• V Dirnfeld.
• Department of Medicine, Richmond Hospital, BC.
• CMAJ. 1996 Aug 15; 155 (4): 407-10.

AbstractThe promise of a universal, comprehensive, publicly funded system of medical care that was the foundation of the Medical Care Act passed in 1966 is no longer possible. Massive government debt, increasing health care costs, a growing and aging population and advances in technology have challenged the system, which can no longer meet the expectations of the public or of the health care professions. A parallel, private system, funded by a not-for-profit, regulated system of insurance coverage affordable for all wage-earners, would relieve the overstressed public system without decreasing the quality of care in that system. Critics of a parallel, private system, who base their arguments on the politics of fear and envy, charge that such a private system would "Americanize" Canadian health care and that the wealthy would be able to buy better, faster care than the rest of the population. But this has not happened in the parallel public and private health care systems in other Western countries or in the public and private education system in Canada. Wealthy Canadians can already buy medical care in the United States, where they spend $1 billion each year, an amount that represents a loss to Canada of 10,000 health care jobs. Parallel-system schemes in other countries have proven that people are driven to a private system by dissatisfaction with the quality of service, which is already suffering in Canada. Denial of choice is unacceptable to many people, particularly since the terms and conditions under which Canadians originally decided to forgo choice in medical care no longer apply.

11 keywords...

hide…