alth care is in jeopardy?

How Dr. Brian Day wants to change the public health care system

 

What this means is that people who could pay more
for their health care would be able to by-pass the long
waitlists, but that would leave people who couldn’t
afford to do that without that ability to access health
care. Although the public health care system would still
be intact, that would not last long, because as people
switch to private clinics, the public health care system
would deteriorate and wouldn’t be able to sustain itself
as the medical plan contributions would downgrade.

It would receive less funding, which would worsen its
quality and create longer waitlists. This, in turn, would
send more people to the private system, which would
just serve to reinforce the vicious cycle. This increase
in the private funded care comes at the expense of

the public system that is accessible to everyone.

Creating this more profit-driven system similar to the
US one would allow private insurance companies to deny

health care to the people most likely to regularly access
it. In other words, the people who need it the most won’t
get it. Someone who has a chronic illness in the US is
likely to go bankrupt, and many people that are unwell
pay more for health care than they do the mortgage on
their house. Some are even denied life-saving treatment
because they can’t afford it. Even if a doctor says his

or her patient requires a certain medical treatment or
procedure to save the patient’s life, a private insurance
company could decide not to pay it. Should the size of
your wallet dictate whether you have a right to live? Dr.
Brian Day says that he is challenging the Charter for the
rights of all Canadians, but with the system he proposes,
those that need health care most will be unable to get it.

Statistically, public health care is safer than private
health care. According to an article published in the
Canadian Medical Association Journal, in a for-profit
system, adults have a 2 per cent higher mortality rate,
and infants have a 10 per cent higher mortality rate than

in a public care system. If Canada switched to a for-profit

system, it would mean 2,200 more deaths each year.

Not only are the death-rates higher, but for-profit
systems also statistically have higher complications in
their patients. In the two-tiered system that Dr. Day
proposes, these complications would be sent to the
public health care system to be fixed. One of Dr. Day’s
own patients, a Hollywood stuntman by the name of

Michael Roselli, came forward with his story of how after

a knee procedure under Dr. Day’s care became infected,

he was directed to his local, public hospital. Roselli spent

three weeks in the hospital, six weeks on intravenous
antibiotics, and underwent three more operations to get
rid of his infection. Roselli states that “[Dr. Day] took
my insurance company’s money and boom, he’s gone
[...] leaving the taxpayer-funded health care system to
do all the clean-up.” Emergency physicians in BC say
they often have to treat complications from work done

By Lauren Paulsen

Multimedia Editor

 

in private clinics because many private doctors don’t do
follow ups and are inaccessible outside their office hours.

There is also that slippery slope of how much ofa
profit a private doctor wants to make, and unfortunately
sometimes this happens at the cost of the patient’s ability
to get health care. In a for-profit health care system, it
is easier for doctors to deny patients that might have
quite complicated health problems care because it
could cut into their profits to take them on. Although
not all doctors are like this, it is apparent that there
are some out there who only care about the money.

Interestingly, while Dr. Day alleges that the audit
was a “diversionary tactic” meant to force him to drop
his lawsuit, Dr. Day only submitted his lawsuit after
his clinics were going to be audited by the federal
government. This audit came after complaints from some
of Dr. Day’s patients that he was illegally overbilling
them. During his audit, it was proved that these
complaints were true, and it also came to light that Dr.
Day would not only charge his patients for a service, but
then would charge the public health care system for the
same service, earning him, illegally, twice the amount
of money. It was uncovered that Dr. Day had overbilled
for $500,000,
and $66,000
in double-
billing, all in
just a 1 month
period. “Dr.
Profit” certainly
seems like an

“THE CLINIC LAWSUIT CHALLENGES THE
SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT FEATURE OF THE
CANADIAN MODEL: THAT HEALTH CARE
BE PROVIDED ACCORDING TOA PATIENT'S

appropriate
name. NEED AND NOT ACCORDING TO HIS OR HER

It is ABILITY TO PAY FOR THE TREATMENT.”
important that ec cccccececececeeeeeeseeeeeseeeueveseuavaseuavaseuanasees

Canadians see

Dr. Day for the greedy man he is. He himself stated that
a wealthy person deserves a higher standard of care
than everyone else: “We in Canada will give the same
services to a wealthy person as to a person who isn’t
wealthy, and that doesn’t make sense.” Why should
wealth determine whether a person has a right to health
care? Tommy Douglas would be rolling in his grave.

If Dr. Day really cared about the people, he wouldn’t
be advocating to be allowed to charge unlimited
amounts of money to suffering people. Yes, we have
problems with our current health care system. Yes,
waitlists are often quite long, but setting up a for-
profit system like Dr. Day proposes would not fix
the system. Instead of trying to strike down a bill
that keeps the health care system accessible to every
Canadian, we need to look at actually improving health
care services in Canada. Don’t let Dr. Day ruin it.