pinko

Fair enough but I am sure you must recognize that people you know paint the picture they want you to see.

This is probably one of the major problems as quite often parents use the children as pawns in satisfying the need to win at all costs. This shows a lack of maturity on the part of the parents and conceivably damages relationships between parent and child.

There are several points you present that I would like to take issue with. As you know ours is an adversarial system. In such a system once legal counsel is retained it isn't unusual for the lawyer to contact the the other party. A lawyer doesn't have the authority to demand a divorce and in most cases seperation, custodial issues and place of residence are common points of discussion in the initial stages. Once one party petitions the court the other party is notified and the process begins. Whether legal counsel is engaged or not the issues are defined in a series of case conferences including financial disclosure and other issues such as those previously described. Throughout the process there are opportunities to mediate the issues and as well the case conferences allow for advocacy and resolution of issues as they arise. The process itself has nothing to do with the tactics adopted by the litigants and from my point of view it is the litigants who should be held to account if found to be frustrating the objectives of the law. Of course each side paints the picture it wants to create but I would suggest the judiciary sees through such attempts and addresses them accordingly.

Such a jaundiced view. Have you been involved in litigation in such a system?

Perhaps jbg could elaborate a bit more on the premise he has advanced. I have some knowledge of family law albeit from the perspective provided by a relationship involving my daughter and her participation in litigation involving custodial and maintenance matters. From such a perspective I have a different view than that described in the National Post article. Were my daughter to have relied on the deadbeat she and my grandson would not have survived financially. Fortunately she has a marketable skill and a husband who, while not the biological father of my grandson, provides the elements of fatherhood missing with respect to the deadbeat. The deadbeat is thousands of dollars in arrears and while he has spent a few days in jail for his delinquent behaviour seems to continue to be in default.

In the jurisdiction I live in there are predetermined support payment guidleines. Secondly if an individual's means change then the individual may apply to the courts to vary the level of payment. Deadbeat dads need to be held to account. While the events described in the article are tragic this man had an obligation to contribute to the upbringing of his children.

Oh...and look...Mr. Gratzer is from...Manitoba! So what. Just because some no name posits such a view doesn't make it the case. How about something credible for a change. By the way I notice he is linked to a neocon think tank and the discredited economic model offered by Milton Friedman.

"Utterly irrational. The government would pay between 50% and 90% LESS for these procedures. What you are arguing for is to pay the most taxes humanly possible." No. What I am arguing for is a made in Canada solution that doesn't include some hair brained scheme combining a vacation and a medical procedure.

August1991: You do realize there are no credible sources to support your claim that the Canadian healthcare system is like that of the former Soviet Union. Here is an excerpt describing the model employed here in Manitoba. "Teams may include practitioners such as family physicians, nurse practitioners, primary care nurses, social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, pain therapists, audiologists, wound care specialists, and community developers depending on availability and need. Two providers from the same discipline can be considered collaborative if they fulfill different functions. In smaller communities, a primary health care team can comprise as few as two or three providers, whereas in urban areas there can be up to 50. Team size reflects the availability of providers and the size and needs of the community." http://www.healthcouncilcanada.ca/docs/rpts/2009/TeamsInAction_Manitoba_Summary.pdf

Trump isn't presidential material.

"I bet that the killing of the poor police officer was in fact indirectly done by a vile system - as the conspiracy theorists say...Kachkar was what they call a "Manchruian Canidate" - a mindless assasin conditioned to eventyally snap and kill - and it seems that our militarized police made a lot of useful hay and got great and needed P R out of the death of Russell ..........someone should investigate who really is responsible for the death of the officer...like I said...there should be an investigation of the sequence of events that led to this human tragedy and great polical triumph at the expense of two men - one dead and the other half dead - and left to suffer for the next 25 years." What planet did you say you lived on? Here is some background information for you http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/article/926391--the-mystery-of-the-man-in-the-snowplow.

If you have so much confidence in what you are trying to promote I would like to suggest that you put your own money (not to be confused with taxpayer money) into the venture you have been describing. The solutions to our healthcare problems must lie within the borders of Canada and not in some pie in the sky scheme dreamed up by some so called visionary. I don't want my taxes paying for someone's vacation to India or anywhere else. The bottom line is care is available here in Canada and there is absolutely no need to supplement it with a trip abroad.

"I've also dealt with both the US and Canadian systems when it comes to mental illness and all I can say is without public health and more importantly public insurance, mentally ill people from the working class on down are basically doomed." I think your most recent post is a fair description of the current state of affairs. As for the mental heathcare system I couldn't agree with you more.

If by this you mean there is an accreditation process and the number of openings in medical school is determined by public funding then you may have a point. With respect to the equipment my point is that there is a capital cost associated with starting a business. I am not in a position to dispute your contention that the cost of such equipment will come down. That doesn't mean that the cost of such equipment will, in fact, come down. To the best of my knowledge the clientale for the clinic is not confined to those from British Columbia. I believe there is competition between the various clinics so to that extent, if I am correct, there is a competitive element.

Here is a set of circumstances with which I have some knowledge. My son and his two partners run a fertility clinic. As you may know fertilty treatments, at least in British Columbia, are for the most part, out of the scope of medicare. Upon startup of the business a sigificant expenditure on equipment was required. Using this as an exmaple I would like you to illustrate the point you are attempting to make with your Atari example. My son also works within the medicare system ultilzing another of his specialities and as such you might also attempt to address this point as it is within the scope of medicare.

I may do that if I feel there is a need to do so.

" Right now most Canadian medical tourists are either going for dental work, or theyre affluent people trying to get around waiting lists." These medical tourists you refer to aren't very bright if they are going to India for dental work. While it is the case dental work isn't covered for most Canadians I have my dental work done through my Blue Cross insurance and it is always done expeditiously.

I take it the Geyser comment is directed at me. I notice you have avoided describing your background, if any , in the healthcare field. I am well aware of information like that contained in the CBC article you have highlighted. I am inclined to focus more broadly on the issues at hand over an extended period of time rather than cherry pick like you have. There is nothing earth shattering in that article. Are you one of those 4 million people without a family doctor?

"Any set of services should generally decrease in cost over time, as productivity increases and innovation work their magic." Do you have some examples to prove your point? If so provide them.

My post is to let you know you are fooling no one with your neocon philosophy. Now put your eyes back in your head and try to say something intelligent.

It can and you certainly don't have a corner on the truth.

Michael: You state: "I think a good practice would be for wait times to decrease over time..." That is a fine goal. Now tell me what steps need to be taken to achieve that goal. Please don't reiterate the private sector option. You further state: "and for an identified independent party measure that and provide the information back to consumers." Which independent party are you referring to? Finally you state: "I also think costs for a defined set services should go down over time" What is the set of services you refer to?

Shady from London, Ontario sure has neocon talking points down pat.