2 of 13

Write now Article Tools

There are many arguments over whether a presidential candidate or a candidate to any elected post should be forced to disclose health records. My immediate thought is that overall health should remain private and that the public should not be entitled to view the details of a candidate's personal health records. After giving it more thought, however, I think it might be wise for the public to have access to an overall picture of a candidate's health.

A candidate is under scrutiny for his or her finances, track record, views and opinions on topics that matter to us and family background. Why should health be any different? When a person runs for office, he or she knows that past records of all kinds are fair game. It would be foolish to be uninformed about a major, current health issue. For instance, let's say your favorite candidate takes heavy-duty medication for depression. The voters wouldn't know about that without disclosure. Or maybe he or she is being treated for cancer or has had a stroke. Shouldn't we be informed of these ailments? Illness shouldn't change the way we view a candidate, but realistically, awareness might make us better better informed voters. My guess is that many past presidents took medication for high blood pressure and maybe even anxiety issues. After all, what job is more stressful?

For the general public, a job application sometimes asks if you've ever been treated for certain diseases or mental illnesses. The employer makes decisions to hire based on these answers. Perhaps making a similar job "application" public would be enough. Would we, as voters, discriminate against a candidate based on the answers to a health questionnaire? Would it matter to a voter that a candidate entered rehab for alcohol or drugs in the last 5 years? It might. Holding the most difficult office in this country, however, carries tremendous responsibility and the public should be made aware of illnesses that might prevent our nation's leaders from being fully able to perform the duties required.

I don't think the public needs to know that a candidate had tonsils removed at age 7, or sees a marriage counselor from time to time, but knowledge of PENDING illnesses and treatments might be of benefit to a voter. A solution might be that health records be turned over to an independent panel of medical specialists to determine whether a current ailment or illness COULD affect a candidate's ability to perform his or her duties as the president. Then, disclose only those ailments that should be considered by the public before election time. It seems a bit unfair to judge a candidate on health issues that they have no control over. But, if a candidate knows that health records will be reviewed before they enter a political race, there shouldn't be an issue about it. If every other aspect of a candidate's life becomes public knowledge, then why wouldn't a health overview be important? It IS important and it does matter. We want our president to be focused entirely on his job of keeping this country safe, prosperous and free.

Learn more about this author, Patricia Cunningham.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

Add your voice

Know something about Should presidential candidates be required to disclose their health records??
We want to hear your view. Write now!