Two more words: Alfie Evans.
I’m going to countersignal here - just a bit.
I don’t want socialized medicine, because it will ruin a lifetime of my work.
HOWEVER
Once you are bought into it (which a majority of Americans are, in my opinion), you really can’t claim unlimited access to Other People’s Money.
That’s what we have now - a free market (sort of) paid for with OPM, which is obtained by money printing and debt. This cannot and will not go on.
So. Even in the UK, care is unlimited - IF YOU PAY FOR IT WITH YOUR OWN MONEY.
Unlike the USA, private doctors and private hospitals in the UK are under no obligation to see you or even to talk to you without payment. And your “free” healthcare provider will not pay for any care in the private system.
Therefore, most of the hospitals and most of the hospital staff doctors and GPs are part of the NHS. The NHS has a budget, which is not increased by a farthing because you need something that they provide. Every hospital, every “health area”, has to live on their budget.
Your MP can’t get you more than the NHS is budgeted to pay for. Your lawyer can’t do that for you, either.
The people who live there appear quite content with the tradeoffs. (I worked in a London teaching hospital in the 1970s). It’s always been my view that Americans would not tolerate it.
But, in the 1970s, Americans were not so dependent on Other People’s Money as they are now.
The right of Alfie, or you, or anybody in the US to have care for condition X is absolutely dependent on the willingness of someone, and at the end of the day the taxpayers, to pay for it. Right now, the process is dishonest and multiple tradeoffs are concealed. Eventually, the huge borrowing and money printing needed to make this all work will come crashing down.
In the UK, the process is explicit. Because it is explicit, it is ugly. But at least it’s not dishonest.
You do realize that they consider that a good thing don't you?