From what I understand not only was there no single place in Calgary, with a population of of over 1 million compared to 56 thousand, that could handle 4 kids, but no place in Canada period.
Granted the info about the no place in Canada period was from a “Right leaning” talk show host and has not been verified yet, but certainly a 56K US hospital in the middle of BF nowhere being able to handle 4 kids and no place in a major city in Canada says something.
Just to add some local perspective, Calgary being a town of 1 million is relatively new, and has happened very quickly. This boom is driven by the energy industry (largely based out of Calgary) which is also luring people into jobs within the sector - that’s putting a squeeze on staffing throughout the region. There not being any NICUs available in the rest of Canada sounds far-fetched - they likely checked neighbouring provinces before flying the family south of the border.
All in all, I don’t see this as much of a story about Canada’s health care system. It’s more linked to the economy in the region and the job-related issues we’re facing.
Like I said I haven’t been able to verify the “All of Canada” thing yet. However I have found a couple other incidences with issues with NICU’s. Apparently this is an ongoing problem that has been happening for at least a decade. I found one instance in 1995 where someone couldn’t find a place to handle triplets. A place was finally found at the last minute, the night of the birth apparently.
When I had my triplets in 1995 they had to do a great deal of searching (up until the night I delivered) before they located an NICU who could take all 3 children, and some of my children were eventually sent to different hospitals for short periods of time during their 9 week NICU stay.
Also not stating that this in anyway condemns the Canadian system or socialized system in anyway, just that when one is pointing towards “A better system” they often time overlook the downfalls of “supposed” superior system. Shortages, longer waits etc are exactly the problems that “anti-National health care” people point at. I think this definitely falls in that category.
Surprising since Calgary just built a giant new children’s hospital… Although i don’t know, maybe children’s hospitals aren’t typically the ones which handle births.
Also Edmonton is closer to Calgary than West Falls Montana, and apparently they didn’t go there. One, maybe incorrectly, could assume that nothing was available in Edmonton either. In essence nothing was available in either the 5th or 6th largest cities in Canada?
I don’t want to get in to deep here as this even sound to unbelievable for me. I’m starting to wonder if it’s a hoax. If it’s not, it seems to be a sad statement on the health care system, or at least in that arena of health care.
~Matt
Edit to add: Vacouver appears to only be 100 miles or so further than West Falls. If it were me and it meant paying for the bill or driving an extra 100 miles, I’d probably take the extra 100 miles. Vancouver proper is only 600K, but the area is around 2 mil. Nothing there?
Oddly though, a hospital with the same number of beds that the old one had before they moved out. Ah well. I don’t know if beds was actually the issue in this case either - I understood it to be staffing, in which case any number of empty beds wouldn’t help.
Anyhow. I’m not personally too interested in the subject - just thought I’d throw in some facts of which Matt wasn’t aware.
You’re probably right - I would guess that they checked all of Alberta, British Columbia and Saskatchewan and came up empty before going south. But when I said there was a “region” being impacted by the oil patch (centered in Alberta), I would include the other two provinces in that “region” as well. It’s a big deal, but not necessarily a failure of the health care system per se. That said, it certainly doesn’t make it a good time to get sick here if you’re on a schedule. Of course, it’s also not a good time to install a new bathroom fan since you’ll need to go on a waiting list to get an electrician to install the wiring.
Again, it’s not an issue about which I’m passionate (or even care that much really) - just trying to add some bigger picture perspective.
PS> They were actually flown both ways accompanied by appropriately trained health-care professionals. The total cost was estimated at $200k vs. $60k for the same service in Canada had it been available. Money doesn’t seem to be the biggest issue here.
Edit> See here for additional local news coverage.
Edit #2> I’ll admit that I just read the original article posted by Matt, and now can see where this went off the rails. Several “facts” offered by the hospital official in Montana are quite incorrect. The cbc.ca article linked above should corroborate my comments and provide clarification.
A friend is an NICU emergency nurse in Vancouver. Apparently there is, if not routine, then regular co-operation between regional hospitals when it comes to saving lives. Crazy huh?
One reason that Canadian NICU’s might be at or over capacity is the phenomenon of the middle aged pregnancy. Not something a demographically based, centrally planned, massively bureaucratic, health system could have predicted.
The Canadian system is easy to criticize but it works well enough for almost everyone almost all the time. More than you can say for most.
Not really trying to “criticize” per se. Some here STRONGLY support socialized health care as a replacement to the current system in the US. I’m merely pointing out that socialized systems have major concerns as well, maybe different concerns but still major issues. Worst case scenario here, what if the US Didn’t have and places for this family because we were socialized as well?
but it works well enough for almost everyone almost all the time. More than you can say for most.
EXACTLY and I would say the same for the US’s system. So why, instead of scraping the whole system, are people not trying to improve upon what we have that already works as well as other systems?
They were actually flown both ways accompanied by appropriately trained health-care professionals. The total cost was estimated at $200k vs. $60k for the same service in Canada had it been available. Money doesn’t seem to be the biggest issue here.
I’m a little confused. The article I posted states they drove. This article doesn’t mention being flown, unless I missed it. Do you know if the 200K included transport and where did you read they were flown?
I’m assuming “Sick Kids” is a specialized hospital? I would also assume that it would have been more cost effective to go ANYWHERE in Canada since it’s already been paid for, no? The question is why didn’t they? So far I’ve only heard that no place in the area could handle it. Not sure how far Toronto is from Galgary, but I can’t imagine it would have been cheaper going to the US in any case.
An article stating they were flown south. I’m sure i read they were flown both ways in another article that i can’t be bothered to track down.
And your opinion on our healthcare is too reasonable - imagine, someone conceding that our system has weaknesses AND strengths… Too often in this stupid forum I see blind attacks with no consideration of an opposing viewpoint…
Hey Matt. It was in the 6th paragraph that it says the Calgary Health Region hopes “fewer high-risk mothers-to-be will need to be flown out of Calgary”. It was also reported by local television news media that the couple were flown to Montana. Also, here it says “But the decision to send Ms. Jepp south of the border comes with a steep price tag: about $7,000 per day to care for each of the four premature babies as well as $45,000 for air transport”.
It isn’t like the actual cost of treating people in Canada is free. Even though the citizens don’t have to pay for it, there is still a cost associated with every procedure done. So it is very easy to picture a scenario where a hospital doesn’t have the resources to treat someone so they send them to the next closest hospital with the resources. And with the way the Canadian dollar is right now, it may have well have been cheaper for them to go to the states and have the US hospital bill the provincial health care system. i can see tonnes of scenarios where it is more cost effective to do what they did. But that doesn’t make for good “news” down south.
“fewer high-risk mothers-to-be will need to be flown out of Calgary”.
Ahhh, I didn’t catch the assumption that these people where flown down, was reading at fewer people in the future will need to be flow out.
Also, here it says “But the decision to send Ms. Jepp south of the border comes with a steep price tag: about $7,000 per day to care for each of the four premature babies as well as $45,000 for air transport”.
I’m guessing that a good portion of the price difference is due to malpractice insurance. A DEFINATE problem in the states. Some smaller hospitals, particularly rural areas, are left with out decent docs because they can’t afford the insurance. Like I said, both systems have problems, just different ones.
Like I said, both systems have problems, just different ones.
~Matt
100% correct on that one. To be honest, i am quite surprised that Calgary doesn’t have whatever they need right now. That city/province is raking in the money hand over fist right now.
It isn’t like the actual cost of treating people in Canada is free.
No wasn’t my point. I’m assuming whomever is running the system there has crap pots full of statistics like we have in insurance companies here. I’m guessing that they have a good idea what the average cost is per person and thus citizens are paying in taxes what we are paying in insurance costs.
In this case citizens have already paid for the procedure, or will pay, and then they paid again to have it done outside the country. I’m looking at it from the perspective that Canadians are pre paying like we do for insurance. Now that may not be the case and maybe Canadians post pay, but I really doubt it.
The “bonus” would come in the scenario that the US delivery was cheaper than internal cost and later on down the line taxes were lowered to reflect the lower cost overall…again I HIGHLY doubt that’s going to happen.
It isn’t like the actual cost of treating people in Canada is free. Even though the citizens don’t have to pay for it, there is still a cost associated with every procedure done.
Who pays for it if it is not the Canadian citizens? This is one of the misconceptions that bothers me about socialized health care; the citizens of Canada are paying a heavy price for health care. The people who live a healthy lifestyle are paying well beyond their share, and the successful citizens are also paying more than their share. Please don’t act as though the ‘‘citizens don’t have to pay for it.’’
My nurse friend has a job that would crush me emotionally in a week. She assures me that there are contingency plans for these type of situations. They try to maintain as close to ideal care as possible while maintaining the ability to do what they have to to get a positive outcome. Putting such an expectant woman on the street is not an option.
My premium coverage works well enough for me and my family all right.
I’m no expert, aren’t about 30% of U.S. citizens lacking any kind of coverage at all? I’m embarrassed to say I don’t know this but I’ve worked on projects in Canada and I do know that there, universal means everyone.