Let's put nurses in charge of fixin' healthcare?

[mirror]

Doctors support private health system

The Canadian Medical Association threw its support behind a parallel, private health-care system Wednesday.

In what was a historic vote for the influential organization, delegates decided by a two-to-one margin that patients should be able to go outside the public health-care plan and use private insurance if they can't get necessary medical care quickly enough.

It's a major change for the association, which until now has been unequivocal in its support for a strong public system. The last time the CMA

voted on such a motion was in 1996 when it reaffirmed its support.

This is an absurd decision and a major copout. Doctors have been front and centre in the decision-making process of healthcare but no matter how much they earn they just never seem to have enough. Oh, those poor doctors, doesn't everybody feel sorry for them!

[SirSpanky]

Doctors work damn hard, under stressfull conditions. My uncle is a plain jane family doctor, he does rounds at a hospital from 5-8am, then runs his practice till 7pm, 6 days a week, with an extra couple hours in the hospital Sunday. Dealing with sick people I think is the shittiest circumstance other than dealing with politicians ( ). Don't cry too loud, they deserve it.

Do you want to simply discount their opinions? They are on the front lines, and ask any good businessman/woman; listening to the people dealing directly with the action part of any business is good practice.

Although thats a great suggestion to have the nurses more involved.

[Riverwind]

The doctors are not unique. More and more Canadians are realizing that having the choice of paying for private care in the country should be an option. Asking individual nurses may be worthwhile but the nurses unions have no place in the discussion since they have demonstrated over and over again that their primary interest is preserving unionized jobs and could not care less about patients.

[shoop]

Typical mixed bag from Mirror. Inflammatory headline with a somewhat thoughful post.

Nurses have a valuable role to play. The move towards Nurse Practitioners is a good one.

http://www.unbc.ca/nursing/practitioner.html

Mirror - care to explain why the MDs are being 'absurd' in tyring to find a solution for patients who cannot get necessary medical care in a timely fashion?

[Argus]

Typical mixed bag from Mirror. Inflammatory headline with a somewhat thoughful post.

Nurses have a valuable role to play. The move towards Nurse Practitioners is a good one.

http://www.unbc.ca/nursing/practitioner.html

Mirror - care to explain why the MDs are being 'absurd' in tyring to find a solution for patients who cannot get necessary medical care in a timely fashion?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Easy. First, Canada has the finest health care system on Earth. Second, whatever problems there are have been exagerated, and they are being fixed.

Mirror has said all of this as if he actually believes it. And if you believe that then you gotta believe there is no reason at all for changes.

[err]

Doctors work damn hard, under stressfull conditions. ......

Do you want to simply discount their opinions? They are on the front lines, and ask any good businessman/woman; listening to the people dealing directly with the action part of any business is good practice.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The CMA is not "most doctors".... What the system needs is a government body willing to pay doctors a little better... rather than giving away all the tax dollars they can in subsidies to corporate Canada.....I personally don't think the family doctor is well enough paid....

[shoop]

Easy. First, Canada has the finest health care system on Earth. Second, whatever problems there are have been exagerated, and they are being fixed.

Mirror has said all of this as if he actually believes it. And if you believe that then you gotta believe there is no reason at all for changes.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The Supreme Court of Canada has recently ruled that wait times, in Quebec at least, are unreasonably long for some procedures. (The stay on the decision doesn't reflect upon the decision itself, merely reflects that the Government of Quebec is trying to rectify the situation and they have been given a year to do so.)

Are you both say that the Supreme Court of Canada AND the Canadian Medical Association are wrong in this case?

[mirror]

McGuinty says private sector to fund Soo hospital

I am not sure what the significance of this is. As long as it is in compliance with the 5 principles of the Canada Health Act I suppose there is not problem with it, as long as it is the best deal for taxpayers, but is it? Does this mean that the private sector is going to lease the space to the government when the building is completed? This is really bizarre reporting but so typical of the MSM - no specifics, just a lot of hype!

[err]

Are you both say that the Supreme Court of Canada AND the Canadian Medical Association are wrong in this case?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Was it you who I heard praising Buzz Hargrove earlier (in another forum).... because the CMA is the Buzz Hargrove of the doctor's union... And their interest is certainly not the health of the public... It's profit and earning power that counts with the CMA... If you cannot recognize this, you should not be debating here.....

The CMA has a vested interest in having its members charge huge amounts of money that it figures it will not be able to extract from a public system. So of course they're going to promote a vehicle to suit their own ends... (their vehicle looks more like a Brinks truck than an ambulance)

The Supreme Court has ruled that waiting times are unreasonably long.... and I guess you suppose that putting in a parallel system is more sensible than fixing the one we have.... Like when your city bus needs repair... do you repair it or buy limosines so rich people can buzz past the run-down bus.....

[mirror]

err......great analogy and excellent post!

[err]

McGuinty says private sector to fund Soo hospital

“Now, more than ever, Ontario needs to reject Dalton McGuinty’s backdoor privatization and start developing real solutions that protect and improve public health care for ordinary Ontarians.”

Privatization of health care has to be stopped in its tracks.

[mirror]

Ontario must have some big bucks to play around with. Oh well, this decision to reverse one of Harris's cost cutting measures seems to be a good idea, especially for women in Ontario.

Hospital merger to be reversed

[mirror]

Thank goodness for our grandparents.

Grannies rage over docs' 'arrogance'

New Democrat MLA Raj Pannu said the move by doctors at their national convention in Edmonton this week will generate a huge political storm that will carry over into the next federal election.

Pannu called the move by doctors "regressive and highly distressing," warning that the cure they propose to fix health care "will be worse than the disease."

[mirror]

Ontario to add 50 new midwife positions

Ontario is really loosening the purse strings. I guess all those cutbacks by Harris aren't working very well and need to be reversed.

[Shady]

It's all about supply and demand, as it is with any job. The supply of doctors is small, and the demand for doctors is large. They represent a very skilled workforce in which only a very small group of people have the necessary training and skills to succeed. The government continues to artificially cap doctor's salaries, contrary to what they're actually worth. I have no beef with doctors seeking to be appropriately compensated for their incredible work. God bless doctors!!!

[mirror]

Letting the health-care genie out of the bottle

I found this article quite informative in that it povides a good overview of the history of Canada's health care system.

The question now is which politicians are going to show the courage required to sort this out so that we, the prospective patients, are going to be best served.

Can we count on PM Martin and Health Minister Dosanjh to protect our interests, or will they sell us out to the secret corporate lobbyists that lurk in the dark corridors of power in Ottawa?

[Riverwind]

The government continues to artificially cap doctor's salaries, contrary to what they're actually worth.  I have no beef with doctors seeking to be appropriately compensated for their incredible work.  God bless doctors!!!

The gov't also works to limit the supply of doctors by making it virtually impossible for qualified doctors from other countries to practice here. They do this by not funding residential positions for doctors that did not graduate from Canadian schools. So the doctors can hardly complain about caps on thier salary by the gov't.

[Shady]

The gov't also works to limit the supply of doctors by making it virtually impossible for qualified doctors from other countries to practice here

You're so right. We have friends who's husband is a Pediatrician. He's from the United States but was practicing in London, Ontario, at the Children's Hosptial. Anyways, long story short, he had to leave and take a job in Toledo, Ohio, because of all the regulation related to doctors coming from outside of Canada. It's just another example of government regulating itself into a crisis.

[Argus]

err......great analogy and excellent post!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It would only be a great analogy if someone was suggesting the public "buy limosines" or in other words, pay for private health care.

So what he's really saying is.

"If your buses don't work do you repair the system or let people buy their own cars to get to work on their own."

I think the more people use their own cars the less strain on the bus system.

And since the people who operate the buses have been standing around shaking their heads trying to decide how to fix them for about ten years now I'd say we should let people buy their own cars.

[err]

It would only be a great analogy if someone was suggesting the public "buy limosines" or in other words, pay for private health care.

So what he's really saying is.

"If your buses don't work do you repair the system or let people buy their own cars to get to work on their own."

I think the more people use their own cars the less strain on the bus system. 

And since the people who operate the buses have been standing around shaking their heads trying to decide how to fix them for about ten years now I'd say we should let people buy their own cars.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If the wealthy can afford their own limosines, let them drive them... but we should not subsidize the purchase of the said limosines with ANY public capital... not one red cent.

But the wealthy don't want to pay for their own independent system... they want the public to "mostly pay for" a system that will be out of reach of the poorer and middle-class segments of our society. Either that, or a private system that can soak up public money... that was supposed to be used for maintenance of the bus...

The public system should remain "totally public", where everyone in our country can make avail of its services.

If there is a problem with our system, it is due to the government's fiscal policy, not its ability to pay for a "fully functional" system. The government continues to give more and more tax breaks to corporate Canada, but there's no extra for health care.... In fact, health care monies were cut to give the tax breaks (to corporate Canada, not the lowly citizens), if you'll remember Paul Martin in his former post.

[shoop]

But the wealthy don't want to pay for their own independent system... they want the public to "mostly pay for" a system that will be out of reach of the poorer and middle-class segments of our society.  Either that, or a private system that can soak up public money... that was supposed to be used for maintenance of the bus...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Maybe I am missing something, but where is this whole the wealthy want the public to "mostly pay for" a system that will be out of reach of the poorer and middle-class segments of our society coming from?

[err]

Maybe I am missing something, but where is this whole the wealthy want the public to "mostly pay for" a system that will be out of reach of the poorer and middle-class segments of our society coming from?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

P3's. and other privately owned hospitals that will get a large part of their funding (and profits) from our public health-care system's funding....

[Argus]

It would only be a great analogy if someone was suggesting the public "buy limosines" or in other words, pay for private health care.

So what he's really saying is.

"If your buses don't work do you repair the system or let people buy their own cars to get to work on their own."

I think the more people use their own cars the less strain on the bus system. 

And since the people who operate the buses have been standing around shaking their heads trying to decide how to fix them for about ten years now I'd say we should let people buy their own cars.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If the wealthy can afford their own limosines,

I note again this typical leftist tactic of insinuating that private medical care is something only sought by the "wealthy". I said "people" should be allowed to buy their own "cars" and you immediately shift it back to "wealthy" buying "limosines".

The wealthy do not give a rats ass about your public health care system or privatising it. The wealthy, ie Paul Martin and Belinda Stronach, and the rich, ie Pierre Pettigrew, James Peterson, Bill Graham, Reg Alcock, John Mccallum and numerous others in the Liberal Cabinet, have immediate, ready access to private health care in the United States, and are not the least bit hesitant to make use of it. They could not care less what happens with Canadian health care. Jean Chretien wrapped himself in the health care flag and defended it doggedly every election - while secretly going to the US for medical care. Nice. And typical.

But the wealthy don't want to pay for their own independent system... they want the public to "mostly pay for" a system that will be out of reach of the poorer and middle-class segments of our society.

The NDP, the "middle class" is made up of anyone who makes more than minimum wage, while the "rich" is anyone who can afford their own home.

In point of fact the demand is for private health care to be legally permitted, as opposed to publicly funded. Us rich folk will then fund it ourselves, in addition to funding the public health care system.

The public system should remain "totally public", where everyone in our country can make avail of its services.

Or non-services, as the case may be.

Really, this whole argument boils down to nothing more than jealousy and resentment towards the rich, towards those who can afford private insurance and medical care.

If there is one hospital and the wait is ten hours to get a broken bone set everyone is "equal", ie, equally miserable. If there is a private hospital sitting next to it, then those with money don't have to wait. Thus while the poor are no worse off leftists get incensed that their services is not as good. In fact, a second hospital would improve waiting times at the first by streaming off those who can afford to pay.

The most equitable system, however, would be that the second hospital, since it serves taxpayers, is funded exactly like the first hospital. However, it would be able to charge fees to cover an improvement in services. If it costs $1000 to fix a broken bone then both hospitals should get $1000 from the government. The second hospital should then be able to charge a $100 fee in order to cut their waiting time from 10 hours to 10 minutes.

[err]

So what he's really saying is.

"If your buses don't work do you repair the system or let people buy their own cars to get to work on their own."

I think the more people use their own cars the less strain on the bus system. 

And since the people who operate the buses have been standing around shaking their heads trying to decide how to fix them for about ten years now I'd say we should let people buy their own cars.

I note again this typical leftist tactic of insinuating that private medical care is something only sought by the "wealthy". I said "people" should be allowed to buy their own "cars" and you immediately shift it back to "wealthy" buying "limosines".

My original argument said "limosines"... it was you who changed it...

Prompt and effective medical care is sought by the wealthy and poor alike. We have a system (a bus) that once was the best in the world. Over the years, conservative arguments have said "we can't afford this" (free care for the poor).. And they have contiually plundered the system... and it doesn't matter to the wealthy Conservative, because the rich can afford to buy 'front of the line', (limo) service.... as you have stated (quote below).

Now, if our medical care system was as good as it once was, nobody would be seeking private care, would they... So why don't we expand our analogy... We have a run-down bus that works... Rich people take private limosines.... So do we fix the bus, or do we continue to run a bus service with a poor bus, and also publicly pay for a private taxi system for when our bus is broken down... I don't think you need an economics degree for this one.... Let's fix the bus...

The wealthy do not give a rats ass about your public health care system or privatising it.

Your verbal diatribe then went on to list prominant liberals and conservatives who don't care about the system.... The answer is simple... DONT VOTE FOR LIBERALS OR CONSERVATIVES IF THE AREN'T INTERESTED IN FIXING OUR HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS... VOTE NDP.

The NDP, the "middle class" is made up of anyone who makes more than minimum wage, while the "rich" is anyone who can afford their own home.

You're showing your ignorance, big time....

Really, this whole argument boils down to nothing more than jealousy and resentment towards the rich, towards those who can afford private insurance and medical care.

What did you have to smoke to come to that conclusion.... I'm a big supporter of fixing our health care system... And if that means they have to close a tax-loophole to afford it, then I say, "lets do it". It has nothing to do with much more than common sense....

If there is one hospital and the wait is ten hours to get a broken bone set everyone is "equal", ie, equally miserable. If there is a private hospital sitting next to it, then those with money don't have to wait. Thus while the poor are no worse off get incensed that their services is not as good. In fact, a second hospital would improve waiting times at the first by streaming off those who can afford to pay.

"Thus while the poor are no worse off get insensed that their service is not as good".... Common sense, in line with your argument....

If there are to be private hospitals, I'm not against them at all. What I'm against is the public paying a single red cent to one of these private hospitals. They can build them, but not with ANY public money.... for building it... maintaining it, or running it... Private is private, and public is public...

The most equitable system, however, would be that the second hospital, since it serves taxpayers, is funded exactly like the first hospital. However, it would be able to charge fees to cover an improvement in services.

Wow... So the public purse should pay for two sets of doctors, two sets of nurses, two sets of administrative services, two sets of maintenance staff, two heating bills, two air conditioning bills... and I suppose the "profit" is the pay-for part of the bill with your idea.... ???

It would be much cheaper to fix our existing public system....

[August1991]

Prompt and effective medical care is sought by the wealthy and poor alike. We have a system (a bus) that once was the best in the world. Over the years, conservative arguments have said "we can't afford this" (free care for the poor).. And they have contiually plundered the system... and it doesn't matter to the wealthy Conservative, because the rich can afford to buy 'front of the line', (limo) service.... as you have stated (quote below).

The correct analogy would be me, still waiting for the bus, while the rich are already driving by in limousines. But I can't buy a Toyota Echo.

We have never put more money into health care than we do now. To blame our health care problems on "conservative arguments" is singularly lame. It's like blaming the newspaper for the bad weather.