.jpg)
57% of Canadians are very satisfied with their health care
Having explored the facts and principles of the Canadian health care system, it is now time to look at what is good and what is bad. No system is perfect. The Canadian system has those who love it and those who hate it. Both sides are passionate in their beliefs.
Analysis of the truth is made significantly more difficult because of the variations in the insurance plans controlled and administered by each province or territory. A patient's experience can be very different depending on where he lives. Because of this I have tried to identify the specific province when necessary.
Some of the very worst features of American health insurance do not exist in Canada. Accessibility is probably the most obvious. Canada has no medical underwriting and no pre-existing condition limitations. In many provinces there are no premiums although Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario do charge a small premium based on income. No one is excluded because of inability to pay.
These is really only one requirement to be insured under a health insurance plan in Canada, residency. A resident in a particular province applies for a health card. The heath card is issued by the province or territory. New residents may have a waiting period which varies by province but cannot exceed 3 months under the terms of the Canada Health Act.
The quality of care in Canada is at least as good as it is in the United States. Hospitals are accredited against the same standards in Canada and the United States. Accreditation Canada is the not-for-profit, independent organization that sets standards for Canadian hospitals and evaluates their compliance. The standards are in no significant way different than the standards set in the United States.
Medical schools in Canada and the U.S. are accredited by the same organization -- the Lliaison Committee on Medical Education -- applying the same standards on both sides of the border.
The same pharmaceutical firms manufacture and sell the same drugs used in both countries.
According to the latest National Survey, 57% of Canadians believe that they are receiving quality health care. This figure is up from 53% in 2003.
Canadian Senator Hugh Segal appointed to the Senate in August of 2005 as a member of the Conservative caucus. recently questioned challenges to the quality of the Canadian health care system. "What you have is a longer life span, better outcomes and about one-third less costs. That's what you have" said Segal.
Canadian officials underscore is that their government-run system is driven by the value of the care and that the quantity of tests and procedures don't necessarily equal quality.
Follow this series on Canada's health care system by clicking on "SUBSCRIBE to E-MAIL." Comments and opposing views are welcome and appreciated. Rudeness is neither welcome nor appreciated
Comments
Besides the survey results on how many Canadians think they receive "quality" health care, which is rather heavily dependent on the respondents subjective evaluations of what constitutes "quality"... you might want to look at the other recent survey result. The comment box won't let me put a link, but the Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey recently asked Canadians if they preferred their system to the U.S. one.
How many would be willing to trade their system for U.S. health care? Very few. That's 82% of respondents in Canada who are of the opinion they've got it better right where they are... which is not exactly an ambiguous result. And I'd be willing to wager that a high percentage of the remaining 18% have limited knowledge of what health care in the U.S. is actually like. Having lived for many years in both the U.S. and Canada, give me Canadian health care any day of the week hands down. It's simply no contest.
Excellent piece delivering some much needed perspective against some of the misinformation about the Canadian system - one minor correction: Alberta ended its health care premiums this year.
Thank you Cliff. I will check it and if you are correct I will amend the article. A word of caution. You may hate my next article as it will address the other side. And as we all know, there are always 2 sides to every issue. I'll try and be fair. But there are unhappy stories coming out of Canada as well and I have said I would present both sides.
Thanks Grant
You may not be able to link to the Canadian Press survey but I can. I will read it and report on it.
My next article will be reporting the other side. I have to accept that there are some people in Canada who don't agree with you. They deserve to have their side reported as well.
Hope you understand
Oh I have plenty of exposure to the other side... it's how I developed a great confidence that there's little backing up their position. If there was then in all the hours and days and weeks I've spent discussing it with people on that side I think I would have seen some sign of it.
What I have seen instead generally falls into a few broad categories.
1. Argument by anecdote. a.k.a. "My cousin's roommate's Aunt Sally is a Canadian, and one time this bad thing happened to her... so that's what the entire Canadian system is like."
2. Argument by misdirection. Usually taking the form "See! People complain about this thing in that system... therefore you don't want it" while neglecting to address whether those same people would be complaining more or less about the U.S. system if they found themselves in that (the answer's usually "more".)
3. Argument by "Commies! Run For Your Lives!" presented with only a bit more subtlety then I just used there.
But by all means, be balanc
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!