Jump to content
GaryC

Canadian Health Care We So Envy Lies In Ruins, Its Architect Admits

65 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted (edited)

The Canadian government is not looking to privatize health care - although the governing conservatives who are akin to the Republicans in the US are more in favour of privatization than members of the other parties. Yes, the College of Physicans and Surgeons is not a government body - it is appointed by the government to oversee licensing of physicians. It grossly underestimated the growing demand for doctors, and because it wants to ensure that its doctors receive the biggest salaries they can command - the more patients a doctor sees, the more he can charge the government - they limit the number of new doctors they allow to enter the system. The problem has been growing for a number of years and only recently have they addressed the need for more spaces in medical schools. training a doctor, however, takes time so the problem gets worse before it starts to get better. There are qualified doctors driving cabs in Toronto because the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons refuses to recognize their foreign credentials but demands that they do a significant part of the medical training all over again in Canadian facilities - which have a limit on the number of foreign doctors they will admit - and these do include doctors who received their training in the US. It isn't done to ensure the quality of medical care but to ensure the ability of their member doctors to earn the biggest bucks they can within the system. Basically, they are 'working the system'.

Edited by Kathryn41

“...Isn't it splendid to think of all the things there are to find out about? It just makes me feel glad to be alive--it's such an interesting world. It wouldn't be half so interesting if we knew all about everything, would it? There'd be no scope for imagination then, would there?”

. Lucy Maude Montgomery, Anne of Green Gables

5892822976_477b1a77f7_z.jpg

Another Member of the VJ Fluffy Kitty Posse!

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Filed: IR-1/CR-1 Visa Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted

Well Gary - they don't really claim anything in this article actually, since they make broad based statements which are difficult to quantify. So maybe nothing is "untrue" however there really isn't an appropriate measure for many of these claims - so here goes:

Canadian Health Care We So Envy Lies In Ruins, Its Architect Admits

BY DAVID GRATZER

Posted 6/25/2008

As this presidential campaign continues, the candidates' comments about health care will continue to include stories of their own experiences and anecdotes of people across the country: the uninsured woman in Ohio, the diabetic in Detroit, the overworked doctor in Orlando, to name a few.

But no one will mention Claude Castonguay — perhaps not surprising because this statesman isn't an American and hasn't held office in over three decades.

Castonguay's evolving view of Canadian health care, however, should weigh heavily on how the candidates think about the issue in this country.

Back in the 1960s, Castonguay chaired a Canadian government committee studying health reform and recommended that his home province of Quebec — then the largest and most affluent in the country — adopt government-administered health care, covering all citizens through tax levies.

As pointed out by Kathryn, Castonguay isn't the architect/founder/chairman of all things relating to Canadian health care. He sat on a committee in the province (which is akin to a State) of Quebec. Each province (Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, British Columbia. . . ) in conjunction with the federal government operate the health care system. Each provincial system receives funding from the federal government and agrees to operate according to a particular standard and while administering health according to the specific needs of its population. Taxes and levies vary according to province, since not all provinces have the same level of need.

So what was or was not working in Quebec, cannot be taken as a broad generalization for the operation of the system since we're only looking at one province.

The government followed his advice, leading to his modern-day moniker: "the father of Quebec medicare." Even this title seems modest; Castonguay's work triggered a domino effect across the country, until eventually his ideas were implemented from coast to coast.

Four decades later, as the chairman of a government committee reviewing Quebec health care this year, Castonguay concluded that the system is in "crisis."

As I stated earlier - this statement might not be untrue. However, how do your quantify a crisis. Are people dying unexpectedly, are people paying too much in taxes, are children going without care. . . . .hmmmm again the system might be in crisis; just not sure what he's using to support that claim

"We thought we could resolve the system's problems by rationing services or injecting massive amounts of new money into it," says Castonguay. But now he prescribes a radical overhaul: "We are proposing to give a greater role to the private sector so that people can exercise freedom of choice."

Castonguay advocates contracting out services to the private sector, going so far as suggesting that public hospitals rent space during off-hours to entrepreneurial doctors. He supports co-pays for patients who want to see physicians. Castonguay, the man who championed public health insurance in Canada, now urges for the legalization of private health insurance.

In America, these ideas may not sound shocking. But in Canada, where the private sector has been shunned for decades, these are extraordinary views, especially coming from Castonguay. It's as if John Maynard Keynes, resting on his British death bed in 1946, had declared that his faith in government interventionism was misplaced.

There is nothing extraordinary about these views, we've heard them, fully understand them and we as this article states "exercise freedom of choice" in not selecting this model. Private healthcare runs adjacent to our basic and core philosophy about equal access to services. People presume that means we choose to wait, but last time I needed testing, an appointment with a physician etc I had it done that day or the next. There is nothing extraordinary about private health care. Good use of semantics in this article though.

What would drive a man like Castonguay to reconsider his long-held beliefs? Try a health care system so overburdened that hundreds of thousands in need of medical attention wait for care, any care; a system where people in towns like Norwalk, Ontario, participate in lotteries to win appointments with the local family doctor.

Overburdened, I like that word. It invokes such emotion and the view of people lying in gurneys, bleeding, coughing, decrepit. I would like him to define - hundreds of thousands in need, cause what does that mean? Does that include people who've had medical emergencies and received treatment. Are there whole cities under cardiac arrest and unable to get medical attention because we only have 1 doctor per 200,000 people. Give me something substantive to go with that quote and we'll talk turkey. Oh wait he did:

In regards to "Norwalk, Ontario". There is no place in Ontario called Norwalk. We have a Norfolk, Ontario. However if there is a doctor lottery going on in Norwalk, Ontario - Wisconsin better get their system under check.

Years ago, Canadians touted their health care system as the best in the world; today, Canadian health care stands in ruinous shape.

Ruinous, again what is said isn't untrue, but what do they mean?

Sick with ovarian cancer, Sylvia de Vires, an Ontario woman afflicted with a 13-inch, fluid-filled tumor weighing 40 pounds, was unable to get timely care in Canada. She crossed the American border to Pontiac, Mich., where a surgeon removed the tumor, estimating she could not have lived longer than a few weeks more.

The Canadian government pays for U.S. medical care in some circumstances, but it declined to do so in de Vires' case for a bureaucratically perfect, but inhumane, reason: She hadn't properly filled out a form. At death's door, de Vires should have done her paperwork better.

I am never sure why someone who touts a private health care system would use these types of examples, since really the only thing this says to me is that a public system can be responsive to needs as well. Where services cannot be provided in a timely manner, they look for alternatives, which includes south of the border. Government pays the bill, patient gets care, no hold up in our system. Hmmmmmm. . . . . not sure what the point was here.

De Vires is far from unusual in seeking medical treatment in the U.S. Even Canadian government officials send patients across the border, increasingly looking to American medicine to deal with their overload of patients and chronic shortage of care.

Since the spring of 2006, Ontario's government has sent at least 164 patients to New York and Michigan for neurosurgery emergencies — defined by the Globe and Mail newspaper as "broken necks, burst aneurysms and other types of bleeding in or around the brain." Other provinces have followed Ontario's example.

It isn't infrequent for people to travel the world to get medical treatment. Canada's system is soooooo broken, the people from around the world travel to Edmonton, Alberta for heart transplants, and to use our esteem UofA Hospital for a multitude of pediatric surgeries which cannot be done anywhere else.

Canada isn't the only country facing a government health care crisis. Britain's system, once the postwar inspiration for many Western countries, is similarly plagued. Both countries trail the U.S. in five-year cancer survival rates, transplantation outcomes and other measures.

If Canada does trail the US in 5 year cancer rates, I'd like to know what qualifiers he placed on which studies were looked at, his claims to this point lack credibility.

The problem is that government bureaucrats simply can't centrally plan their way to better health care.

A typical example: The Ministry of Health declared that British patients should get ER care within four hours. The result? At some hospitals, seriously ill patients are kept in ambulances for hours so as not to run afoul of the regulation; at other hospitals, patients are admitted to inappropriate wards.

Again, this claim isn't false, but last time I checked we were looking at Canada's healthcare system - which is an 8 hour flight from Britain. I guess they couldn't find a proper Canadian example, so they're just looking for a common thread, because clearly these must be similar characteristics shared by all Communist health care systems.

Declarations can't solve staffing shortages and the other rationing of care that occurs in government-run systems.

Polls show Americans are desperately unhappy with their system and a government solution grows in popularity. Neither Sen. Obama nor Sen. McCain is explicitly pushing for single-payer health care, as the Canadian system is known in America.

"I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer health care program," Obama said back in the 1990s. Last year, Obama told the New Yorker that "if you're starting from scratch, then a single-payer system probably makes sense."

As for the Republicans, simply criticizing Democratic health care proposals will not suffice — it's not 1994 anymore. And, while McCain's health care proposals hold promise of putting families in charge of their health care and perhaps even taming costs, McCain, at least so far, doesn't seem terribly interested in discussing health care on the campaign trail.

However the candidates choose to proceed, Americans should know that one of the founding fathers of Canada's government-run health care system has turned against his own creation. If Claude Castonguay is abandoning ship, why should Americans bother climbing on board?

Ok, well this one is clearly false, like stated above he isn't a founding father - he's not even an uncle of the health care system.

Gratzer is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a physician licensed in both the U.S. and Canada, where he received his medical training. His newest book, "The Cure: How Capitalism Can Save American Health Care," is now available in paperback.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editori...299282509335931

Sorry Gary, you asked, and I really hope that people don't take this as a Canada Good - America Bad. Cause I really don't like comparing either country in these types of things. Our founding philosophies are significantly different - and both equally as right. We just choose to operate health care based on those principles. I am happy to move to the States in a few months, and happy that my husband has good insurance. I guess I'll see shortly the shortfalls in each system.

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Canada
Timeline
Posted (edited)

To add to my statement . . . back in Canada, we were always 'told' by media reports (similar to the one you quoted) about how much better the private health care system in the US was than the universal health care system in Canada, and the ease and immediacy of access to quality medical care was held out to us as reasons to consider privatization. During the increasing doctor shortages, proponents of privatization often used the US health system as an example to which we should aspire. So, when I was in the position to take advantage of that accessible and high quality system, I discovered that all of these things we had been told weren't true. With my own health care on the line, I was even more deeply disillusioned. I will say that the in-hospital nursing care I received was better than my last visit in a Canadian hospital. The medical care itself is no better, no more accessible and a lot more expensive.

I guess I become disturbed and reactive when I see articles like this - written about someone who has a personal agenda - promoting how 'bad' the health care system in Canada has become when compared to the privatized health care system the US has - and I know from personal experience that it is not true. It worries me that people will believe articles like this - like I used to believe the US had better health care than Canada does. There are more medical providers and there are more 'high tech' facilities here , but the medical care is no better, it is not any more accessible, and it costs a lot more.

Edited by Kathryn41

“...Isn't it splendid to think of all the things there are to find out about? It just makes me feel glad to be alive--it's such an interesting world. It wouldn't be half so interesting if we knew all about everything, would it? There'd be no scope for imagination then, would there?”

. Lucy Maude Montgomery, Anne of Green Gables

5892822976_477b1a77f7_z.jpg

Another Member of the VJ Fluffy Kitty Posse!

Posted

The US health care system is great for people who are well-off, have good insurance, and live in urban areas. No doubt about it. For the majority of Americans who don't fit that category, it's pretty difficult to access timely care, either because the wait is too long (I have a patient who has medicaid who has liver cancer and had to wait FOUR MONTHS to see a specialist because he doesn't have private insurance, and no begging and pleading on my part could make any difference in that), it's too expensive (one of my patients with no insurance had a likely brain tumor and decided to pay for his medicines instead of shelling out for an MRI... 2 months later, in a coma), or it's simply unavailable (no personal experience here, but women in rural areas who don't have insurance or are on Medicaid often cannot find an OB/GYN to take care of them).

Canada's system is far from perfect, as the article points out, but at least everyone is covered. Our 2-tier system is pretty harsh on those on the bottom.

Inlovingmemory-2.gif

October 13, 2005: VISA IN HAND!!!

November 15, 2005 - Arrival at JFK!!!

January 28, 2006 - WEDDING!!!

February 27, 2006 - Sent in AOS

June 23, 2006 - AP approved

June 29, 2006 - EAD approved

June 29, 2006 - Transferred to CSC

October 2006 - 2 year green card received!

July 15, 2008 - Sent in I-751

July 22, 2008 - I-751 NOA

Posted

The reason I bring this whole thing up is this, I agree that something must change with our health care system. I agree that people that don't have health insurance needs something to help them when the need medical care. We have two competing ideas on how to deal with the problem. One way is the one touted by the dems which is some form of a government run or single payer system that abandons the private health insurance way of doing things to some extent or another. The other way, one put forth by McCain and the reps, is a revamping of the health care insurance system that makes it easier for those without insurance to get it with some sort of a safety net for those that still can't get insurance.

Since we are "the only industrialised country" without government run health care of some sort I want to look at what has worked for them, what hasn't worked for them and also to see what direction they are taking now. It seems that those "other" countries started out with a full on government run system and after letting it mature for a time have realized that they need to back away from the government running the whole thing and let at least some private sector, market driven services be allowed. I would be in favor of changing the way we do things here but I also want to benefit from the lessions that these other countries have learned. It seems to me that some sort of a hybrid system would be the best. Right now about 80% of the country has some sort of health care that meets most of their needs. With that 80% (this is just a number I pulled out of the air, it may be lower but lets go with it) the biggest gripe I hear is portability and pre-existing conditions. I would like to see us be able to keep our insurance when we move from one job to another and eliminate the pre-exsiting clause in insurance coverage. That would go a long way in solving the problems with those that have insurance. For the other 20% that have no insurance I would be willing to talk about expanding one of the exsisting government run health care systems already in place like Medicare/Medicade. Make this like any other "security net" program where a person qualifies for it based on income. That way everyone would be insured some level of health care without the government taking over the whole show.

Filed: Citizen (pnd) Country: Ireland
Timeline
Posted (edited)

Coming from a county that too has social health care system I'd say without a doubt the system back home (am sure the system in Canada too) overall quite literally kicks the ####### of the every man for himself system here. I didn't mind at all paying higher taxes on everything knowing if I got sick I don't have to worry about a big bill, debt collectors and everyone else hounding me to death for money! I didn't mind paying more knowing that everyone all the way from the top to the bottom would get the same treatment.

The system here in the US isn't harsh to me... it's inhuman on those at the bottom. I've read and been told that some hospitals will send people without insurance to collections 2 weeks after requesting payment? 2 weeks before they set the vultures on ye!

I tried to make a dentist appointment here a few weeks ago, first question I was asked was "do you have insurance" next was "we might not accept that, you'd have to pay first".. Back home the first question was "whats wrong and are you in pain".... it sickens me to death to think that people without (could have been me, was me before) would have been turned away in pain?

Edited by aidan80

Filed N400 11/7/16

Check (CC) Cashed 11/10/16

Text/Email NOA 11/16/16

Posted
I agree that something must change with our health care system.

Why the change of heart, Gary?

Just 15 days ago, this is what you had to say:

Our health care system is fine

It is fine but it can be improved. Personally I am very happy with what I have. As I said before, most people in America have good medical care (thats the fine part). But I do see the need to improve it and to help out the ones that don't have access.

Posted

Wow I actually agree with a lot of what Gary said....

However *insurance* for all is different from health *care* for all. For me the attraction of single payer coverage isn't the "socialism" aspect of it; it's the decreased waste of time, energy, and money. Every hospital has HUNDREDS of employees whose sole purpose is to figure out how to get paid by the hundreds of different insurance plans. Most of my patients have medicaid, so I know what prescriptions are covered, but every once in a while I have a patient with private insurance and I spend at least 30 to 45 minutes of every clinic day sorting out issues of making sure I filled out the right referral form and I picked the right generic version of the right drug. Isn't that a huge waste of time? Not to mention the time the pharmacies are spending calling *me* to tell me I have to pick a different drug, and so on. All of that wasted time adds to our national health care bill.

Not to mention the waste of time all the denials cause! In any given week while I'm working in the hospital, 25-30% of the patients who are there don't need the level of care provided by the hospital; however, they're stuck in limbo while the social workers and hospital administration are tryign to figure out a place to send them that will be covered by their insurance. If you forgot to fill out one line of a form on Thursday, forget about that Friday discharge; that patient is staying until Monday or Tuesday. If there were one uniform, easy, computerized process for all patients, if all the same medications were covered by all the same people, if the US government used its collective bargaining power to force pharmaceutical companies and suppliers of medical equipment to stop overcharging us, we could save some real money and actually cover everybody.

Inlovingmemory-2.gif

October 13, 2005: VISA IN HAND!!!

November 15, 2005 - Arrival at JFK!!!

January 28, 2006 - WEDDING!!!

February 27, 2006 - Sent in AOS

June 23, 2006 - AP approved

June 29, 2006 - EAD approved

June 29, 2006 - Transferred to CSC

October 2006 - 2 year green card received!

July 15, 2008 - Sent in I-751

July 22, 2008 - I-751 NOA

Filed: Timeline
Posted
Gary, why is the U.S. the only industrialized nation that doesn't guarantee healthcare to its citizens?

Because we are a lot bigger than all the other industrialized countries with a more diverse population.

Try again, Gary: the six largest EU countries alone have a larger combined population than the US. And there are actually 27 member states in the EU with a total population close to 500MM. The EU, despite it's size and diversity offers universal health care to her citizens. Size ain't the reason, Gary. :no:

Posted
Coming from a county that too has social health care system I'd say without a doubt the system back home (am sure the system in Canada too) overall quite literally kicks the ####### of the every man for himself system here. I didn't mind at all paying higher taxes on everything knowing if I got sick I don't have to worry about a big bill, debt collectors and everyone else hounding me to death for money! I didn't mind paying more knowing that everyone all the way from the top to the bottom would get the same treatment.

The system here in the US isn't harsh to me... it's inhuman on those at the bottom. I've read and been told that some hospitals will send people without insurance to collections 2 weeks after requesting payment? 2 weeks before they set the vultures on ye!

I tried to make a dentist appointment here a few weeks ago, first question I was asked was "do you have insurance" next was "we might not accept that, you'd have to pay first".. Back home the first question was "whats wrong and are you in pain".... it sickens me to death to think that people without (could have been me, was me before) would have been turned away in pain?

Hmmm... Funny you should mention dental problems. Right now I feel like a horse kicked me in the jaw. However, when my tooth finally got to the point where I could no longer put off seeing a dentist I walked into the closest office to my home. They didn't ask about insurance at that point, and they made me an appointment for 3 days later. When I went in I was seen, had x-rays and was told about the need for some dental surgurey. Only after all that did they talk about insurance and money. I gave them my card and before I left they told me what part I would have to pay and what the insurance company would pay. Then they said that if I had any problem with coming up with my part ( I don't thank God) that they would take payments at zero interest for up to a year.

Gary, why is the U.S. the only industrialized nation that doesn't guarantee healthcare to its citizens?

Because we are a lot bigger than all the other industrialized countries with a more diverse population.

Try again, Gary: the six largest EU countries alone have a larger combined population than the US. And there are actually 27 member states in the EU with a total population close to 500MM. The EU, despite it's size and diversity offers universal health care to her citizens. Size ain't the reason, Gary. :no:

And each one with their own system. You can't lump them all together unless their health care systems are also lumped together. Try again Dog.

Filed: Timeline
Posted
I agree that something must change with our health care system.

Why the change of heart, Gary?

Just 15 days ago, this is what you had to say:

Our health care system is fine

It is fine but it can be improved. Personally I am very happy with what I have.

Gary is a big advocate of red tape and bureaucratic waste. He knows that no government comes close to the private sector when it comes to creating costly and inefficient red tape in the health care sector. Therefore, he supports the status quo.

Posted
I agree that something must change with our health care system.

Why the change of heart, Gary?

Just 15 days ago, this is what you had to say:

Our health care system is fine

It is fine but it can be improved. Personally I am very happy with what I have.

Gary is a big advocate of red tape and bureaucratic waste. He knows that no government comes close to the private sector when it comes to creating costly and inefficient red tape in the health care sector. Therefore, he supports the status quo.

We are having a real discussion here dog, if you want to start a flame war I suggest you go elsewhere.

Filed: Citizen (pnd) Country: Mexico
Timeline
Posted
I agree that something must change with our health care system.

Why the change of heart, Gary?

Just 15 days ago, this is what you had to say:

Our health care system is fine

It is fine but it can be improved. Personally I am very happy with what I have. As I said before, most people in America have good medical care (thats the fine part). But I do see the need to improve it and to help out the ones that don't have access.

are you serious? the thousands of americans who work low wage manufacturing jobs don't get jack.. the burger flippers at mickey d's get jack, they have to go to the healthcare county office wait forever and get crappy service...

El Presidente of VJ

regalame una sonrisita con sabor a viento

tu eres mi vitamina del pecho mi fibra

tu eres todo lo que me equilibra,

un balance, lo que me conplementa

un masajito con sabor a menta,

Deutsch: Du machst das richtig

Wohnen Heute

3678632315_87c29a1112_m.jpgdancing-bear.gif

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...