Introduction
Rising health care costs and population aging has fuelled the debate about the financial sustainability of Canada’s healthcare system. This demographic change in the Canadian society will deeply impact on all aspects of social, economic, and political factors. The extensive use of health care by the seniors has put a heavy burden on the universal health care system. This paper will closely analyze the sustainability of the Canadian healthcare system and the challenges our government has to face as our population ages and uses more of the healthcare expenditure. By examining the issue of health care sustainability, this paper will also propose recommendations and explore the implications of those recommendations.
Issues we
…show more content…
It is expected that with the baby boomers significantly using the health care dollars, the provinces and territories will end up spending 60% of their GDP on health care services which accounts to $530 billion dollars of debt ( Robson, 2001). This discrepancy will put pressure on the federal government and encourage provincial policy makers to rely more on the federal government for funding instead of finding their own way to manage their health care systems better. Population aging affects the demand for and costs of health care services, given that seniors account for about 45% of provincial/ government health care dollars (Ng,Sanmartin,Tu, Manuel, 2014, pg 15). Seniors are not only the largest user group of health care, but their hospital visits and admissions are higher than any other age group. This is merely because seniors tend to have more chronic conditions which derive them to use the health care services. Due to the health care problems that many seniors face, it is important to address the future directions in which the sustainability of the universal health care resides.
Current Policies/Recommendations
In order to sustain the health care system, the Canadian government needs to strategically plan for the years ahead and invest more in preventative care rather than curative care. Canada should enforce non-medical health policies which are not only going to promise healthy living for
The disproportionate, poor health outcomes experienced by First Nations Canadians have been attributed to an uncoordinated and fragmented health care system. This system is rooted in colonial legislation and social policies that have created jurisdictional ambiguity and long-standing confusion among federal, provincial and First Nations governments as to who is responsible for First Nations health care (Kelly, 2011; Lavoie, 2013). The responsibility of healthcare resembles a “political football and while it is being passed back and forth, the health status of First Nations people remains the lowest of any segment of the population (Cook, 2011, p. 40). Despite attempts over the last 40 years to address this pressing social issue, the absence
Health care expenditure accounted for an estimated 11% (214.9 billion) of Canada’s GDP in 2014 (CIHI, 2014). Canada boasts a universal, cost-effective and fair health care system to its citizens (Picard, 2010). However, despite great claims and large expenses incurred Canada’s health care system has been reported inefficient in it’s delivery to the population (Davis, Schoen, & Stremikis, 2010; Picard, 2010). As inconsistencies exist in health care delivery across the country, choosing priorities for the health of the Canadian people becomes of vital importance. In Ontario, progress toward a better health care system has been stated to be moving forward by putting the needs of the “patient’s first” (Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care [MOHLTC], 2015). This policy brief will give a background of health care issues in Canada related to Ontario. Three evidence-based priorities will be suggested for Ontario’s health policy agenda for the next three to five years. Furthermore, through a critical analysis of these issues a recommendation of the top priority issue for the agenda will be presented.
This paper will discuss the Canadian healthcare system compared to the United States healthcare system. Although they’re close in proximity, these two nations have very different health care systems. Each healthcare system has its own difficulties, and is currently trying to find ways to improve. Canada currently uses the Universal Health Care system; which provides healthcare coverage to all Canadian citizens (Canadian Health Care, 2007). The services are executed on both a territorial and provincial basis, by staying within the guidelines that have been enforced by the federal government (Canadian Health Care, 2007).
When asked to describe what makes Canada unique compared to other countries, many outsiders might yell out “Hockey!” “Cold Weather!” or “Free Health Care!.” Health care is definitely one of Canada’s most noticeable trademarks when compared to the United States, but the reality is that our health care services are not what they are made out to be. Canadians tend to take pride in the fact that they have a Government funded health care system, but the system is failing at a rapid pace. One can gage the quality of health care in our country while at the emergency ward in any hospital, where most Canadians realize its downsides. The Government spends most of its budget towards health care but Canadians are not feeling an improvement. Waiting
Canada’s healthcare cost constitutes a large share of GDP. Although this may be a good thing as it reflects on a country’s increased wealth and ability to pay for valued care, however in the case of Canada, there is a strongly held belief that the growth rate in Canada is not sustainable nor is it necessarily improving our outcomes.
In 1967, Tommy Douglas had a great impact in establishing Canada’s universal health care system which guarantees health care to its residents regardless of factors such as race or ethnicity, religion, income, and age (Tommy Douglas: The Father of Medicare, n.d., para.1). In the 1974 Lalonde Report it emphasizes that health services were only one of the many factors that affect health (A New Perspective On the Health of Canadians, 1974). Others factors which include income, food security, the level of education, shelter, status of health, social status, employment and working conditions, and living conditions also contribute to the status of ones’ health. These factors are known as the social determinants of health or one’s socio-economic status that provide an insight to the health of Canadians.
Canada 's healthcare system is praised globally for its universal and free healthcare. It started to take shape after World War II in 1945. Health insurance was introduced and was attempted, but was not successful even though there was an increase in the spending of health related services and goods. Fast forward a few years to 1961 where Tommy Douglas, the premier of Saskatchewan, developed the idea for an all-inclusive insurance plan. He later inspired the Medical Care Act in Canada in 1967, when he pointed out health care is a right for all Canadians. From this one thought, Canada has become of the many countries with a universal health care system. Ever since Tommy Douglas sparked the idea for health care coverage, Canada is praised for the way it carries out its system because of several key features. This system is publically funded, is universal and is accessible to everyone across the nation. Because this is a public system, funding comes from the tax payers and some federal funding, so there is no extra cost for the patients. Also, being a universal system it has offered care to all Canadians, immigrants and visitors. Unlike the U.S who does not provide healthcare to its entire population because it is a private system; access depends on how much someone could afford, and how
The Canadian health care system is funded majorly by the public, with very few private donations. Over the past few decades acts of large-scale philanthropy by wealthy private donors have started to increase, due to the investments in social programs and infrastructure from the government declining. Without the aid of private donors and large sources of income from outside of the public (government) the infrastructure of all hospitals, clinics, and the totality of western healthcare systems would collapse and ultimately fail as the system is set up presently. There is an opportunity of keeping a healthy and happy society sustained by public funds, as long as the government is able to step up and provide the healthcare system with enough funds, making the donations from philanthropists an excess instead of a necessity.
Since 1984, Canada has established a publicly funded healthcare system through the provisions of the “Canada Health Act,” which states that the objective of Canadian health care policy is to “facilitate reasonable access to health services without financial or other barriers” (“Canada Health Act” 1). However, many Canadians feel Canada’s healthcare system is financially restricting. This system does not cover many prescription drugs or speciality drugs, which are needed for 41% of Canadian citizens aged 6-79 years old (Rotterman, Michelle et al. 1). This excludes elderly citizens who require even more medications. According to the Canadian Institute for Health Information it is estimated the provincial and territorial governments spent $10.4 billion on prescription medications in 2014 (Matteo, Livio Di 2).
Health care is an essential service needed by citizens. As a result, the government plays an important role by designing an appropriate health care system for its citizens. In this paper, a comparison between the health care system in the U.S. and Canada has been made. Using various literary sources, the comparison has been done considering the four components of health care services delivery; financing, insurance, delivery, and payment. The findings indicate that the health care system in the U.S. is expensive but more efficient than the single-payer health care system in Canada.
In the past, Canada’s government-funded, universally accessible, health care system has been praised and admired both at home and abroad as one of the finest in the world. A great source of pride and comfort for many Canadians is that it is based on five fundamental principles. Principles that are a reflection of the values held by Canadian citizens since the formation of Medicare in 1966. These principles were reinforced in the Canada Health Act, (CHA), of 1984 and state that the Canadian system is universal, accessible, portable, comprehensive and non-profit.
Canada’s healthcare system started in 1946 and is made up of a group of socialized health insurance plans that provides coverage to all Canadian citizens. It is publicly funded and administered on a provincial or territorial basis with in the rules set by their federal government. Since the late 1960’s Canada essential has had a universal health insurance system covering all services provided by physicians and hospitals. In 1966 Lester B Pearson’s government subsequently expanded a policy of the universal healthcare with the medical care act. Canada’s healthcare system is the subject of political controversy and debate in the country. While healthcare in America began in the late 1800’s but was truly born in 1929 when Justin Kimball
Canada’s health care system “can be described as a publicly-funded, privately-provided, universal, comprehensive, affordable, single-payer, provincially administered national health care system” (Bernard, 1992, p.103). Health care in Canada is provincial responsibility, with the Canada Health act being a federal legislation (Bernard, 1992, p. 102). Federal budget cuts, has caused various problems within Medicare such as increased waiting times and lack of new technology. Another problem with Medicare is that The Canada Heath Act does not cover expenditures for prescriptions drugs. All these issue has caused individuals to suggest making Medicare privatized. Although, Canada’s health care system consists of shortcomings, our universal
Medicare is facing a fiscal crisis that threatens its sustainability. The need for significant Medicare reform is increasingly urgent as 76 million baby boomers are expected to retire over the next two decade. According to the 201 Medicare Trustees Report, the Hospital Insurance trust fund will be depleted in 2024. This translates to $27 trillion in unfunded liabilities over the next 75 years. Current projections indicate that health care costs will increase by more that 70 percent over the next ten years and will continue thereafter to consume an increasingly greater portion of personal income.
most of the elderly people have no insurance. There is a 10.4% of GDP that Canada spends while