The document discusses the ethical dilemmas surrounding international investments in Latin American health care, where constitutional rights to health care are often not met. It critiques the role of international donors, particularly the World Bank, for imposing conditions that limit access to health care while providing aid. The text raises questions about the responsibility for health care and the ethics of conditioning assistance on political or social reform.

1. There are multifaceted ethical issues relating to international
investments. One aspect relates to human rights. Most Latin
American governments have constitutions that mandate health
care as a human right, yet some of these countries provide poor
health care for the majority of their population.
During the 1980s, the general populace of these countries
deteriorated, even though several Latin American countries
developed strategies to reposition medical personnel and
services to rural areas. Throughout this time, many international
donors provided assistance; however they did so with imposed
conditions. An example of this constrained assistance was the
World Bank, which imposed restrictions that included
privatization of health care, as well as required limitations on
universal access.
Did the World Bank and other international donors act
responsibly and ethically in constraining their humanitarian
assistance? Who has the responsibility for the health care of the
Latin American people? Is it a reasonable and socially
responsible practice to offer international assistance in
exchange for an opportunity to shape a country's political
and/or social system? Why or why not?