HealthCare - What If ??

Who would own & operate the hospitals? What about the maintenance people? What about the patient or hospital records, & corporate "privacy"? (=secrecy)

---
"These Yankee politicians are the lowest race of thieves in existence." - Sir John Sparrow Thompson

forgot something... in that Himmelstein/Woolhander article Mel Hurtig submitted they say that a free market in health care is impossible because:<BR> - the patients don't know whether they get a good deal on their product, they don't know if they'd be better off in a hospital for 2 more days or in a nursing centre for 4 days or something<BR> - corporate hospitals don't set up where there will be any competition<BR> - patients don't comparison shop; they go to whatever hospital they want<BR> <P> here's my favourite anti-privatisation quote:<BR> "Privatisation has other benefits. If working people depend on the stock market for their pensions, health care, and other means of survival, they have a stake in undermining their own interests: opposing wage increases, health and safety regulations and other factors that might cut into profits that flow to the benefactors on whom they must rely, in a manner reminiscent of feudalism." <p>---<br>"These Yankee politicians are the lowest race of thieves in existence." - Sir John Sparrow Thompson

I guess the answer is just to the south of us. The American for-profit health system also has two (at least) tiers: there are those with absolutely no access; there is the minimalist care available to those who have any money at all; there is a level of physicians who specialize in the diseases of the rich ... and the latter do extremely well.

There would be no shortage of people in Canada lining up to pay for what they perceive is better or more immediate care although it is likely that, as in most enterprises, a saturation point would be reached and surpassed before settling into workable numbers of providers.

Frankly, the attractiveness of a second tier of care in Canada would disappear if the first tier was working the way it ought to. I do not believe that the system is unfixable or even that we aren't sure what we need to do to fix it: we know exactly what is wrong and exactly how to fix it, we simply lack the political will to tell the for-profit mongers to go to hell and get on with the repair.

Paul Harris

I agree with all the above.

I am simply trying to see if a completely private system, privately funded, vs. a publicly-funded private system that harper was trying to sell would work.

Just musing on an idea that I knew would be shot down.


---
"Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
Jim Callaghan
Minden, Ontario
705-286-1860
www.misterc.ca

"<i>I guess the answer is just to the south of us. The American for-profit health system also has two (at least) tiers: there are those with absolutely no access; there is the minimalist care available to those who have any money at all; there is a level of physicians who specialize in the diseases of the rich ... and the latter do extremely well.</i>" Now, if they would "throw in" a complementary vasectomy with every treatment for the first two "levels", eventually there would just be the rich left, and the American Dream would finally prevail.......<p>---<br>RickW

Yes RPW but then there would be no poor to work for the rich, and those rich folks would be forced to labor for food; so that's not going to happen.

Jim, I am presently attempting to dissect the new Alberta advantage healthcare reform proposal and am really trying to find out exactly what is missing from the scenario. I have to do more research, but as Paul Harris says we know how to fix it we just need the will and those are the answers I need to find, to put forward my argument against the new plan. I am not impressed by the new plan, but I want to have clear solutions to put forward as opposed to just ripping theirs appart, which is quite easy.

Of course they aren't looking for my input,but I want to be fair and give it to them anyway. I'm feeling generous.

---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

Whelan, be as generous as you can be.

Please keep us up to date.


---
"Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
Jim Callaghan
Minden, Ontario
705-286-1860
www.misterc.ca

In my world, there would be no private hospitals, just clinics for diagnostics and surgeries.

The public system would operate as it does today.

Privacy of patient info would (should) not be compromised.



---
"Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
Jim Callaghan
Minden, Ontario
705-286-1860
www.misterc.ca

No, no, no! Just not right!

---
Dave Ruston

What If? - what if we only considered the best interests of people. Ditch all the paradigms and get on with it. Canadians could come up with solutions that are more innovative than the current mess without leaving anyone behind. The current system seems to serve health care workers first, patient's second and taxpayers a far distant third.

Actually I think you missed the order, healthcare serves, private interests first, administrators second, then healthcare workers, then patients and taxpayers last.

The system is no longer about helping people, curing illness or prevention, it is about does it make money for all the middle men?

---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

Here is a healthcare example... a person I know had a concern,had not used the system for years, didn't like to go to doctors at all, finally when the pain became unbearable she sought the help of a doctor. The doctor did a little check, gave her orders to take some iron for excess blood loss, a laxative for constipation and sent her on her way. This went on for about 2 years, constant pain, no relief, a lot of blood loss. So the woman doesn't want to complain or overuse the system. Finally she says to the doctor look something is really not right here, I'm gaining weight though I exercise like mad, I eat properly but nothing is working. Doctor says ok, we'll put you on birth control pills that should fix the bleeding etc. Woman says, but I am at high risk for taking birth control, I have a family history of blood clots, heart disease and tumors.

Doc is now pissed at woman and tells her that if she is not willing to take the pills, which is required as a first step and she wants some other treatment, that treatment she'll have to pay for herself, about $10,000.00. She doesn't do an exam, she doesn't say what the $10,000.00 treatment is, but she tells the woman she is not going to let her abuse the system!

Patient is now very frightened, confused and feels like shit! She finally goes to another doctor, attempts to have the file transfered from the first doc will cost $50.00. Second doc does an exam, some blood tests and discovers fairly quickly the woman is full of fibroids, sends her to a specialist, she has a uterus as big as a 5 month pregnancy. She is now having a hysterectomy and waiting to find out if it is cancer!

So who is this first doctor working for, does the patient's health matter at all, or just the system? Recommending the first course of treatment even if the patient will be further risking their life as opposed to doing the proper exam to determine the cause, which saved the system how much money?

This is the attitude of some doctors who are obviously in favor of if you can pay, you get treated, if not suck it up!

---
If I stand for my country today...will my country be here to stand for me tomorrow?

Whelan, there are all kinds of stories that are very serious about some doctors skipping over the obvious, and that is a sad thing.

Doctors are like average people, some are good at their work and some are mediocre. Some are in it for the money, that is one reason we are seeing a lot of specialists these days and fewer GP's coming through the system.

My own doctor would prefer to be on a salary, and he has given me many reasons for this.

If you compare calling a plumber, electrician, or a computer technician to come to your home for an emergency, they have as we all know huge fees for service calls.

My doctor has told me that for him to do a house visit, he is paid the princley sum of $19. Yes, you read that right.

Now, back to the topic, I would much prefer to see the feds come back to the 50% level they promised at the very beginning of public healthcare. However, I don't see that happening, ever. Getting them to just 25% is going to be tough.

The whole reason for this thread is to see if a completely private system can work beside a publicly funded system, and I don't think it can.

I just wanted to see how others saw this option, as opposed to harper's DUMB, STUPID idea of publicly funding private-for-profit healthcare.

If a private company can't make a profit, it goes bankrupt.

I see that happening in the case of private care with private money.

Let's spend the public funds in the proper areas, so we make our system better.

Long waiting lists are not acceptable !! Proper treatment within weeks is the goal, let's work toward that.


---
"Arrogance in Politics is unacceptable"
Jim Callaghan
Minden, Ontario
705-286-1860
www.misterc.ca

C#, that's a terrible story, but only the tip of the iceberg. I know a lady who works in an extended care facility in Edmonoton. The stories I hear out of that place make it sound like Guantanamo Bay.<p> Jim is right, there are people who care about people, and there are people who only care for the money. You can tell the difference right away.<p> <p>---<br>"History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme" Mark Twain <br />
"The greatest price of not participating in politics is being governed by your inferiors." Plato