Financially: It's a lot more efficient for society to cover all health care that's proven to be cost-effective regardless of who needs it or why. Putting gates on who is allowed to receive benefits costs more than it saves.
Then I said "I think the idea would rather be that you would pay 5 cents a year towards his medical care, rather than have to pay all of it." meaning that while the settlement for the lawsuit might be millions of dollars it will in fact not end up impoverishing the parent poster.
But for some reason you seem to think that it was about some other situation than the one under discussion here? I hope this summary has clarified the chain of very short messages for you, so that you no longer need labor under this evident misapprehension.
Same reason that we try to help the homeless, the less fortunate, etc.