Socialized Medicine Fails Again

Memphis Slim

Superhero
Joined
Nov 30, 2006
Messages
6,996
Reaction score
0
Points
31
Mothers in British Columbia are having a baby boom, but it's the United States that has to deliver, and that has some proud Canadians blasting their highly touted government healthcare system.

"I'm a born-bred Canadian, as well as my daughter and son, and I'm ashamed," Jill Irvine told FOX News. Irvine's daughter, Carri Ash, is one of at least 40 mothers or their babies who've been airlifted from British Columbia to the U.S. this year because Canadian hospitals didn't have room for the preemies in their neonatal units.
"It's a big number and bigger than the previous capacity of the system to deal with it," said Adrian Dix, a British Columbia legislator, told FOXNews.com. "So when that happens, you can't have a waiting list for a mother having the baby. She just has the baby."

The mothers have been flown to hospitals in Seattle, Everett, Wash., and Spokane, Wash., to receive treatment, as well as hospitals in the neighboring province of Alberta, Dix said. Three mothers were airlifted in the first weekend of October alone, including Carri Ash.

"I just want to go home and see my kids," she said from her Seattle hospital bed. "I think it's stupid I have to be here."

Canada's socialized health care system, hailed as a model by Michael Moore in his documentary, "Sicko," is hurting, government officials admit, citing not enough money for more equipment and staff to handle high risk births.
Sarah Plank, a spokeswoman for the British Columbia Ministry of Health, said a spike in high risk and premature births coupled with the lack of trained nurses prompted the surge in mothers heading across the border for better care.
"The number of transfers in previous years has been quite low," Plank told FOXNews.com. "Before this recent spike we went for more than a year with no transfers to the U.S., so this is something that is happening in other provinces as well."
Critics say these border crossings highlight the dangers of a government-run health care system.
"The Canadian healthcare system has used the United States as a safety net for years," said Michael Turner of the Cato Institute. "In fact, overall about one out of every seven Canadian physicians sends someone to the United States every year for treatment."
Neonatal intensive care units in Alberta and Ontario have also been stretched to capacity, she said.
The cost of these airlifts and treatments, paid to U.S. hospitals by the province under Canada's universal health care system, runs upwards of $1,000 a child.
"We clearly want to see more capacity built in the Canadian system because it’s also expensive for taxpayers here to send people out of the country," Dix said.
The surge could be due to women giving birth later in life, and passport restrictions and family separation adds to the stress.
"I think it’s reasonable to think that this is a trend that would continue and we have to prepare for it and increase the number of beds to deal with perhaps the new reality of the number of premature babies and newborns needing a higher level of care in Canada," Dix said.
British Columbia has added more neonatal beds and increased funding for specialized nurse training, Plank said.
"There is an identified need for some additional capacity just due to population growth and that sort of thing and that is actively being implemented," she said.
_____________________________________________________________

Michael Moore is the biggest phony ever....:dry:
 
It's still a better idea for healthcare to be a service and not an industry.
 
Tell that to those pregnant women who have to wait in line.
 
Tell that to the sick kids who come out of the pregnant women who can't get medical treatment because they don't have insurance.

See, I can play to extremes too. The difference is, mine is a lot less common than your typical, Republican talking point, scare people out of national healthcare BS.
 
Tell that to the sick kids who come out of the pregnant women who can't get medical treatment because they don't have insurance.

See, I can play to extremes too. The difference is, mine is a lot less common than your typical, Republican talking point, scare people out of national healthcare BS.


Tell where kids can't go in and get care at a hospital if they need it.
 
Tell where kids can't go in and get care at a hospital if they need it.

Not the point, it's all about paying for it after. We have laws that force hospitals to give any patient who walks in care, doesn't mean it's for free.
 
America is a free market economy......anything high quality has a price....
 
sounds like more of a staffing problem than anything else. how is it bad that the government is helping people who need it?
 
staffing in healthcare across the board is an issue....I know in the northeast US there is a huge demand for healthcare workers....my aunt is an RN and she has to work a 12 plus hour shift because the hospital she works at is severely understaffed....
 
America is a free market economy......anything high quality has a price....

Actually, it's not really a free market economy because the government has passed legislation and regulations to let many industries overcharge consumers for their services, give them massive tax breaks, give large companies advantages over smaller ones through legislation and a whole slew of other interferences that completely taint the idea of a free market economy. And high quality doesn't always mean high price, either. There are plenty of instances of very high quality goods and services not being priced highly or overcharged for. All that aside, doesn't it strike you as a problem that only those people with money can afford truly quality health care? That some people can't get any at all or have to get bottom of the barrel health care doesn't concern you? Health care shouldn't be something that comes at a heavy premium and is only available to those who can afford it, which is one of the primary concerns behind folks who are proponents of some form of socialized medicine in this country. In the end, a hybrid model of service industry type healthcare like we have today (with some better regulation of cost of services to keep them affordable) and a subsidized medicine program will be where America heads. But for those that run around like Chicken Little over every isolated problem they can find with socialized medicine, I have to wonder why they don't do the same over the MULTITUDE of issues our current system in the U.S. carries with it. Perhaps it's because they have stock in Merk, Phizer and Bayer? :)

jag
 
as always Jag, you are good for any conversation. It should bother me that only those with means can afford quality healthcare, but it doesn't. I have quality healthcare through my job. Like I have said in other threads, I feel that all Americans should have access to healthcare, but it should be quality healthcare and not bottom of the barrel. sadly, there is too much money in big pharma and medical supply for anyone who can affect change to be motivated to make change
 
Actually, it's not really a free market economy because the government has passed legislation and regulations to let many industries overcharge consumers for their services, give them massive tax breaks, give large companies advantages over smaller ones through legislation and a whole slew of other interferences that completely taint the idea of a free market economy. And high quality doesn't always mean high price, either. There are plenty of instances of very high quality goods and services not being priced highly or overcharged for. All that aside, doesn't it strike you as a problem that only those people with money can afford truly quality health care? That some people can't get any at all or have to get bottom of the barrel health care doesn't concern you? Health care shouldn't be something that comes at a heavy premium and is only available to those who can afford it, which is one of the primary concerns behind folks who are proponents of some form of socialized medicine in this country. In the end, a hybrid model of service industry type healthcare like we have today (with some better regulation of cost of services to keep them affordable) and a subsidized medicine program will be where America heads. But for those that run around like Chicken Little over every isolated problem they can find with socialized medicine, I have to wonder why they don't do the same over the MULTITUDE of issues our current system in the U.S. carries with it. Perhaps it's because they have stock in Merk, Phizer and Bayer? :)

jag

umm, what he ^ said. :up:
 
Man Your'e source for this story is FOXNEWS???? Good Grief. :whatever:
 
as always Jag, you are good for any conversation. It should bother me that only those with means can afford quality healthcare, but it doesn't. I have quality healthcare through my job. Like I have said in other threads, I feel that all Americans should have access to healthcare, but it should be quality healthcare and not bottom of the barrel. sadly, there is too much money in big pharma and medical supply for anyone who can affect change to be motivated to make change

Wait. So it doesn't bother you that only those with the means can afford quality health care but you do feel that all Americans should have access to quality healthcare that isn't bottom of the barrel? Umm.....okay? :huh:

jag
 
as always Jag, you are good for any conversation. It should bother me that only those with means can afford quality healthcare, but it doesn't. I have quality healthcare through my job. Like I have said in other threads, I feel that all Americans should have access to healthcare, but it should be quality healthcare and not bottom of the barrel. sadly, there is too much money in big pharma and medical supply for anyone who can affect change to be motivated to make change
what would happen if for some circumstance you were to loose your job and all the benefits that come with it?
 
Wait. So it doesn't bother you that only those with the means can afford quality health care but you do feel that all Americans should have access to quality healthcare that isn't bottom of the barrel? Umm.....okay? :huh:

jag

we are at a juxtaposition. We have a chunk of the population that has painted our government as incompetent helmet wearing window lickers, but are demanding that same government provide free healthcare for all Americans. It doesn't bother me, because it doesn't affect me personally....thats the mindset of alot of Americans in this country. I am all in favor of free healthcare for our citizens, but it needs to be done right.
 
I would have to look for another job.....
I'd assume you'd get a new, higher paying, with better benefits job three days before you even got laid off :rolleyes:

but what if it took more than that?

it isn't until you actually get to smell your feet that you start appreciating fresh air and how important it is for everyone to breath it
 
we are at a juxtaposition. We have a chunk of the population that has painted our government as incompetent helmet wearing window lickers, but are demanding that same government provide free healthcare for all Americans. It doesn't bother me, because it doesn't affect me personally....thats the mindset of alot of Americans in this country. I am all in favor of free healthcare for our citizens, but it needs to be done right.

I'd say that the same people who understand what a bunch of idiots are running our country right now are also the same ones who want to see a viable solution that'd done right for healthcare in this country. ;)

jag
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"