Dominguez Surgery, is our health care really that bad?

Hello Saskatchewan,

MD gets his surgery today. 1 1/2 months from the injury date.

Did MD get bumped to the front of the line?

I thought our health care wait lists were 2 years long.

(thats what the Neo-Cons say)

Is our health care really that bad?


get a grip. Some lists ARE 2 years. Some aren't. And for alot of things, yes it is that bad.

How am I supposed to know? thats why I am asking. I just have a tough time believing politicians.


I golfed with a man this summer who played for the first time since 2005, because for 23 months, he basically couldn't walk due to a hip problem, yet he was classed as non-critical or some silliness, and just recently got a hip replacement.

Imagine giving up two years of your life, but your government says its fine because everyone gets treated the same.

Well, its a tough thing to balance. If you let rich people buy there way to the front of the line then poor people will NEVER get their turn.

I believe the system is too slow, but atleast we are covering everyone eventually.

America has a shorter line because they exclude people who can not afford it.

What is more fair, 2 year wait or no access for the poor?


If those who can afford it are made to use private clinics that are outside of the public system, you are effectively removing them from the public wait list, without reducing the public capacity, so everyone would get through faster. Allowing for-pay clinics would increase capacity overall, helping everyone.

Our government takes the defeatist approach, which is that rather than strive to IMPROVE the service to the poorest to get closer to the service received by those who can pay their own way, they deny those who can pay that ability, and force everyone to endure that which they've deemed "good enough".

They force everyone to the lowest standard, rather than work toward getting everyone the highest standard. Having everyone poor, but the same, is better than everyone better than they are right now, just some more better than others.

There's a word for that....starts with c.....

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

If you set up private clinics, then you are taking Doctors away from public clinics. This does not shorten the line for everyone, just the rich.


All public-

2 Doctors for 10 patients (5 person wait)

Split system-

1 Doctor for 3 rich people

1 Doctor for 7 middle/lower income

All public system is a 5 person wait and the split system has the middle/lower in a 7 person wait.

How is this better?


Just a note. All Doctor clinics are private clinics. They are just funded by public $$.

There are a myriad of public/private systems world wide. Unfortunately the advocates only look at the US as an example.

Our system is in horrible shape. Period. Who knows, it may be the best system in the world, but it can still be horrible. It would just mean the rest are worse.

The biggest difference between public $$ and private $$ is the speed of payment and the amount of tracking that is required. Now, if you add in private insurance as they have in the States, that adds another layer of paperwork.

There are too many people making too much money with how the system is for anyone involved to really be interested in changes.

I thought this was to be a football forum, but it seems to be a political debate. You know nobody wins in politics except the polititions.

I don't feel a lot of sympathy for this guy.
Imagine--a world without golf...?
Seriously, the glass is half full.
Ten years ago, the type of surgery that has given this guy a new lease on life likely was not available at all.
So he would still not be playing golf.
Now we bitch and complain because it took him two years?
The back log on surgeries is largely due to an increase in these types of surgeries that are now available and practical for everyone.
The system has had a difficult time keeping up with these new techniques AND an aging population.
Every health care system in the world has been stressed by this, not just in Canada.
The single most stressed system has been the American model which spends the most money in the world per capita on health care but it is a system ready to implode. Best health care in the world for 5% of the population, mediocre health care for 70% of the pop, and next to no health care for the rest.

It is also a word which starts with c....

Arius, I expected a little better from you. I know you're smarter than this.

Yes, he couldn't golf for two years. He also couldn't work, or shovel the walk, or cut his grass or lift up his grandkids, or dance at his youngest daughter's wedding.

If this guy was a family member I'd have raised holy he11 with the system, but he was a long-time Saskatchewan resident who honestly believed his government when they tell him this is how it has to be, and that really, it's not that bad.

You'll think of me if you ever have the misfortune of being a line entry on a waiting list.

Actually the rich can jump the line here in Saskatchewan. If you are tired of waiting, you can hop on a plane and get the surgery done at the Mayo clinic in Rochester Minnesota and put it on your gold card just like I did a few years ago.

A few posts back, I asked if the public Canadian medical system was responsible for treating pro football injuries and did the tax payers pick up the tab.
I was told in a rather insulting way, that I was foolish to ask such a question because IT DID NOT. It appears now that the tax payers do pick up the tab and our public system is responsible and those who insulted me, knew nothing about what they were talking about.

I am sorry but I am in favour of a teird system.

Why should I be lobed into the public health care system that is horribly back loaded just so that we can all get the same care. I am sorry but if you have had any look arround we arn’t all the same.

Tell me this does John doe who flips bugers at the mcdonalds have the same social economical benefit to making him better than myself who is a Emergency Medical Technician (I am actually back at school taking Respiratory Therapy)??? I would say no. Now am I saying that we should run like the states do where John doe wouldn’t get treatment??? No way lump john doe in with the other John does in the public system and allow thoes of us who can afford to get better sooner get better soon so we can again contribut to society in a meaningful manner.

Am I saying that I should get bumped up the list because I provide a much greater service to society than he does, no, like I said above if I can afford it let me pay to get better quicker, increasing the ammount of time that I work and contribute myself to the benefit of our society.

You can jump the line...
Just hop a plane and go the USA (or wherever) and put it on your credit card. The doctors here even have to give you your medical records to take with you if you ask for them.
I know for a fact, because I have done it.

I don't like the teird system, not because it divides people between the haves and have nots, but because all it will do is become yet another thing that unions will want to have in their contracts when it comes to collective bargaining again. They will want something in their contract that will allow them to get themselves into the realms of the haves...

Thing is with Canadian social programmes is that they have to be universal or else the mean spirited rich will just point their judgemental fingers at the undeserving poor and take it away from them.

what does tierd mean?

I am not sure if I have the spelling correct. I only hear the word when its brought up in political arguments in regard to public health care versus private health care. It is not part of my every day jargin. In fact I think this is the only time I have ever used the word.

To me it means different levels of something.

hmm ok, thanks

They are missing an "e". Tiered.
And I think the definition of "jargon" isn't very sound isn't jargon if it is everyday....

I think you overlooked the next sentence...but seriously....implying I was just teasing over the golf thing, mostly as that was a bad example on your part. But I dd understand the rest.

The remainder of my point, I believe stands however.
10-15 years ago, we would have just told this guy see you later, there is nothing we can do for you.
Now making him wait two years is unacceptable.
I hardly think that is a failure of the system.
sure the wait lists in America are not as long for a new hip. Because 50 million people are not allowed to get in line, and another 50 million are not likely to get in line. And only 5 million people get to the front of the line because they can afford it.
You drop 50% of the Canadian population off the waiting lists and tell me how dramatically wait times will be reduced?
And if I sidestep the waiting list by buying my way to the top, it does not shorten overall wait times.
It just shortens it for me, but extends that time for everyone behind me.
In theory, if in a two tier system, enough wealthy people need hips, and I have no money, I'll never get my new hip.
But the average time will remain the same. If it takes me ten years, but 4 others get their surgery in a week, the average is still 2 years.

"10-15 years ago, we would have just told this guy see you later, there is nothing we can do for you.
Now making him wait two years is unacceptable.
I hardly think that is a failure of the system."

But it is a failure of the system. Why? Because (a) we know that it can be done faster, in fact this wait time can be almost entirely eliminated; and (b) our government not only fails to make this alternate available, it OUTLAWS it, forcing someone to wait. Why should a government decide what a good enough level of care for me is, and then say I MUST accept that decision. I refuse to accept a beaurocrat's determination that two years, to wait for any medical procedure, satisfactorily discharges that governments obligation to provide me with my "health care".

That's garbage, frankly.

And the irony of all of this is, the systems that our NDP government blasts the most (think Alberta, USA) are exactly where we have to go to get treated the fastest.