In lieu of the recent natural disaster in Japan, it seems people have forgotten the crisis that America still faces and is battling, healthcare.

While browsing the New York Times: Texas section the other day, I came across an article about a 12-year-old girl and her grandparents who could not get child—only healthcare for her. They are ready to retire and depend on Medicaid for their insurance but their granddaughter, who they have raised since she was born, has little to no options for insurance.

The story shocked and disgusted me.

I understand that not everyone wants socialized medicine or some form of it. I respect both sides of the argument and think both privatized healthcare and government-controlled healthcare have great consequences, but at the same time great benefits. But now we have let the argument affect our children’s health?

I thought we did better.

A child rarely has the freedom to make his or her own life choices and most under the age of 19 do not have the means to pay for their own insurance. These children should be in school and worried about student council, track practice, doing their homework and building life-skills, not wondering if their parents can insure them.

When the government or private sector cuts off a child’s resources, everyone suffers. By not offering a child-only insurance plan, many private companies are punishing children because their parents cannot afford to insure them.

That, my friends, is a travesty.

Many people against “Obamacare” claim that the bill acts as a death penalty for the elderly, that we will just leave them to die. Why are we not fighting for the children who are being put in the same situation as the elderly? Because it’s not cost effective? Are we really about to stoop so low as to put a price on a child’s life?

It seems so simple that by moving money around or even raising taxes by a small percentage that we could ensure that every child in this country, that so often claims to be the most desirable in the world, would be insured.

Think of your brother or sister, nephew, niece, any child in your life. What if they were diagnosed with an infection that could easily be treated but they did not have insurance and their guardians could not pay for treatment? Could you look those caregivers in the eye and say, “I’m sorry. In America’s selfish quest for money and extravagance we decided that your child’s life is just not worth the money?”

If we really want to think of ourselves as the best country in the world we need to start caring for our people, and what better place to start than with children who have virtually no control over their environments or economic status?

Are we really about to tell these children that they’re not worth it? Private insurance companies are telling parents just that.

Without a child-only insurance option children are left untreated, unable to regularly visit a doctor and their quality of life is diminishing. Something has to be done to break that cycle.

Are we willing to save a new pennies at the expense of a child?

Michael Graves is a first year religious studies and communications studies double major. He can be reached for comments or questions at [email protected].