How Canada’s Health Care System Helped Create a Killer
thewalrus.ca
thewalrus.ca
Canada's healthcare system has long needed improvements in mental health capacities. I figure that is what they're trying to explicitly illustrate here. The result has been iterations of separate mental health institutes, leading to driving efforts like CAMH (Centre for Addiction and Mental Health) in Toronto. Sadly, many remote regions do not have ready access to these kinds of resources. The northern regions of the provinces are particularly starved for social and medical resources.
Hopefully the article will have the enlightening and impactful effect I interpret its author having intended.
I personally witnessed it help to turn around the life of a "binge" addict of 20+ years. If her recovery lasts, it may prevent the "cycle of addiction" from being passed on to her two kids.
Despite such successes, and the enormous need, the U.S. is at this moment on the course to reverse this improved treatment.
I guess there's more money to be had in prisons. (We continue to transfer and expand our incarcerations into private, for-profit prisons.)
As for Canada, I hope treatment is expanded. Pharmaceutical coverage. At least basic, health-based dental coverage (as opposed to cosmetic -- though for myself I've no objection to covering it, as well) . Both should be cost effective. A reliable supply of medicines means people don't unnecessarily worsen while going without. And every year, more studies demonstrate that dental health is a primary preventative measure against other, very expensive diseases, such as coronary artery disease.
As with Medicaid in the U.S., it's not just "additional expense". It's a lower-cost preventative measure against greater costs down the line. Cost that in both countries gets passed onto the public. It's just that here, in the U.S., we have hospitals perform "cost spreading" of uncovered emergency care across the populations that have insurance.
(There's been very little coverage of the dramatic decrease in hospitals' uncovered care/expenses since the ACA went into effect.)
It's not completely destitute for mental health help. Ontario is improving coverage of pharmaceuticals for people under 25 and mental health is a growing concern.
Dental care is a sore spot for myself. I really hope we can improve upon that as it can cause life threatening health problems. Beyond that having dental problems that a person can't afford to remedy can relegate a person to a lower class, especially in business. It's a crucial aspect of physical well being, and should absolutely be considered! It's reassuring every time I hear the idea corroborated. While some dentists I've known are very empathetic and try to play to any insurance restrictions, others are quite the opposite and try to take advantage to their decided maximum and decry the idea of publicly subsidized dental health strictly because it might affect margins due to potential price changes in equipment. I look forward to attitudes on that subject changing.
I hope the moods and ideas surrounding the ACA and other, better, public health initiatives change in the US. It is an immense relief knowing that I'd never be turned away, can always see a doctor, can have blood work, urinalysis, x-rays, MRI's, ultrasounds, CAT scans, and emergency work done without a single worry about effects upon my life outside of the loss of quality due to any determined ailments. Every American I've ever met has never struck me as the kind to shun their neighbour by default—but for some reason when it has to be managed on the scale of a federal government program—some still develop issues with what they refer to as the burden of it.
I think we're on the right path here, in general, but I also think many Canadians underestimate the level of need outside of the cities, and in particular the northern and more isolated regions. There's definitely work to do.
I hope the current phase in the US changes, empathy becomes a larger influence in the spirit of the time and in policy decisions. It can do well for every aspect of society.
It's a long road forward—and no matter how much it improves, it can always improve further.
What a strange word to apply to a medical system. I mean, really think about it. That's like saying the "DMV is beloved". It's just a strange word usage that makes me wonder if you're more of a "fan" of their system than an unbiased source.
My Canadian friend I regularly play PUBG with, remarked that non-life-threatening illnesses like a broken arm can have waiting times measured in months. (Sounds like our VA.) And he lives in one of the large cities. He is glad that nobody goes bankrupt but he would NEVER use the world "beloved" to describe it.
"Better than the USA"--probably, I'd easily give you that without raising my brow. But "beloved"?... I'm sorry, I just can't get past that word. It's so out-of-place. If this was a novel I was reading, I'd have to set the book down for a moment and go, "Really?"
> Beloved... I'm sorry, I just can't get past that word. It's so out-of-place.
Many people around the world would describe their government institutions that way, healthcare is a common one but you'll also see things like the BBC or public transit systems held in similar regard.
If any bureaucracy is run smoothly efficiently and effectively, I can totally imagine people calling it beloved simply because it makes such a huge positive impact in their lives.
I think this notion of not just lack of fondness for helpful government institutions but active dislike for them is more an American phenomenon and qualifies as 'strange'
And, much like a beloved relative, our system has major annoyances and often keeps us waiting. (Can you still call Uncle Bob beloved after he shits the bed? I think you can.) But it's so core to the Canadian experience -- we all know, no matter what economic turns we might take, it's always there for us from birth to death, quirks and all. It's a constant and foundational.
I reckon by early adulthood many Canadians will have personally seen it help more loved ones than it harms (while asking for little or zero additional money) ... so I think the word beloved is reasonable.
I'd say our system is dear to my heart and that's synonymous with beloved.
I'd like to add further context:
It saved my younger brother's life in terms of a brain operation where the (thankfully benign) tumor had reached the size of a standard California navel orange. He was a child. It cost my parents nothing for the immediate invasive surgery, the subsequent week+ stay and treatment, and recurring visits, checkups and studies.
When my father was a child the Sick Kids hospital in Toronto (disclaimer: also a charity, not solely OHIP) looked after my father regularly. I grew up with stories he'd tell about the state of children in that place from the time he spent with them while he was there.
---
To expand upon your statement "by early adulthood many Canadians will have personally seen it help more loved ones than it harms" — this is the best way to put it. When it's not such a scarce and hallowed resource, people don't just go to look after their health if they have money, or are sick, or worse. They go to maintain good health, and don't typically abuse it otherwise. There are holes to fill yet, but just the same I think it's common knowledge that people love the system enough that they would fight against its hypothetical removal — especially in the face of promises of tax cuts, or other "trickle-down" benefits. At the same time it doesn't change the common opinion that certain aspects need improvements.
The press will say it's "beloved," along with government-sector employees, but in reality you're as likely as not to encounter people very frustrated by the system. Everyone thinks it's better than what exists for poor Americans, and at the same time substantially inferior to what is available for rich Americans.
It astounds me that people can hear stories such as this and actually believe them. No, of course people don't wait months to get their broken arm taken care of. I broke my foot and had it in a cast that night, and the only reason it took as long as that was because I didn't realize at first that I'd broken it.
I'm not going to throw away his experience because it doesn't fit into someone's worldview.
Just because you had a good experience doesn't mean he can't have a bad one.
Use your head: a society that couldn't deal with broken bones without months-long lineups would grind to a halt. How can you seriously believe something so ludicrous? Notice how many other Canadians are jumping in to tell you your statement is totally untrue.
You aren't going to wait months for a broken arm. That's just not happening.
The reason it's beloved is because when some guy sucker punches you and breaks your jaw it's not financially ruinous. You can go to emergency, get pulled out of line because a nurse sees you are actually in trouble, and then get surgery from a specialist a couple days later. It ends up costing you almost nothing.
That's exactly what happened to my father.
My mom has epilepsy. When I was a kid we had to call an ambulance multiple times because that's what we were told to do if she had a larger than normal seizure and my dad wasn't home to take care of her. We could do that because it didn't cost us thousands of dollars each time, which would have been beyond our ability to pay. My grandma has had cancer, my grandpa has had a heart attack, my other grandma had a stroke that required weeks of recovery time in hospital. My cousin was born with a hole in her heart. Another with a cleft pallet.
It's not perfect. it has a lot of holes and we have problems like shortages of doctors. It's still a "beloved" system because it saves lives and does so without costing an absurd amount.
Sadly, that doctor will likely continue their practice.
"Hers was Sault Ste. Marie’s sole homicide of 2013."
How many small towns in the US can you say that of?