarding the "privilege" of health care in this country. Smith describes health care as "a privilege of those who are productive and can earn the money necessary to pay for the health care they need."

Why are only corporate financial standards of productivity applicable? What about artists, writers, musicians and self-employed individuals who may not have access to health insurance?

What about people with mental or physical disabilities that prevent employment?

Why is economic status considered a measurement of worth? Should we punish children of adults without health insurance by denying them adequate care?

Why do only the wealthy and their children deserve healthy lives? Smith asks, "Why should doctors . . . be enslaved to patients who offer their need alone?" Doctors do so willingly. They promise to use their abilities to help those who are in need, regardless of economic status.

One is not made worthless by one's finances, and doctors treat patients equally.

Why should "the rest of us" bear this burden of equal treatment? Because we as a nation should understand that in this country, we are not all given an equal shot at a productive life, and awarding "privileges" to the already-privileged is insufficient.

Because we should understand that when we deny health care to any person, we do so willingly, selfishly and callously. Because we are capable of more than the reductionist logic such as the idea that only monetary productivity entitles one to adequate health care.