Medical tourism “ involves patients intentionally leaving their country of residence to access non-emergency medical interventions abroad, outside arranged care (Synder et al., 2011, p.139)”.
In the news story Medical tourism is a sickness, not a cure, Sandra Azocar expresses her opinion on how private clinics in the medical tourism industry are going against Canada’s core values as a public system. The wealthier being able to pay to skip the wait lists and get surgeries abroad is unfair and introduces more issues into our health care system, especially when post care is needed. Azocar strongly believes that this goes against the Canada Health Act of having equal access to care because it creates disparities between the rich and the poor.
…show more content…
Imagine that you are in need of a hip replacement that puts you in extreme pain doing everyday activities causing an inability for you to work at your job. Surgery will be about a year wait in Canada or can be done immediately abroad at a cost. Would you choose to go abroad? This is the same question medical tourists are asking themselves when they make the decision to go abroad. Long wait lists are one of the top reasons why Canadians go abroad because it leaves many patients in chronic pain that they no longer can endure (Synder at al, 2011). Going abroad seems simple yet extremely controversial. Azocar would argue that waiting is the best option because there are risks when one goes abroad and it goes against our equity component in public health care (Azocar, 2013). The public should respond by getting all the information on the situation and weighing the pros and cons. Physicians can play a role in the decision-making and should help educate the patient on their options and help them make the most ethical choices (Crozier & …show more content…
If you have, what if cosmetic surgery was half the price abroad and included a vacation while you are in the recovery stages. Would you choose to go abroad in this case? Cosmetic surgery is not included in the public health care system therefore traveling abroad is an option for patients who can’t afford it in their country but is it worth the cost? Cost is another major reason why many patients travel abroad because it is rather inexpensive compared to their home country (Synder et al., 2011). This is an attractive offer but we must think about the possible risks, complication rates and follow up information (Melendez M. & Alizaden, 2011). Also, this is something that the public should be skeptical about because it seems too good to be true to combine a vacation and surgery at a lower cost. Many medical tourism industries market “worry free experience” and “all inclusive care” to gain the trust of patients (Sobo et al., 2011) but the public should question these statements. We must be weary of the statistics that may have been manipulated by the medical tourism industry to attract tourists for profit (Crozier & Baylis, 2010). This will help the public make informed choices because we cannot stop medical tourism since it is not regulated. The quality of care and safety concerns when traveling abroad have limited data therefore we should only use medical tourism as a last resort and instead
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.
A Canadian Dermatologist who once worked in the United States breaks down the pros and cons of Canada’s health care system and explains why he thinks the Canadian system is superior to America’s. Canada runs a single payer health care system, which means that health care is controlled by the government rather than private insurance companies. One of the main pros of the Canadian health care system is that everyone is insured. He says that in the province of Ontario, the Ministry of Health insures all of its citizens, all important health needs such as physician visits, home nursing and physical therapy are covered. Since every resident is covered under the government plan the problem of patients being turned away due to lacking medical coverage
In the 1990s the government made the decision to cut back on physician production because it though that it had enough physicians (Dauphinee, 2005). This lead to the greatest net loss of Canadian physicians to other countries, primarily the united states (Dauphinee, 2005). It was approximated that 508 physicians left in 1996 (Dauphinee, 2005).
In the past decade, Canada’s population has grown from 5,301,000 in 1900 to over 34,030,589 in 2011, driven mainly by immigration (Central Intelligence Agency, 2011). By 2056 it is expected, one in four Canadians will be 65 years or older, compared to 13 per cent currently. This will put a huge strain on the country’s health care system (Macleans, 2008 p.2). The future of Canada’s health care system is at great risk due to its escalating and aging population. This is triggering a shortage of physicians, particularly anesthesiologists, in some provinces of Canada (Canadian Medicine Journal, 2007). Anesthesiologists are specialist physicians who provide critical care to patients in a number of health programs: operative anesthesia for patients in all surgical subspecialties, acute pain management, procedural anesthesia, obstetrical care, and high-risk medical management, chronic pain management, resuscitation, advanced airway management, and critical care (Intermountain Healthcare, 2011). The current shortage of anesthesiologists is highly impacting access to care in each of these areas. Due to the lack of foresight in government policies, the shortage of anesthesiologists in Canada is increasing and becoming more critical. The Canadian government has failed to train, hire, and retain enough anesthesiologists/assistants for the needs of Canada’s rising population. The Canadian Medical Association (CMA) estimates it would take 26,000 more physicians, presently, in order to bring Canada up to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) average (Macleans, 2008 p.2).
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.
In this paper, there will be a comparative analysis to the United States (U.S.) healthcare system and Canadians healthcare system highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of both.
Dianne is a single woman who has just graduated from nursing school. She has always loved traveling the United States, meeting new people, and experiencing new cultures. Dianne wonders how she can be successful with her career as a nurse but still get to do what she loves. Before settling down and establishing a career in one particular hospital or clinical setting, Dianne is trying to figure out a way to experience something new in the medical field. She has researched and is considering travel nursing.
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.
The issue of a universal approach to Canadian Health Care has been contended for several years. Canada's national health insurance program, or Medicare, was designed to ensure that all people can have medical, hospital and physician services. The cost is to be paid for by Ontario medical insurance program (OHIP). The Canada Health Act was intended to represent certain principles of our health care system. It was intended to be a symbol of the Canadian values. Those values are fairness equity and togetherness. This oneness of a universal approach is what we call the one tier system. Many Canadians still believe the official government stand on this: Canada’s medical insurance covers all needs and services for every insured citizen. Officially then, there is a one level health care system. This paper shall argument that Canada has a two tier health care system.
Recently, Canada’s health-care delivery system 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
The globalization of trade is predominantly relevant for health services that have become a commodity that can be traded in distinct ways. Primarily, health services can be provided across countries. Examples of this include a range of telemedicine tools like tele-diagnostics and tele-radiology as well as medical consultation through traditional and electronic methods. Secondly, patients can travel overseas/abroad to obtain health care or use certain facilities available elsewhere (Pang, 2004).
The public health care system in Canada is still flawed, proven through the wait times that many patients have to go through. Canadians may wait up to six to nine months for “non-urgent” MRIs . The waiting list is dreary for Canadians, unlike Americans who can get their services immediately through paying out-of-pocket, the long public sector in Alberta waits up to a year for services, the wait for cataract surgery was six weeks ; these waits for some patients put the public health care system to shame, and helps push the idea of the privatized health care system a bettering option for the future of the nation. Additionally, 41 percent of adult Canadians said they experienced a difficulty in accessing hospital and physician care on weekday nights and weekends . Furthermore, it is still evident that Canadians in fact pay a higher income tax compared to Americans, due to the fact that they are paying the fund the health care system through their taxes; however, it is still significantly less to pay for a public health care system than it is privatized . Privatization is further proved as a superior choice with regards to the discharge situation many Canadians face. In Canada, it is common to see patients discharged earlier than recommended due the rising amount of patients using the free-of-charge public health care system, patients are released “quicker and sicker” because of this . Additionally, when discharged, the public health care system does not cover home care and private nurse care ; further proving the notion that there is still some forms of privatization already in the health care system in
Health care has become an issue because of the shortage of doctors in Canada. Many of them are either going to the U.S.A. or going to other countries to practice in hospitals and clinics. The earning cap imposed by the government has forced doctors to work fewer hours than are necessary to serve the public. Many Canadians are without a doctor to help them with their needs, and emergency rooms are filled to capacity with no available beds for those who have to be admitted to the hospital. Waiting time for specialist and specialty tests has become so long that someone diagnosed with a major illness may die before they can be properly treated.
In recent discussions of healthcare, a controversial issue has been what is the source of the healthcare crisis. On the one hand, some argue that only capitalism plays a part in the crisis. From this perspective, one can only blame the hospitals for the United States low life expectancy rate. On the other hand, however one can argue that cultural norms and the fact that health care providers are loosing sight of their clients. This essay will address whether the health care crisis is because of capitalism, cultural norms or the disassociation between doctors and clients.
Armstrong, P., & Armstrong, H. (1996). Wasting Away: The Undermining of Canadian Health Care. Toronto: Oxford University Press.