Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Do you think the Medical system needs to be revamped? (Discussion/Poll)


In the context of my Thread......do you think we need to re-vamp the medical system?  

25 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Jimmy McGill said:

thats OK, it happens :) 

 

where we disagree is I see better models for care. I see the current structure of the HAs as one of the biggest problems to improving care in the. north. 

 

25 minutes ago, KristoffWixenschon said:

At least we agree that there are better models for care. 

I just cant imagine that care for small communities improves when the needs of each small community must be decided provincially instead of by a health authority.

I might agree to at least centralize licensing to the federal government. It's never made sense to me why a physician who practices in BC has a bunch of bureaucracy to go through to become licensed in any other province. And for a country that imports many of our doctors from other countries, it's an unnecessary hurdle to their immigration process. 

I think a lot of the problem with the local HAs has to do with critical mass - there's not enough population density/population base in each of the HAs to be able to make the bulk purchases (or hiring) necessary to stock up on important supplies (or personnel) at a reasonable cost. 

 

The licensing of medical professionals, as you mentioned, is handled provincially, and this is due to the fact that provision of health care is a provincial responsibility; much like how professional engineers or lawyers are also governed by provincial law.  Good luck trying to get the provinces to release their jurisdiction on this to the feds.

 

Drug and medical device regulation is addressed at the federal level.  Effective treatments are often dependent upon the ability to access the appropriate and efficacious drugs and medical interventions/devices by health care providers (provincially and locally), both physically and financially.

 

When you have that many layers of government with their hands in the cookie jar, and when funding is not sufficient at any level, there are bound to be inequities in provision of service - both in terms of quality and ability.  Sadly, when governments approach taxpayers with an empty palm, the most common reaction of the taxpayer is to tell the government that we're already taxed to death and to piss off.  :rolleyes:

  • Upvote 1
  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

I think a lot of the problem with the local HAs has to do with critical mass - there's not enough population density/population base in each of the HAs to be able to make the bulk purchases (or hiring) necessary to stock up on important supplies (or personnel) at a reasonable cost. 

 

The licensing of medical professionals, as you mentioned, is handled provincially, and this is due to the fact that provision of health care is a provincial responsibility; much like how professional engineers or lawyers are also governed by provincial law.  Good luck trying to get the provinces to release their jurisdiction on this to the feds.

 

Drug and medical device regulation is addressed at the federal level.  Effective treatments are often dependent upon the ability to access the appropriate and efficacious drugs and medical interventions/devices by health care providers (provincially and locally), both physically and financially.

 

When you have that many layers of government with their hands in the cookie jar, and when funding is not sufficient at any level, there are bound to be inequities in provision of service - both in terms of quality and ability.  Sadly, when governments approach taxpayers with an empty palm, the most common reaction of the taxpayer is to tell the government that we're already taxed to death and to piss off.  :rolleyes:

you're correct on all of that, I'd add that individual hospital privileges are granted at the HA level, and up until very recently it was a black box between HAs. That project took about 7 years to work out (I know some of the people involved in that one). That kind of inefficiency is whats hurting our ability to innovate. 

 

Last thing I want to see is the north get forgotten in an over-centralized system, but I also see a HA that's really understaffed and underfunded in many areas. I do think that could be different under a better organized provincial system. 

  • Hydration 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

I think a lot of the problem with the local HAs has to do with critical mass - there's not enough population density/population base in each of the HAs to be able to make the bulk purchases (or hiring) necessary to stock up on important supplies (or personnel) at a reasonable cost. 

 

The licensing of medical professionals, as you mentioned, is handled provincially, and this is due to the fact that provision of health care is a provincial responsibility; much like how professional engineers or lawyers are also governed by provincial law.  Good luck trying to get the provinces to release their jurisdiction on this to the feds.

 

Drug and medical device regulation is addressed at the federal level.  Effective treatments are often dependent upon the ability to access the appropriate and efficacious drugs and medical interventions/devices by health care providers (provincially and locally), both physically and financially.

 

When you have that many layers of government with their hands in the cookie jar, and when funding is not sufficient at any level, there are bound to be inequities in provision of service - both in terms of quality and ability.  Sadly, when governments approach taxpayers with an empty palm, the most common reaction of the taxpayer is to tell the government that we're already taxed to death and to piss off.  :rolleyes:

Although in the UK polls indicate that the public would support a tax rise if it was directly for the NHS. However there isn’t trust that this would be the case 

  • Hydration 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, UKNuck96 said:

Although in the UK polls indicate that the public would support a tax rise if it was directly for the NHS. However there isn’t trust that this would be the case 

One need only look across the Atlantic to see that it's definitely not the case that North Americans would automatically support any tax increase, even one as socially important and responsible as to support health care funding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

I think a lot of the problem with the local HAs has to do with critical mass - there's not enough population density/population base in each of the HAs to be able to make the bulk purchases (or hiring) necessary to stock up on important supplies (or personnel) at a reasonable cost. 

 

The licensing of medical professionals, as you mentioned, is handled provincially, and this is due to the fact that provision of health care is a provincial responsibility; much like how professional engineers or lawyers are also governed by provincial law.  Good luck trying to get the provinces to release their jurisdiction on this to the feds.

 

Drug and medical device regulation is addressed at the federal level.  Effective treatments are often dependent upon the ability to access the appropriate and efficacious drugs and medical interventions/devices by health care providers (provincially and locally), both physically and financially.

 

When you have that many layers of government with their hands in the cookie jar, and when funding is not sufficient at any level, there are bound to be inequities in provision of service - both in terms of quality and ability.  Sadly, when governments approach taxpayers with an empty palm, the most common reaction of the taxpayer is to tell the government that we're already taxed to death and to piss off.  :rolleyes:

 

59 minutes ago, Jimmy McGill said:

you're correct on all of that, I'd add that individual hospital privileges are granted at the HA level, and up until very recently it was a black box between HAs. That project took about 7 years to work out (I know some of the people involved in that one). That kind of inefficiency is whats hurting our ability to innovate. 

 

Last thing I want to see is the north get forgotten in an over-centralized system, but I also see a HA that's really understaffed and underfunded in many areas. I do think that could be different under a better organized provincial system. 

Haha well said. 

Though we have to consider, its not just a funding issue that results in rural health care being understaffed. 

It is insanely challenging to hire, train, and retain people in small communities. 

My wife recently immigrated to Canada and is working as a physician in Northern Health. There were so many barriers in her way. If it wasnt for the fact we were married, she would never have muddled through all this needless Fed/Provincial bureaucracy. But to Northern Health's credit, the reason she may stay for longer than intended is because of the freedom she has within the health authority. She has access to northern research grant funding, paid training initiatives, the ability to get paid to train to do day surgeries and an incredible amount of independence in her practice. These initiatives would be missed in a centralized system and they really fill the gaps in care within smaller communities. 

  • Hydration 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, KristoffWixenschon said:

 

Haha well said. 

Though we have to consider, its not just a funding issue that results in rural health care being understaffed. 

It is insanely challenging to hire, train, and retain people in small communities. 

My wife recently immigrated to Canada and is working as a physician in Northern Health. There were so many barriers in her way. If it wasnt for the fact we were married, she would never have muddled through all this needless Fed/Provincial bureaucracy. But to Northern Health's credit, the reason she may stay for longer than intended is because of the freedom she has within the health authority. She has access to northern research grant funding, paid training initiatives, the ability to get paid to train to do day surgeries and an incredible amount of independence in her practice. These initiatives would be missed in a centralized system and they really fill the gaps in care within smaller communities. 

But we can design the system so that doesn't happen. 

 

If we wasted less money on admin layers, we'd have more money to get staff like your wife into places where they are needed. It just ridiculous the barriers we put in peoples way, good on you guys for sticking with it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jimmy McGill said:

But we can design the system so that doesn't happen. 

 

If we wasted less money on admin layers, we'd have more money to get staff like your wife into places where they are needed. It just ridiculous the barriers we put in peoples way, good on you guys for sticking with it. 

You and me, Jimmy!  Let's get to work fixing this province!
I just don't think you get cool things like a rural health training initiative without the advocacy and insight of a Health Authority.  We need a certain amount of administrative effort to research the needs of communities, interview professionals on what their needs are, develop plans for recruitment and retention and submit those proposals to the province.  All we (the north) usually see out of centralized systems (MCFD, Ministry of Ed) are endless pilot programs that leave people hanging when the funding runs out.  

 

But who knew?  All Northern Health needed to do was to send people out into the world to marry medical professionals and convince them to live here.  I should charge NH a recruitment fee for my service!

Honestly we can thank covid for bringing her here.  The border closure really forced our hand to make a decision where to live.  

  • Vintage 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, UKNuck96 said:

I’m happy with it the NHS but if we change to any system Australia is the one I would want to model it on 

I remember watching an interview with one of the guys that set up the NHS,he was by this time on his 80's.

The thing he said that struck me the most was that the British people had just spent billions on war and killing that it seemed that funding a healthcare system that looked after the British people was a better return for the taxpayer/society. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Boudrias said:

How will GP's maintain practices with the explosion in on-line medicine? It could take a big chunk out of their revenue. You say it is not meant to supplant family medicine but it likely will. Perhaps family practices can adapt and adopt their own form of telemedicine. 

Hospital affiliations impact a physician's creative individualized telemedicine abilities. Because of the type of money involved, software giants are vested to enable adaptation of telemedicine--Lemonaide, K Health, Epic, Engage, LiveHealth, and WebMD are some of the brands.  Hospital affiliations have concluded through cost benefit analyses that paying for a license is cheaper and more productive, and it is more integrative than trying to create something new.  And having an overall integrative platform like Epic makes everything so much easier from a practice management process.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

100% it does. The stories my wife tells me about useless nurses and techs that do nothing and get paid top dollars is crazy. They are all protected. Every evening when she shows up for her graveyard, she always sees the same lazy nurses talking and playing facebook game on their department computers! (they send the new younger nurses to do the work).  A few of the techs she works around basically refuse to go to ER to deal with patients and always send the younger ones. They take complete advantage of students who are doing their practicum. 

 

Of course not ALL heath care workers are like this but quite a few are, mainly the "boomers". The department she works in has been building a case for over a year to have someone fired who consistently puts patents in danger. Some of the things this person has done over the last year would make your jaw drop. The fact it's taken this long is disgusting. That's Unions jobs for yah though I guess. 

 

Edited by kurtis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 4/29/2021 at 7:06 PM, kurtis said:

100% it does. The stories my wife tells me about useless nurses and techs that do nothing and get paid top dollars is crazy. They are all protected. Every evening when she shows up for her graveyard, she always sees the same lazy nurses talking and playing facebook game on their department computers! (they send the new younger nurses to do the work).  A few of the techs she works around basically refuse to go to ER to deal with patients and always send the younger ones. They take complete advantage of students who are doing their practicum. 

 

Of course not ALL heath care workers are like this but quite a few are, mainly the "boomers". The department she works in has been building a case for over a year to have someone fired who consistently puts patents in danger. Some of the things this person has done over the last year would make your jaw drop. The fact it's taken this long is disgusting. That's Unions jobs for yah though I guess. 

 

I think it speaks more towards the lack of empathy and morals of these individuals more than anything else

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/30/2021 at 3:06 AM, kurtis said:

100% it does. The stories my wife tells me about useless nurses and techs that do nothing and get paid top dollars is crazy. They are all protected. Every evening when she shows up for her graveyard, she always sees the same lazy nurses talking and playing facebook game on their department computers! (they send the new younger nurses to do the work).  A few of the techs she works around basically refuse to go to ER to deal with patients and always send the younger ones. They take complete advantage of students who are doing their practicum. 

 

Of course not ALL heath care workers are like this but quite a few are, mainly the "boomers". The department she works in has been building a case for over a year to have someone fired who consistently puts patents in danger. Some of the things this person has done over the last year would make your jaw drop. The fact it's taken this long is disgusting. That's Unions jobs for yah though I guess. 

 

A good union protects their employees but doesn’t stop the bad ones being let go. Especially where the bad one is impacting on others or endangering others 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...