If we were to take a general look back at Canada’s history of social policy and reform, you’d ultimately come to the conclusion that Canada is well situated in this regard. In fact, you could even go as far as saying that we are one of the world’s leaders when it comes to progressive policy reform and you’d be well-merited in claiming so. However, in Blake and Kenshen’s book the Social Fabric or Patchwork Quilt some key issues concerning Canadian Social policy are brought to attention; shedding light on otherwise subordinated topics of public concern. One topic that I wanted to discuss in particular is the hotly debated topic of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, evolving jurisprudential practices, and how they affect the cost of Health-Care. …show more content…
Consequentially challenges made to Health Care policy, shifts the responsibility of Health Care reform over to the Courts, where two types of litigation are prominent: matters pertaining to financing and the deliverance of services; and challenges to the scope of coverage offered through current Health Care policies. The latter tends to originate from individual challenges, wherein 33 cases to date (2006) were brought up by patients. These 33 cases share a low success rate of 33 percent, in contrast to the fewer but much more successful rate of challenges made by medical professionals. I believe the reason for this disproportionality is because the Courts tend to tread lightly in the realm of politics, as to make sure justice is served in a way that does not disrupt the established political equilibrium. Furthermore, because of this looming pressure to make the right decisions, the courts need to be able to justify their decisions to potential challengers. Wherein, for the most part the cases made by medical professionals such as Doctor’s enjoy much more professional merit than the cases made by patients. However, this is not to say that challenges from patients cannot be compelling to the Courts, as we will see in the case of Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General) …show more content…
Moreover, since the services sought were more readily available to the hearing-population, this constituted a Charter violation of Section 15. Equality Rights. After a relatively long trial period the Courts ultimately ruled in favor of the plaintiff, citing that the negligence to provide equal degree of access to medical services for the deaf constituted discrimination on the basis of disability. The government was ordered to comply with the court order and to enact legislation in manner consistent with Section 1, ultimately altering fiscal expenditure within the province of British Columbia. However, what the Courts did not expect was that their decision would have a domino effect in spreading to the other nine provinces. So the annual provincial cost of hiring these interpreters went from being an estimated $150,000 to approximately $1.5M nationally. Though, a huge victory for the deaf community this just goes to show that the decisions that judges make in this realm have the potential to make a tremendous impact on the fabric of our policy decisions; fiscally, and
In the modern day, health care can be a sensitive subject. Politically, health care in America changes depending on whom is President. Obamacare and Trumpcare are different policies regarding health care, which many people have passionate feelings towards. However, not many Americans are informed about Norman Daniels’ view on health care. Throughout this paper I will be outlining Norman Daniels’ claims on the right to health care, and the fundamental principles in which he derives to construct his argument. By means of evaluating Daniels’ argument, I will then state my beliefs regarding the distributive justice of health care.
...nadian women could no longer be denied the access to education, equal pay, employment, and their rights. At last, after a century, Canadian women had gained the rights they fought so hard to possess.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted under the Pierre Trudeau government on April 17, 1982. According to Phillip Bryden, “With the entrenchment of the Charter into the Canadian Constitution, Canadians were not only given an explicit definition of their rights, but the courts were empowered to rule on the constitutionality of government legislation” (101). Prior to 1982, Canada’s central constitutional document was the British North America Act of 1867. According to Kallen, “The BNA Act (the Constitution Act, 1867) makes no explicit reference to human rights” (240). The adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms significantly transformed the operation of Canada’s political system. Presently, Canadians define their needs and complaints in human rights terms. Bryden states, “More and more, interest groups and minorities are turning to the courts, rather than the usual political processes, to make their grievances heard” (101). Since it’s inception in 1982 the Charter has become a very debatable issue. A strong support for the Charter remains, but there also has been much criticism toward the Charter. Academic critics of the Charter such as Robert Martin believe that the Charter is doing more harm than good, and is essentially antidemocratic and UN-Canadian. I believe that Parliament’s involvement in implementing the Charter is antidemocratic, although, the Charter itself represents a democratic document. Parliament’s involvement in implementing the Charter is antidemocratic because the power of the executive is enhanced at the expense of Parliament, and the power of the judiciary is enhanced at the expense of elected officials, although, the notwithstanding clause continues to provide Parliament with a check on...
The introductory of Canada’s health care system in the mid-20th century, known as Medicare, led the country into the proud tradition of a public health care system, opposite to America’s privatized health care system in the south. Though Canada’s health care system still holds some aspects of a privatized system, it is still readily available for all citizens throughout the nation. After continuous research, it is clear to state that public health care and the association it has with welfare state liberalism is by far a more favourable option for Canada, than that of private health care and the association it has with neo-conservatism. To help understand why public health care is a better and more favourable option for Canada, it is fundamental
Makarenko, J. (2007, April 1). Romanow Commission on the Future of Health Care: Findings and Recommendations | Mapleleafweb.com. Mapleleafweb.com | Canada's Premier Political Education Website!. Retrieved January 26, 2011, from http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/romanow-commission-future-health-care-findings-and-recommendations
Stella Bliss in the year of 1979 had been forced to leave her job because of her pregnancy only the four days before giving the birth of her child. Stella claimed for maternity benefits. By stating her situation as special the Supreme Court of Canada had not treated her case under section 30 of the Canadian Legislation. Rather her case has been conveyed under section 46 which finally rejected to give her the benefits of six weeks after the birth of the child. What is more surprising the court has sounded the most famously that the inequality is never created by the legislation rather by nature (Joseph, 1992).
In 2005, the supreme court of Canada ruled that the Québec health insurance act and the hospital insurance act prohibiting private medical insurance in instances when long wait times are a reality, violated the Québec charter of human rights and freedoms. The vote was 4 to 3. This ruling is only binding in the province of Québec but does set a president should the argument come up in other provinces or territories. Leading this fight was a 73-year-old man, George Zeliotis, who was a patient on...
Managed care, as it relates to providers healthcare, can be defined as a patient that only sees the doctors and specialists that are in their health plan. In compliance to this agreement, the co pays are lowered by a managing company who oversees all health care interactions of their clients. The reason these costs are kept significantly lowers is because the company has contracts with particular healthcare providers and hospitals. There are three different types of managed care plans that are available. These are Heal Maintenance Organizations (HMO), Preferred Provider Organizations (PPO), and Point of Service plans (POS). Each is a little different from the other, but provide the same basic service, managed health care.
Romanow, R. (n.d.). Building on Values: The Future of Health Care in Canada. Collections Canada. Retrieved from http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/webarchives/20071122004429/http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/english/pdf/romanow/pdfs/hcc_final_report
“The National Council of Women of Canada lobbied for wide-ranging reforms that helped build this country’s social safety net. This large network of local, provincial and federal councils had its beginnings in 1893 at a meeting held near here, in the original Horticultural Pavilion. At a time when only a few women could vote and then only in
Recently, Canada’s health-care delivery has undergone changes, affecting access to services. Although Canada’s public health-care system is universal, privatization of health-care services has increased in the past two decades (Ives et al., 2015, p. 150-151). Privatization is “a shift from the public sector to the private sector in the provision of health services, often with the assumption that the individual rather than the state must pay for these services” (Clarke, 2016, p. 413). The privatization and delisting of health services
Delivering high quality health care to all citizens for a reasonable cost should be a simple thing. Unfortunately, it is not. From the health care debates, we know that a host of complex and competing issues are involved – as are special interests working to preserve the status quo.
My name is Dominique Clemons and I am writing to you in response to your views on today’s Healthcare issues, specifically the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act’s main goal was to cover uninsured Americans, which it did. I understand that is has not given coverage to every American, but it has drastically lowered the uninsured percentage. So, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is not at all a “train wreck” as you described, but it does need some work. And although you were opposed to its passage, I think instead of working so hard to repeal it,
As any proposal, this proposal has some potential negative outcomes, as you may well know. Some of the potential negative outcomes that can arise from the expansion of prevention is that many individuals will argue that all these efforts will not better increase a person's health because its upon the individual to take action and seek these available resources provided to them. Aside from this, many will not like the idea of cutting some medical expenses such as pharmaceutical companies and biomedical companies, which will realize that some cut in theses medical procedures and medications will not be beneficial for the companies' interest. For example, Pharmaceutical companies will oppose the idea of cutting medical expensive because some medication will be cut off the market depending on their effectiveness, and companies like biomedical companies will also oppose this because they will feel threatened that their medical technologies will be cut thus reducing their profit. As a result, this could lead to these industry to make advertisements informing people that expanding prevention is not a beneficial thing to do just as they did with running adds against the ACA (Halfmann, Lecture). Generally speaking, these large special interest groups, from pharmaceuticals and medical insurance companies, these industries have come to show that it when it comes to increasing resources for medical care they generally always seem to promote rather than oppose these agendas (Hemenways 2010).
Countless advancement in medical technology and healthcare have appeared, yet there are still obstacles present in providing quality healthcare for all citizens in Canada. An issue that has existed over a long period of time is the concern of health care and health delivery. The two systems that have been debated over are public health where the medical costs are covered by the government and private health insurance where the citizens have to pay for their own health care. Like many countries, Canada has a mixed public-private system where patients have freedom of choice between which healthcare they would choose for treament. Healthcare in Canada has been seen as a basic human right and is a critical public issue that solely be the duty of