Skip to main content

Home/ CUPE Health Care/ Group items tagged social services

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Govind Rao

Home care visits should be at least 30 minutes long, NICE says | The BMJ - 0 views

  • BMJ 2015; 351 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h5057 (Published 23 September 2015) Cite this as: BMJ 2015;351:h5057
  • Ingrid Torjesen
  • Most home care visits should be at least half an hour long to enable carers to provide the personalised and dignified care that elderly patients need when being supported to stay in their own home, says a guideline on social care services from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE).1Shorter visits would be appropriate only rarely, said the finalised guideline on home care, published on 23 September. This might be when the visit is part of a wider package of support, made by a carer who is known to the patient, or made to complete a specific time limited task, such as checking that a medicine has been taken or that a person is safe and well.
Govind Rao

HEU Day | Hospital Employees' Union - 0 views

  • Tuesday, October 13, 2015
  • For seven decades, Hospital Employees’ Union members have been dedicated to delivering quality public health care to British Columbians every single day.  For nearly a decade, HEU has supported five occupational subcommittees – clerical, support, trades and maintenance, patient care technical and patient care – consisting of rank-and-file members, Provincial Executive (P.E.) members and staff advisors.  These subcommittees have provided outreach to members across the province and were a valuable resource for discussing occupation-specific issues, including bargaining objectives, health and safety, and general union information. 
  • But last fall, HEU convention delegates passed a resolution to amalgamate these occupational groupings into one subcommittee with representatives from each of the five facilities job families to help build unity and solidarity, while still recognizing the unique needs of our diverse membership.  That’s why we’re proud to commemorate our first annual HEU Day, held on October 13, to mark the anniversary of the union’s charter date in 1944. And to celebrate HEU’s strong united health care team – working together in solidarity – for improved working and caring conditions for all members.  Be sure to send photos of your local celebrations for HEU’s social media platforms or share your posts by tagging us with #heuday2015.  Happy HEU Day!
Govind Rao

Basic income guarantee would lessen poverty ; COLUMN - Infomart - 0 views

  • The Kingston Whig-Standard Thu Jun 11 2015
  • Four million hungry Canadians. More than a million kids living in Canadian households where there is not enough food. Almost 20,000 Kingstonians living in poverty. More than 6,500 people using Kingston's Partners in Mission Food Bank. These are overwhelming statistics. Where do we even begin to tackle hunger? For more than 30 years, we have turned to food banks to solve hunger. The idea that food banks can make hunger disappear is appealing in its simplicity. Hungry people need food. If we give food to hungry people, then they won't be hungry anymore. Makes sense, doesn't it? Unfortunately, the food bank solution to hunger isn't working. Last fall, the executive director of the Partners in Mission Food Bank described hunger in Kingston as a "crisis" that is "off the scale." There are simply too many hungry people and there is not enough food.
  • It is not the fault of Partners in Mission or its many good-hearted volunteers that Kingston's food bank can't meet the demand. The problem is just too big. Food banks regularly restrict how often clients can get food and how much food they can receive. Even still, many food banks run low on food and some even have to close their doors until the shelves are restocked. Don't we just have to donate more food? If only more of us donated more food, then surely the problem would be solved. This is what we are told repeatedly in food drive campaigns. From the grocery store to the hockey game to the muffler repair service, we are continually implored to donate to "drive out hunger" or "fill the food bank." Increasingly, we are asked to "get the word out" by using social media hashtags and posting photos of our donations.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • What do these campaigns accomplish? Undoubtedly, food drive campaigns get some much-needed food and money to local food banks. They provide great publicity for their corporate sponsors. They help companies appear to be good corporate citizens who care about local communities. They give those of us who participate a sense that we are "doing something" about a terrible problem in our midst. What they don't do is solve hunger.
  • Research shows that most hungry Canadians never even go to a food bank. And even those who do can never get enough food to keep them from being hungry. Food drives cannot solve hunger because they do not address the underlying problem of poverty. Across the country, political leaders, medical doctors, public health officials and ordinary community members are recognizing that the most effective and important thing we could do to end hunger is to provide everyone who needs it with a basic income guarantee or BIG. A BIG would ensure that everyone has enough money to buy the food they need
  • The list of BIG supporters is growing every week. It includes P.E.I.'s new premier, Wade MacLauchlin, Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi, Edmonton Mayor Don Iveson, former Kingston and the Islands senator Hugh Segal, former Toronto mayor and current Senator Art Eggleton, Medicare defender Danielle Martin, the Simcoe Muskoka Public Health Unit, the Ontario-based Association of Local Public Health Agencies (alPHa). And the list goes on. In Kingston, a group of local citizens, including this writer, has joined with the Basic Income Canada Network to build support for BIG. An effective basic income guarantee would enable all Canadians to meet basic needs and to live with dignity. It would solve the problem of hunger by ending its underlying cause, poverty. It would address the income insecurity that is affecting more and more Canadians as full-time, permanent jobs are becoming increasingly difficult to find. It would unleash our creativity and entrepreneurial spirits. And it would reward the countless hours of unpaid and volunteer work that so many of us do.
  • Over time, a basic income guarantee would more than pay for itself with savings in health care, education and the justice system. And once there were no more hungry Canadians, a basic income guarantee would mean that food banks could finally close. Elaine Power is an associate professor in the School of Kinesiology and Health Studies at Queen's University and co-founder of the Kingston Action Group for a basic income guarantee. © 2015 Postmedia Network Inc. All rights reserved. Illustration: • JULIA MCKAY/THE WHIG-STANDARD • Volunteers David Norman, left, and Ralph and Kathee Hutcheon pack up one of the 30th Hotel Dieu Hospital's Food Blitz brown bags with nonperishable food items in the warehouse at the Partners in Mission Food Bank in Kingston in May.
Govind Rao

Province unveils plan to keep seniors at home longer - Infomart - 0 views

  • The Daily Gleaner (Fredericton) Tue May 20 2014
  • The provincial government hopes its Home First strategy will help seniors remain safely in their homes longer. It announced it's investing $7.2 million in the first year of the program. "Helping keep seniors at home longer means optimizing the entire continuum of care to ensure the system is delivering effective support," said Social Development Minister Madeleine Dubé. "It is essential that seniors receive the highest quality of care and the necessary programs and services to help achieve that goal." Home First is a three-year plan to enhance healthy aging and care in New Brunswick.
Govind Rao

For Canada, a strong economy and healthy environment can co-exist - Infomart - 0 views

  • The Globe and Mail Wed Jun 4 2014
  • In the 1950s and '60s, Canadians across the country decided to create a public health-care system, following Saskatchewan's pioneering reforms in the late 1940s. These changes were very controversial at the time, with many doctors opposing the "socialization" of services that were previously provided mostly on a private, for-profit basis. A half-century later, despite the many problems that plague our health-care system, the vast majority of us believe that universal access to publicly provided health care is the right thing for Canada.
  • Environmental policies implemented today need to be seen as investments in our future - investments that yield both a cleaner environment and a stronger economy. Keeping our air more breathable reduces the future costs of our public health-care system, and frees up resources for other things. Better protection of our forests and rivers improves our future potential for a wide range of industries that rely on these natural assets. Accepting that a strong economy and a healthy environment ultimately go hand in hand is the first step in what could be Canada's next major economic project. The second step is to explore the kinds of policies we could use to improve both. I'll address that issue in my next column.
Govind Rao

Barrette sparks unrest; Health minister's reform plans panned by many - Infomart - 0 views

  • Montreal Gazette Wed Jan 7 2015
  • But Dr. Gaétan Barrette, Quebec's health minister since April, seems to thrive offthe criticism as he pushes ahead with major reforms to the province's health-care system.
  • The big question, though, is whether the minister has the support of the public and the medical community to accomplish those reforms - already dubbed "la révolution Barrette" - when the National Assembly reconvenes on Feb. 10.
  • ...13 more annotations...
  • "I'm here to listen to the province's eight million people, not the 8,000" general practitioners, Barrette told reporters on Nov. 28, the day he made public one of his more controversial proposals - threatening doctors with penalties of up to 30 per cent of their income if they don't see more patients.
  • Most people who observe the health-care system would say something had to give, something needed to be done," said Antonia Maioni, a professor in McGill University's Institute for Health and Social Policy.
  • During a heated exchange in the National Assembly with Diane Lamarre, the PQ's health critic, Barrette insinuated that she might be suffering from a "form of epilepsy" after she kept repeating the same questions about Bill 10. That remark drew a rebuke from House Speaker Jacques Chagnon.
  • But it's not Barrette's zingers that have made him so polarizing as health minister: it's his plans to overhaul the public system and the way he's gone about it.
  • Barrette, by comparison, announced his reforms only four months after being appointed health minister. None of his proposals - from abolishing regional health agencies to penalizing doctors financially - were alluded to in the Liberal election platform.
  • The reforms were unveiled in quick succession as Bills 10 and 20, with no public consultation beforehand.
  • Barrette has had a hard time garnering widespread support for Bill 10, his effort at restructuring Quebec's health system. The bill has two goals: to downsize Quebec's costly, Byzantine health bureaucracy, and to streamline the governance of its institutions.
  • Critics have assailed Bill 10 not so much for its goal of cutting administrative costs by more than $200 million a year as its objective to eliminate the boards of directors of many health institutions - from rehab centres to hospitals. Quebec's anglophone community is particularly concerned that many bilingual institutions would vanish in "one fell swoop," as former Liberal MNA Clifford Lincoln has warned. The bill would also confer on the health minister - in this case, Barrette - the power to hand-pick members of so-called mega boards.
  • 140 amendments in December
  • continue to make services available in English - a measure that critics contend is still no guarantee for the anglo community. The relatively high number of amendments - even for a complex piece of legislation like Bill 10 - would suggest that Barrette underestimated both the opposition to his reforms and the possible unintended consequences.
  • In November, Barrette tabled Bill 20, which the minister himself described as "first the carrot, now the stick."
  • Like his first piece of legislation, Bill 20 has two goals: to compel both medical specialists and family doctors to follow more patients or risk being docked their pay; and to no longer cover in vitro fertilization under medicare.
  • Many couples and fertility specialists are also incensed by his plan to de-list IVF from medicare, denouncing his proposals as draconian and hastily formulated. There's no doubting that Barrette's proposed reforms are part of the Liberal government's austerity agenda. But beyond that, it's not so clear what his overall vision might be for Quebec's beleaguered health system, critics argue. And that lack of vision might mean the difference between whether those reforms succeed or fail.
Govind Rao

Taxes: not always a dirty word; Civilized society, with universal health care, is fuell... - 0 views

  • Hamilton Spectator Fri Dec 12 2014
  • "Try to think of a word more hated than "taxes"! Right! Let's lay our cards on the table and say we are talking taxes. Politicians promise lower taxes and, therefore, more disposable income if we vote for them. They turn "taxes" into a hated word. The promise of lowering them is like luring a bear to a honey pot because many of the electorate believe they will be better off financially. This is a myth. One has only to note all the "extras" for which you would fork out on a daily basis - that is, if you are fortunate enough to have the income. It's been said "taxes are what one pays for a civilized society."
  • And we are civilized, aren't we? Taxes pay for all the services we expect to receive in a first-world country: health care, social workers, schools, libraries, bridges, roads, clean drinking water and sanitation, parks, food and building inspectors - and more. If these necessities are not being delivered it's likely taxes are being misappropriated or are insufficient - or maybe both. It's clear we have allowed ourselves to be bamboozled by politicians who promise that if we vote for whoever is electioneering, we shall have halcyon shopping days using the extra money that otherwise would have been lifted from us in taxes. The word "bamboozled" is used advisedly. Take our hospitals. In the 21st century, in Canada, are these institutions meeting the needs of all Canadians, no matter the income? The answer is no. This is not to say that there are not many patients who feel they have received good care. But we are talking about "all Canadians" and not only those who have spun the wheel and been lucky. There are so many horror stories in the media concerning mistakes made and neglect of patients that you feel sorry for conscientious staff from all hospital departments who may feel their efforts are not appreciated. These employees go to work each day and do their best, despite being overworked and stressed.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • For years polls have told us that health care is Canadians' No. 1 concern. Yet federal governments, in particular the present one, have handed down to provinces insufficient funding, thus our health care system finds itself in palliative care. One cannot mention hospitals without speaking of their fundraising campaigns. No matter how you slice the pie, fundraising doesn't seem to be the way to run a first world health care system. What if donations dry up due to a national or global economic downturn? Solid federal funding, the disbursement of which is scrutinized by an informed electorate, must result in careful management by our health and finance ministers. This is really "standing on guard for thee" and being a proud Canadian.
  • For some time now, Hamilton's hospital walls and elevator doors have been plastered with massive posters of smiling doctors and patients urging us to "make a difference." It would be interesting to know the grand yearly total of staff salaries, equipment, office rents, printing, mail-outs, massive posters, and full-page newspaper and television advertisements. Even our telephone calls are met with the suggestion that the caller might like to make a donation. How can our health care system survive, expand and improve while being so reliant on the whims of donors? Further, let's not forget the multiplicity of other organizations that are also urgently fundraising - health care has to contend with these.
  • And it may not be widely known that it is the current government's intention to make another $36 billion in health care cuts over 10 years after 2015. This doesn't convey a picture of a future robust not-for-profit system which Canadians maintain is their No. 1 concern. If Tommy Douglas, medicare's founder, were to walk hospital corridors today, it is likely he would see this aggressive fundraising as one gigantic begging bowl. It is all so tacky.
  • According to their literature, the Registered Nurses' Association of Ontario has set goals for public health, primary care, hospital care, home care and rehab, complex and long-term care. Further, Canadian Doctors for Medicare state its first goal is "to help continuously improve publicly funded health care in Canada." These goals cannot be achieved without a big injection of tax dollars which, spent wisely, enable our public health care professionals to deliver the quality of health care Canadians need and deserve. Think about it! Louise Rogers lives in Dundas.
Govind Rao

Wynne calls for yearly cash transfer earmarked for infrastructure - Infomart - 0 views

  • The Globe and Mail Wed Jan 21 2015
  • Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne is calling on the federal government to create a new annual transfer to the provinces specifically for infrastructure, in the same way that Ottawa already transfers billions each year for health care and social services. The Premier delivered a speech in Ottawa on Tuesday that outlines her proposal and called for infrastructure spending to be a key issue in the 2015 federal election campaign. "As we enter an election year, I issue a challenge to all the federal parties and their leaders: Tell Canadians how you will help to build a stronger economic union across our country," she said, at a gathering of the Canada 2020 policy forum. The Premier said Ottawa should have a "Canadian infrastructure partnership" that would aim to spend 5 per cent of gross domestic product on infrastructure.
  • The Ontario Premier said Ottawa should boost spending on infrastructure despite its loss of revenues due to lower oil prices. She said Canada currently spends about 3 to 3.5 per cent of GDP on infrastructure and hitting the 5 per cent target would mean spending an additional $30billion from all levels of government. Provinces generally prefer transfers that have few strings attached and bristle at federal requests to have a say in which specific infrastructure projects will receive federal funding. The federal government's $14billion infrastructure fund is a 10year program and Ottawa is currently accepting proposals for specific projects. The application process has led to finger-pointing between Ottawa and Ontario because there is still no list of approved projects.
Govind Rao

Provinces dismantle the first stage of pharmacare - Infomart - 0 views

  • Toronto Star Wed Mar 4 2015
  • British Columbia struck the first blow. Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Newfoundland and New Brunswick followed suit. Ontario is poised to join them.
  • Fifteen years ago, Canada had a working model of a national pharmacare plan. Seniors in every province, regardless of income, were entitled to public coverage for all prescription drugs. Their only out-of-pocket expense was a small co-payment.
  • ...12 more annotations...
  • Today, the program is partially dismantled. Half of the provinces have scaled back their seniors' drug benefits. The rest of the system looks shaky. There has been no nationwide analysis and very little public commentary, just snippets from individual provinces. Now a Montreal think-tank has pulled it all together. The Institute for Research on Public Policy has just released an informative study, "Are Income-Based Public Drug Programs Fit for an Aging Population?"
  • The institute commissioned three health-care specialists - two from the University of British Columbia and one from Harvard - to track the retrenchment, analyze its impact and offer advice to the provinces that haven't ratcheted back seniors' drug benefits. The authors acknowledge that financial pressures the provinces face are real. Canada's population is aging, drug expenditures are escalating and the economy is no longer robust enough to accommodate rising costs.
  • What they question is the wisdom of restricting access to medicine for the highest-needs segment of the population
  • Former B.C. premier Gordon Campbell was the first Canadian politician to curtail drug coverage for seniors. Shortly after taking power in 2001 he imposed a three-year budget freeze on his province's health ministry. The following year, he raised the co-payment on seniors' prescriptions to $25. In 2003, he implemented an income-tested plan - "Fair PharmaCare" - requiring better-off seniors to contribute up to 3 per cent of their annual income to the cost of their medications.
  • Over the next decade, four of his counterparts followed his lead, imposing restrictions on seniors' drug benefits. In 2012, former Ontario premier Dalton McGuinty went part-way. He reduced public drug coverage for seniors with incomes over $100,000. They are now required to pay the first $100 of their annual drug bill and a $6.11 co-payment (triple the standard seniors' fee of $2) for each prescription. In 2013, Alberta indicated it was considering the B.C. model. That is where things now stand.
  • The appeal of eliminating universal drug coverage is obvious. It reduces the burden on the public purse. It makes medicare more sustainable. It targets benefits to those who really need them. What's not to like? Three things, the authors say:
  • It is detrimental to the health of seniors. The more financial barriers governments put in front of elderly residents, the less likely they are to fill their prescriptions. Seniors in B.C. forgo drug treatment at twice the rate of their Ontario counterparts. Although they pay the highest price, taxpayers lose, too. Providing older people with medically necessary drugs is much cheaper than paying their hospital bills when their conditions become unmanageable.
  • It penalizes Canadians over 65 with chronic conditions or serious disabilities. "In effect the deductibles under income-based programs are tantamount to imposing a specific income tax on people with the highest medical needs," the authors say. This violates the spirit of medicare. And it is financially inefficient. By unloading the cost of medications on seniors and private insurers, governments reduce their leverage in the pharmaceutical marketplace. The fewer citizens they buy for, the less bargaining power they have.
  • There is a fourth drawback the authors don't mention. The premiers are pushing a full-fledged pharmacare plan out of reach, in defiance of the will of their citizens. Public opinion polls consistently show that 75 to 90 per cent of Canadians want medically necessary drugs brought into medicare. That was part of the vision forged by Saskatchewan premier Tommy Douglas and chief justice Emmett Hall, chair of the Royal Commission on Health Services half a century ago. They recommended that the cost of hospitalization be lifted from families' shoulders first; physicians' fees would be covered next; and finally prescription drugs would be publicly insured.
  • Today Canada is the only country in the developed world with a universal public health-care system that excludes coverage of prescription drugs. Policy-makers were inching in the right direction until the turn of the millennium. As of 2000, seniors, social assistance recipients and aboriginal people had full drug coverage.
  • Now the premiers are moving backward, creating an inequitable patchwork of drug coverage for seniors and lowering the likelihood of pharmacare for everyone else. The short-term savings may look appealing. The long-term costs will add up in ways Canadians haven't begun to contemplate.
  • Carol Goar'
Govind Rao

Eastern Kings feels neglected by Health P.E.I. - Editorials - The Guardian - 0 views

  • March 10, 2015
  • Bright yellow flyers have been sent to mailboxes, displayed in public areas and notices have been included in church bulletins. There should be no excuses for residents of Eastern Kings County to be unaware of tonight’s public meeting on improving health care services for the region. The pamphlet’s colour is an obvious warning sign that residents are not satisfied with Health P.E.I.’s treatment of Eastern Kings and are seeking assurances things will improve.
Govind Rao

Primary health care reform is the way forward: NLMA president - Local - The W... - 0 views

  • March 13, 2015
  • With the province facing fiscal challenges, Dr. Wendy Graham says the Newfoundland and Labrador Medical Association is paying particular attention to the effective use of the province’s health resources.
  • While doctors’ first responsibility is the health and well-being of their patients, they also must be stewards of the health care system.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • People in the province are getting sicker, she said, noting an aging population and the Conference Board of Canada’s recent D-minus grade and description as being unhealthy and inactive. Newfoundland and Labrador has a per capita health care services spending of more than $5,000 per person, according to the doctor who practices out of Port aux Basques.
Govind Rao

Quebec health reform Bill 10 puts Health Minister at centre | Evidence Network - 0 views

  • Micro-management of the health system not the answer
  • Quebec has begun the process of reforming its beleaguered health care system yet again with the introduction of Bill 10. But will Bill 10 fulfill its promises of reconfiguring the organization and governance of Quebec’s health and social services?
Govind Rao

CUPE Ontario | Solidarity with striking nurses - 0 views

  • Nearly 3000 nurses, nurse practitioners, RPNs, social workers, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, speech therapists and allied health professionals at CCACs across the province went on strike January 30. CUPE Ontario supports our sisters and brothers in ONA in their fight for a fair contract, and encourages members to join ONA picket lines in solidarity.
  • "We must stand together and make sure the provincial government hears how their budgets are cutting services and putting the squeeze on dedicated, front-line workers," says CUPE Ontario President Fred Hahn. "This fight is our fight. What nurses face today is what we all face every day. Together, we shall overcome government cuts and unfair employers. Together, we shall build the Ontario we all deserve."
Govind Rao

Canada needs a national seniors strategy - Infomart - 0 views

  • Toronto Star Fri Jan 30 2015
  • As Canada's premiers prepare to gather in Ottawa on Friday to meet as the Council of the Federation, we would like to remind them why a national seniors strategy must be high on their agenda. The Mental Health Commission of Canada reported last week that family caregivers in Canada are experiencing extreme stress. Among those aged 15 and over who provide care to an immediate family member with a chronic condition, 16.5 per cent reported very high levels of stress. Some 35 per cent of the workforce is providing care to a relative or friend, accounting for an annual loss in productivity of $1.3 billion.
  • Statistics Canada reports that family caregivers contribute an estimated $5 billion of unpaid labour to the health-care system. As our country's older population grows, the need for care will only multiply. Recent Nanos public opinion polls conducted for the Canadian Medical Association and the Canadian Nurses Association found that an overwhelming majority of Canadians want the federal parties to improve financial support to family caregivers and to make seniors care part of their election platforms. The tumbling dollar and sagging oil prices may get the headlines from the Jan. 30 council meeting. The real story, however, is how our municipal, provincial and federal treasuries are at risk of being overwhelmed by Canada's growing senior population and the health-care system's inability to meet the demand.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • The federal government has made a start with the creation of the Employer Panel for Caregivers and the Family Caregiver Tax Credit. However, it must do more to make a meaningful difference in the lives of Canadians caring for family members. For example, making the caregiver tax credit refundable would help mitigate care costs such as paying out of pocket for prescriptions, groceries and personal care items or taking time off work for medical appointments. Until all levels of government come together to form a comprehensive pan-Canadian seniors strategy, piecemeal initiatives will have a limited impact.
  • In a way, our generation has become a victim of our own success. Progress and innovation in medicine mean Canadians are living longer. At the same time, more people are living with chronic diseases that complicate both their health status and the treatment they need. Treatment of chronic diseases consumes 67 per cent of all direct health-care costs. Chronic disease is the main reason seniors require health care. In 2011, between 74 and 90 per cent of Canada's seniors suffered from at least one chronic condition, while nearly one-quarter had two or more. These conditions jeopardize a person's ability to live independently at home.
  • On any given day in Canada, "alternative level of care" patients - that is, patients approved for hospital discharge who cannot access appropriate post-hospital care - occupy about 7,500 beds. Hospitals are routinely forced into a state of overcapacity called "code gridlock" in which patient flow grinds to a halt, elective surgeries are cancelled and transfers are put on hold. If you are in a car accident or have a heart attack, our health-care system can effectively mobilize world-class acute health-care services. But the system is woefully inadequate and under-resourced to properly prevent, manage or treat the long-term and chronic health problems facing most of our over 65 population.
  • Too often, seniors who could and should be getting better are languishing in hospitals when more efficient and effective care could be delivered in their homes or in a long-term care facility. It costs $1,000 to keep a person in a hospital bed for a day. Long-term care costs $130 a day. Home care (excluding the economic costs of caregivers looking after relatives) costs $55. That translates to approximately $2.3 billion a year that could be better spent in the health-care system with some strategic thinking and investing. This country as we know it today was, in fact, built by our seniors - by our own mothers and fathers, aunts and uncles and grandparents. Canada's health-care providers are determined and committed to prioritizing and improving their health. We expect the same of our country's leaders. As the premiers gather just blocks from Parliament Hill, we ask that a comprehensive healthy aging and seniors care strategy be at the top of their agenda.
  • Christopher Simpson, MD, is president of the Canadian Medical Association. Morel Caissie is president of the Canadian Association of Social Workers. Karima Velji is president of the Canadian Nurses Association.
Govind Rao

Voluntary caregivers: the invisible backbone of medicare - Infomart - 0 views

  • Toronto Star Mon Feb 9 2015
  • Four years ago, Michael Ignatieff presented himself as a smart, sophisticated patriot, eminently qualified to lead the nation. Voters perceived him as an aloof, self-absorbed academic who didn't understand the country or its people. His political career was mercifully brief.
  • But the former Liberal leader got one thing right: He recognized unpaid caregivers as the backbone of Canada's health-care system and offered them support. His "family care plan" would have given workers caring for a seriously ill family member six months of paid leave and offered those outside with no earnings a monthly allowance of $1,350. Ignatieff's proposal sank with him in the last federal election. The Liberals have not resurrected it.
  • ...7 more annotations...
  • The only vestige that remains is a modest Conservative tax break. Seeking to undercut the Liberals on the eve of the 2011 campaign, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced a family caregiver tax credit of less than $1 a day. It applies to just 18 per cent of the 2.7 million Canadians who sacrifice their income, career prospects and sometimes their health to care for loved ones. With another federal election approaching - and the baby boom generation entering retirement - caregivers have been pushed to the periphery of the federal agenda.
  • The provinces still talk about them - praising their dedication and selflessness - but don't provide enough home care or respite care to ease the physical burden or alleviate the loneliness of caring for a family member with dementia, severe disabilities or chronic illness. Advocacy groups lobby for seniors but seldom focus on the family members who feed, clothe, bathe and clean up after those who need round-the-clock care.
  • Only when caregivers burn out requiring medical attention do policy-makers pay attention. Ken Wong, a robotics engineer who quit his job to care for his wife, diagnosed seven years ago with early-onset dementia, wants to avoid that fate. Last week, he wrote a poignant letter to his MPP, Helena Jaczek (who represents Oak Ridges-Markham and serves as minister of community and social services), pleading for relief. With his permission, here are a few excerpts:
  • "Some days are very tough to get through. She (his 53-year-old wife Nada) frequently screams and becomes agitated - sometimes for hours on end, night and day. It is a very exhausting and challenging role. "It is a lonely job. For whatever reasons, most friends and family seem to have distanced themselves. Sometimes there is more compassion from strangers.
  • "I am keeping my promise to my wife to cherish and protect her for better or worse, in sickness and in health till death do us part. But it is a long goodbye." Wong didn't ask for much. He suggested that Ontario look at Nova Scotia's five-year-old caregiver benefit. Early research shows the $400-a month payment has reduced the probability of institutionalization by 56 per cent. He appealed to Jaczek to take the idea to the cabinet table for consideration in this spring's budget. He ended his letter with a heartfelt plea: "Caregivers need your support to be strong physically, emotionally and spiritually to endure the daily demands for many years."
  • They don't appear to be a high priority for Health Minister Eric Hoskins. His "action plan for health care," released last week, did not mention caregivers. (Officials in his department pointed out that families can request temporary respite care at their local community care access centre.) The federal outlook is cloudy-to-bleak. The Conservatives are content with the status quo. The Liberals have said nothing specific, although Justin Trudeau has talked about the overstretched sandwich generation (families with young children and elderly parents). Only the Democrats, who are running third in popular support, are offering tangible help. They would introduce a caregiver tax benefit modelled on the child disability benefit (which provides a monthly payment of up to $220 for parents caring for a severely impaired child).
  • For the most part, caregivers are out of sight and out of mind. They are easy to take for granted. They're quiet, steadfast and undemanding. They deplete their savings and sacrifice their freedom. Without them, the cost of health care would skyrocket. A smart government would safeguard such a vital asset. Carol Goar's column appears Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
Govind Rao

We must create healthy workplaces across the health care sector - Healthy Debate - 0 views

  • by Amy Katz, Ahmed Bayoumi, Azad Mashari & Andrew Pinto (Show all posts by Amy Katz, Ahmed Bayoumi, Azad Mashari & Andrew Pinto) March 25, 2015
  • Recently, Access Alliance, a community health centre in Toronto, posed an interesting challenge to fellow health care, education, child care and social service organizations: get rid of precarious jobs in the public sector.
Govind Rao

Liberals get it right with focus on home care - Infomart - 1 views

  • The Globe and Mail Thu Jan 28 2016
  • The Liberal government has made so many ambitious promises that a mixture of relief and surprise greets the discovery of promises it could have made, but did not. Take health care, an important area of social policy where the Liberals, being Liberals, made a host of smallish promises. However, several big promises the party did not make are as interesting and important as the ones it did.
  • For example, the Liberals did not promise a national pharmacare program, as did the New Democrats, and as advocated by Ontario's Liberal government. The Liberals did not promise, as do the NDP and health-care unions, to restore annual 6-percent increases in federal transfer payments to the provinces for health care. The Liberals did not mention by how much the transfers would rise, but it will be something less than 6 per cent. The final number will emerge from tug-of-war negotiations with the provinces.
  • ...5 more annotations...
  • Those negotiations have not yet begun. At last week's meeting of provincial health ministers, to which federal Health Minister Jane Philpott was invited, she shooed away any mention of money, which, at this stage of the game, is the correct approach. Meanwhile, the provincial health ministers said they would work on what a national prescription-drug plan would look like and cost - the cost having squelched the idea of national pharmacare in the past. Several academics, often quoted in the press, believe that national pharmacare would save money. Almost nobody else does, which is why the idea has never got off the ground. Quebec has discovered that its public plan, more elaborate than any other, costs a lot more than anyone had anticipated. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's instructions in Dr. Philpott's mandate letter are much more limited. Since Ottawa spends in the order of $1-billion on drugs for aboriginal people and the military, let Ottawa join the provinces in more bulk drug purchases to lower costs. She is also to "explore" the idea of a national formulary - an excellent idea since no logical reason exists for every province to have one. Again, though, this is far from national pharmacare.
  • What the Liberals do want is directed spending on home care. Here, the federal-provincial negotiations will be fascinating, and perhaps consequential for patients. The federal Liberals are always tempted to put strings around the health-care dollars Ottawa sends to the provinces. Ottawa doesn't deliver health care to Canadians (except the military and aboriginal people) and it's paying a smaller share of overall health-care spending than years ago.
  • Yet the Liberal itch to influence, if not direct, how federal transfers should be spent never dies. The trouble is that every time previous Liberal governments pulled out string to wrap around the transfers, at least some of the provinces said: Just give us the cash and stuff the strings away. We do health care; you write cheques. We set priorities; you help pay. This time, though, the provinces are aware of their burgeoning number of older citizens, an increasing share of whom need or prefer to be cared for at home rather than in institutions. Provinces need to save money, too, and care at home costs less than care in a hospital bed. Home care also keeps some patients from emergency rooms and reduces calls to paramedics.
  • The strategic health-care plans of almost every province underscore the importance of home care. So do provincial health-care budgets, which are giving new money to home care and little or none to hospitals. Now, along comes a federal government willing to hand over money - how much remains to be seen - in what the minister's mandate letter describes as a "long-term funding agreement" that would "support the delivery of more and better home-care services."
  • Beefing up home care is what Ottawa wants. It seems to be what the provinces want. But will the provinces sign an agreement that binds them to spend at least some of the federal money for this purpose only? Or will the provinces offer vague assurances that cannot be monitored? Perhaps some (hello, Quebec) will say: Give us the money to spend as we wish, health care being provincial jurisdiction. Maybe home care; maybe not. We'll decide. Home care is the correct priority in a health-care world with endless priorities and incessant demands. Can the often-disputatious Canadian governments pull together around this common objective?
Govind Rao

FSSS-CSN rejects Quebec's contract deal with public sector - Montreal - CBC News - 0 views

  • Government gives union representing more than 100,000 employees until Monday to reconsider its position
  • Mar 04, 2016
  • A Quebec union representing over 100,000 public workers in health care and social services has rejected a tentative deal with the provincial government.
Govind Rao

Private MRIs wrong prescription - Infomart - 0 views

  • The Leader-Post (Regina) Mon Oct 26 2015
  • In the final sitting of the legislature before the spring election, Premier Brad Wall's government plans to pass Bill 179 to facilitate private user-pay MRIs in Saskatchewan. As a longtime family doctor, I see this as a cynical political move that caters to public fears about long wait lists for imaging, but which will actually work to make things worse for patients who truly need an MRI.
  • There is very clear evidence that, far from relieving pressures in the public system, offering a separate stream for the wealthy to jump the queue actually lengthens public wait lists. This has been shown over and over again, whether it be with cataract surgery, diagnostic imaging or surgical procedures. MRI is no different.
  • ...10 more annotations...
  • In Alberta, where private MRI facilities advertise and operate, the median wait time for an MRI is much longer (80 days) than in Saskatchewan (28 days). Furthermore, the wait has lengthened in the public system in Alberta since privatized facilities came on the scene. The explanations are complex, but siphoning human capacity (doctors and technologists), as well as other resources, from the public system into the private and more lucrative stream plays a big role. So does the market generation of increased demand by deceptive advertising and promotion of privatized services.
  • Medical tests should be ordered in accordance with evidence-based guidelines about their usefulness and indications. Patient access to MRI is currently prioritized in Saskatchewan health-care facilities on the basis of medical need, from Level I (a life-threatening diagnosis or treatment requiring MRI within 24 hours) to a Level IV (stable patients needing long range diagnosis or management allowing for delay of 30-90 days).
  • This system works and prioritizes appropriately. While patients sometimes feel that an urgent MRI will make a difference to their outcome, this is rarely the case. When it is the case, patients are prioritized and get urgent access. Allowing private MRI's based on ability to pay and jump the queue will trample this well-developed, equitable system. It will allow the wealthy or anxious to bypass this system and result in two-tiered care.
  • We live in a society obsessed with health. Selling fear of sickness is profitable. But access to MRIs is not our most urgent health-care need. To suggest otherwise is to obscure the social and economic determinants that define who is healthy and who is not, and to further shift resources away from the sick towards the worried well.
  • The Wall government and the private MRI operators that will profit from this legislation have proposed a two-for-one deal, suggesting that one public MRI scan will be done for every private MRI performed. Don't be fooled. This will not get around the problem of prolonging public wait lists since it will siphon resources from the public system. If we really need more MRIs, why not increase capacity in the public system instead?
  • While MRI can be a useful tool, when inappropriately used it can lead to overdiagnosis or "false positives." This then triggers a costly cascade of subsequent investigations or interventions to reassure either physician or patient MRI technology has important limitations, and frequently finds unrelated non-significant abnormalities that frighten patients. For example, 90 per cent of healthy individuals over 60 years of age with no symptoms of back pain show degenerative abnormalities on MRI. Similarly, the vast majority of adults over 50 show knee damage on MRI and only clinical assessment by a doctor identifies whether or not these findings are significant. Early MRI has not been shown to improve outcomes in low back pain and may actually make for worse outcomes. A doctor examining for red flag symptoms can identify the very small number of patients for whom an MRI is useful.
  • Many MRI scans are therefore unnecessary. Allowing patients to purchase an investigation they don't need wastes resources, bypasses the role of an informed health-care provider, and may in the end actually harm patients with needless investigations and interventions. Physicians are engaged in initiatives to "choose wisely" in testing. Throwing the door open to investigations based on ability to pay, rather than medical need, flies in the face of sensible approaches to health resources.
  • And the queue-jumping is not just limited to getting an MRI. It will extend to preferential and quicker access to treatment options, such as specialist care and surgery based on the MRI results if positive.
  • Let's promote greater equity, not less, and preserve health care based on need, not two-tiered care based on ability to pay. Let's trust health-care providers to counsel patients about the right test at the right time and to prioritize patients appropriately. The marketplace has no role in these decisions.
  • Dr. Sally Mahood is a Regina family doctor and an associate professor, Family Medicine, University of Saskatchewan.
Govind Rao

NDP brings to an end Alberta PCs' bizarre experiment with one-person heath-care rule | ... - 0 views

  • October 24, 2015
  • A bizarre two-year era of one-person rule over Alberta's massive, sprawling health care agency came to an end yesterday when the New Democratic Government of Premier Rachel Notley appointed a conventional board of directors to run Alberta Health Services.
« First ‹ Previous 201 - 220 of 223 Next ›
Showing 20 items per page