As healthcare reform in Washington turns more and more political, American media often gravitates to the extreme, more sensational proposals from either party. Hard right wingers cling to the idea of America being hijacked by “socialized medicine,” die hard Democrats insist universal coverage is the flawless alternative to what we have. Like most arguments, the answer is probably found somewhere in the middle.

One particularly polarizing point is the Canadian healthcare model. In Canada, healthcare is paid for by the government, no co-pays, no haggling with insurance, no letters of denial, and most importantly everyone is covered always, employed or unemployed.

But there is also no prescription drug coverage, no dental coverage (some American plans lack this as well, like mine), a serious lack of specialists, and generally longer wait times.It’s impossible to compare on a case-by-case basis what would happen to a patient there as opposed to here. A quick look at my very unique case:
The initial $1000 ER-Co-Pay would not have existed, but the cost of medications saved under my insurance plan quickly evens the score. I have no knowledge of how aplastic anemia is treated in Canada—maybe it’s pushed through the system rapidly or maybe my case would have been outsourced to the United States, where there are more specialists  familiar with treatment options. This I can’t tell you.

What I can say is Canada and America are very different countries. Our Northern neighbor has a population of 33 million, California alone has 36 million. It’s a case of apples and oranges.

Reform in America will not be achieved b copying and pasting in the Canadian model, and barring something wildly unforseen, it won’t ever happen.

Foreign examples can be combed over for broad ideas—but in the end we are going to figure out our how to clean up our own mess starting with a long stare in the mirror, building off our successes and learning from our failures.

Thoughts?

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post