Should Canadians be able to use after-tax dollars to purchase health services that are already covered under the provincial health plans schedule of benefits?
M y comments would suggest that the debate should not be derailed by the emotionally charged concept of two tiered systems but rather should examine alternative concepts of delivery models. Specifically, single service centers that provide solutions to specific cases, which do not require the cost intensive infrastructure of the general hospital model or impose the risks of infection, present in general hospitals, on patients. With the burden of these patients lifted, the general hospitals can focus more efficiently on those patients truly in need of high intensity acute or emergent care.
Provision of health care through highly efficient, focused centers of excellence would bring down costs while improving outcomes and increasing capacity. Shouldice Hospital is one of the finest examples of this.
The heated subject of private vs public. or insured vs uninsured cools considerably in the face of proven practice of the above concept, especially when it is delivered within the scheduled and regulated public system by a private company.
The key to our health care system debate is not in who delivers it but in how it is delivered. The question of whether or not one should be permitted to spend one's money as they choose should not even be asked. It should be a given right. Presumably they will spend it on the best value they can find and it is our responsibility as health care providers to provide that value. If we do that the debate dissolves.
What do you think ? Daryl Urquhart would like to hear from you ...
Please use the "comment" box below to respond ...
|
|
