When asked to describe what makes Canada unique compared to other countries, many outsiders might yell out “Hockey!” “Cold Weather!” or “Free Health Care!.” Health care is definitely one of Canada’s most noticeable trademarks when compared to the United States, but the reality is that our health care services are not what they are made out to be. Canadians tend to take pride in the fact that they have a Government funded health care system, but the system is failing at a rapid pace. One can gage the quality of health care in our country while at the emergency ward in any hospital, where most Canadians realize its downsides. The Government spends most of its budget towards health care but Canadians are not feeling an improvement. Waiting times at the emergency rooms are only increasing and they can be life threatening which is why many Canadians are crossing the border to find better and faster service, even if payment is required. Canada’s single tiered health care is slowly starting to become our bane and is not on a par with modernizing healthcare services. A well thought out and planned two-tiered health care system would solve many of the growing problems related with one of the Government’s biggest spending interests. Allowing Canadians the option between Government regulated and controlled paid health care or Government funded health care would benefit consumers and decrease spending of the budget. The three areas that will be discussed in relation to the health care problem are: the true state of health care in Canada, a hinting change towards the privatization of health care, and a closer look at the possible advantages and disadvantages of a two tiered system.
Our health care system receives a lot of funding from the Gov...
... middle of paper ...
... is hard to say whether or not this type of system would work out.
Works Cited
Brett, Allan S. "Two-Tiered Health Care." Archives of Internal Medicine 12 Mar. 2007: 430+. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 27 Mar. 2011.
Robert G. Evans, et al. "Phantoms In The Snow: Canadians' Use Of Health Care Services In The United States." Health Affairs 21.3 (2002): 19-31. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 27 Mar. 2011.
Mendleson, Rachel. "THE WORST-RUN INDUSTRY IN CANADA: HEALTH CARE." Canadian Business 83.17 (2010): 39-42. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 27 Mar. 2011.
Brown, Barry. "Canadian provinces move toward privatizing healthcare." Christian Science Monitor 28 Feb. 2002: 7. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 27 Mar. 2011.
MacQueen, Ken. "Our health care delusion." Maclean's 124.3 (2011): 18-22. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 27 Mar. 2011.
Though, Professor Armstrong makes very good connections between health care policy reforms and its impact on women, all of these connections are eclipsed by the values encompassed within the Canada Health Act of 1984. Health care to this day is provided on the basis of need rather than financial means, and is accessible to all that require it. Professor Armstrong’s argument is hinged upon the scope of services provided under the public health insurance system, and the subsequent affect of these reforms on women as the main beneficiaries of these services and as workers in these industries. However, these reforms were made to balance the economy, and the downsizing and cutbacks were necessary steps to be taken with respect to this agenda. Moreover, as aforementioned the access to medical services ultimately comes down to need, and the reforms to date are not conducive to an intentional subordination of female interests in the realm of health care. Therefore, I find Professor Armstrong’s critique on Canada’s public health insurance system to be relatively redundant because the universal access to care encompassed within the Canada Health Act transcends the conditional proponents of her arguments of inequality. In other words, I believe she is
Saskatchewan’s governmental agencies approach to the shortage of doctors in the province favors too much the structuralist approach and would be more effective in the long term if switched to a humanistic approach. Throwing money at a problem may work for a little bit but what happens when the money runs out? So are current programs a true fix or a short-term solution doomed to fail. We look at the possible causes for the shortage of doctors and then examine the governmental responses put in place to deal with the problem, both past and present. We look at which perspectives are more successful between the structuralist approach and the humanist approach when it comes to the Canadian health care system.
An analysis of the US and Canada’s systems reveals advantages and drawbacks within each structure. While it is apparent that both countries could benefit from the adoption of portions of the others system, Canada’s healthcare system offers several benefits over the US system.
The Canadian health care system promises universality, portability, and accessibility; unfortunately, it faces political challenges of meeting pub...
At the beginning of the 20th century healthcare was a necessity in Canada, but it was not easy to afford. When Medicare was introduced, Canadians were thrilled to know that their tax dollars were going to benefit them in the future. The introduction of Medicare made it easier for Canadians to afford healthcare. Medicare helped define Canada as an equal country, with equal rights, services and respect for every Canadian citizen. Medicare helped less wealthy Canadians afford proper healthcare. Canadian citizens who had suffered from illness because they could not afford healthcare, were able to get proper treatment. The hospitals of Canada were no longer compared by their patients’ wealth, but by their amount of service and commitment. Many doctors tried to stop the Medicare act, but the government and citizens outvoted them and the act was passed. The doctors were then forced to treat patients in order of illness and not by the amount of money they had. Medicare’s powerful impact on Canadian society was recognized globally and put into effect in other nations all around the world. Equality then became a definition which every Canadian citizen understood.
LaPierre, T. A. (2012). Comparing the Canadian and US Systems of Health Care in an Era of Health Care Reform. Journal of Health Care Finance, 38(4), 1-18.
Being a Canadian citizen, it is hard for me to think of life without any health insurance. I have had public health insurance all my life growing up and have been free to go to any hospital at any time and get some form of health care. Residing in the United States off and for the last 7 years I have experienced health care from both sides. I feel that private health care has huge advantages over public health care. In the following essay I will explain in three points why I feel strongly about private health care as opposed to public. What is better is always subjective, and I will not try to argue the point of health for all, but instead for the individual who is seeking the best health care possible, and is willing to put the resources into obtaining that. I will be addressing efficiency and quality, not inclusion of everyone (free health care), I will be addressing the root of this and not just that one argument, which would detract from my focus. I will not be getting into the political debate of socialism vs. capitalism, as that is a separate argument in itself, and this country is currently running under capitalism. Again coming from living in both a socialist and then a capitalist society, I feel I can do so in an unbiased manner.
Davidson, Stephen M. Still Broken: Understanding the U.S. Health Care System. Stanford, CA: Stanford Business, 2010. Print.
Hicks, L. (2012). The Economics of Health and Medical Care (6th Ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Brian Lindenberg, “Canadian Healthcare: What Works and What Doesn’t | Benefits Canada,” accessed February 14, 2014, http://www.benefitscanada.com/benefits/health-wellness/canadian-healthcare-what-works-and-what-doesn%E2%80%99t-27647.
Reese, Philip. Public Agenda Foundation. The Health Care Crisis: Containing Costs, Expanding Coverage. New York: McGraw, 2002.
Newman, Alex. “Examining Healthcare: A Look Around the Globe at Nationalized Systems.” The New American. 15 Sep. 2008: 10. eLibrary. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
Today, Canadians are concerned with many issues involving health care. It is the responsibility of the provincial party to come up with a fair, yet reasonable solution to this issue. This solution must support Canadians for the best; it involves people and how they are treated when in need for health care. The Liberal party feels that they have the best solution that will provide Canadians with the best results. It states that people will have the protection of medicare and will help with concerns like: injury prevention, nutrition, physical activity, mental health, etc. The Canadian Alliance Party’s plan is to make several policy-developments to benefit Canada’s health care. They believe it will serve the security and well-being best for all Canadians. The last party involved in this issue is the NDP Party; who indicate that they are fighting hard for a better Health Care system in our economy. The NDP Party states that the income of a family should not dictate the quality of health care.
Niles, N. J. (2011). Basics of the U.S. health care system. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett.
The United States health care system is one of the most expensive systems in the world yet it is known as being unorganized and chaotic in comparison to other countries (Barton, 2010). This factor is attributed to numerous characteristics that define what the U.S. system is comprised of. Two of the major indications are imperfect market conditions and the demand for new technology (Barton, 2010). The health care system has been described as a free market in