RE: a sad day
From: Main, Kerry (kerry.main_at_hp.com)
Date: 06/11/05
- Next message: David J Dachtera: "Re: vms and linux"
- Previous message: Jerome H. Fine: "Re: a sad day"
- Maybe in reply to: susan_skonetski_at_hotmail.com: "a sad day"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 22:29:16 -0400
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jerome H. Fine [mailto:jhfine@nospam.com]
> Sent: June 10, 2005 8:27 PM
> To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
> Subject: Re: a sad day
>
[snip...]
>
> >Interesting review in local paper after the Canadian Supreme Court
> >decision was handed down yesterday.
> >
> >Essentially it stated that of the top 30 developed
> countries, there are
> >only 2 that have not yet officially adopted the concept of universal
> >health care for all of its citizens - Mexico and the United States.
> >
> >
> Which paper - I did not see that breakdown.
>
National Post Article - pg A18 June 10,2005:
"The Writing is on the Wall"
Quote "Canada is the only nation committed to providing access to a full
range of health care services to all citizens regardless of their
ability to pay. Of the world's 30 most developed nations, all but two
(Mexico and the United States) agree with the principles of universal
access. But some of these 28 nations manage to provide such universal
access without waiting times for treatment; some do so with superior
health outcomes; most provide better access to physicians and
technology; and none spends more than we do on a per capita basis." End
quote.
> >What was really at stake here in Canada with this decision
> is whether to
> >allow those that can afford it to take advantage of private medical
> >facilities. There are debateable pro's-n-con's of doing this, but the
> >article went on to point out that the other countries that
> have adopted
> >universal medical aid for their citizens, only Canada did not allow
> >citizens to access private medical facilities as an option
> to the public
> >health care system.
> >
> Actually, Quebec does allow that, as far as I understand,
> ONLY that the
> insurance companies are not allowed to be in the middle.
> Other provinces
> have a somewhat different solution. But essentially, for
> medically covered
> public services, private care is restricted to those who can
> afford to
> go out
> of the country - mainly to the US - although for services
> deemed covered
> on a case by case basis, the US visit is sometimes approved
> and paid for.
>
> So your statement "Canada did not allow citizens to access
> private medical
> facilities" is a bit inaccurate although essentially correct
> in actual
> practice for
> all but the billionaires for whom health care is like a
> restaurant meal
> for the
> millionaire.
>
> >Hence, the article stated that this decision would either
> speed up the
> >process to allow private facility access or force the
> multiple layers of
> >Govt to fix waiting times. Given that the latter will require massive
> >amounts of funding, I suspect that the former (with
> guidelines and some
> >restrictions) will gain a lot of momentum with this Supreme Court
> >decision.
> >
> This is the portion I take great exception to and the specific
> reason I am posting this reply. I just can't understand why
> the health care system requires so much more funds to RUN a
> system with wait times that are, for want of a better suggestion,
> at about 20% of the current wait times.
Well, here are a few reasons that I have heard (not sure these are true)
are some of the reasons for the long wait times:
- shortage of trained tech's that only allow MRI's and other specialized
equipment to be run 8 hrs/day Mon-Fri. If the demand is there, why are
they not focussing on training more tech's to allow these machines to
work 24x7?
- shortage of Doctors. However, there are many Dr's from other countries
that are working in Canada as nurses or worse - not even in the medical
area as the current Canadian Medical associations have an extremely long
processes to get certified here in Canada - thus ensuring current Dr.'s
remain high in demand and get big $'s.
- exponentially increasing price of drugs in the industry that are
protected by 20 year+ patents. If this is a prob in Canada, one can just
imagine how big an issue this is in the US where big drug companies have
a huge lobby.
- and my personal vent - lack of auditing and standardization. When has
anyone heard of a hospital being audited to ensure processes and
procedures are optimal? When has anyone ever heard of two hospitals
focussing on reducing duplication of effort, redundant systems? Heck,
even something as relatively simple as a hospital registration card is
different for almost every hospital you go to.
There is no such thing as a single "best" medical system as every
countries medical system has its challenges.
Unfortunately, Medicare is such a sacred cow in Canada that few
politicians are willing to stick their necks out to make any proposals
that might change the status quo.
Regards
Kerry Main
Senior Consultant
HP Services Canada
Voice: 613-592-4660
Fax: 613-591-4477
kerryDOTmainAThpDOTcom
(remove the DOT's and AT)
OpenVMS - the secure, multi-site OS that just works.
- Next message: David J Dachtera: "Re: vms and linux"
- Previous message: Jerome H. Fine: "Re: a sad day"
- Maybe in reply to: susan_skonetski_at_hotmail.com: "a sad day"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
