Quote:
Originally Posted by Axeman
The biggest problem with the Canadian system is caused by the American system. Canada's biggest issues is a shortage in doctors because we train them and then they head south as specialists for the big money in the for profit system. Couple that with the fact the US refused to build more medical schools to meet their demand in house, has cause a huge need to import their doctors from elsewhere. This is being slowly rectified as states are now green lighting more medical schools to meet their own demand.
Also in Canada we train a lot more GP's than the US does as most doctors in the US chase the gold as specialists. So the GP's we train up here eventually get filtered off to be GP's down south.
Canada needs to increase wages a bit to keep doctors and nurses here, but also I think a law needs to be put in place that if your trained in Canada you have to give X amount of years back to the country. Some will choose to go down south to do their medical school but with the lack of schools there, they may not get in anyway.
|
Will quote you an actual situation re Canada/US - tho it's only one example and can't say if this is a norm.
Was involved with coding of a "patient system" to permit healthcare professionals to access patient data as rapidly as possible. This depended on laws and whether private data would be permitted to be shared in this way etc and plenty other factors - too many and not relevant to the point.
Anyways... The software was developed in Canada and was implemented there are various centers. Among others, a fair number of US healthcare companies expressed interest. It was astounding that the attitude to pricing of that system (it cost a good lump of serious money) was more than doubled for the US market. Why? Because that is what they expected to pay and reflected the ROI by using it. There was no real sense in this - it was just another group of US healthcare corps who were charging excessively high costs to patients who felt they could throw away money at this level (and presumably attempting to reduce the balance on their profit/loss accounts).
Can't say - there is a benefit to a system of this type, but smells very similar to US pharma companies who have a blank check on what they can charge hospital groups for their product. US laws allow this is to specifically happen and without any tenders or competitive quotes. Who pays? Individual patients. It's too swamplife and immoral - tho "legal".
The vendor corp in Canada was, of course, happy to do that biz - they never got more money from any other country for the background abuse of patients - tho that could still possible under any healthcare system.