The Transitional Federal Health Plan Of Canada

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

Social policy has a role in limiting people’s exposure to risks and making sure that their basic needs are met. Yet, the high mortality rates and the insufficient access to health services shows the Government is not completely pursuing policies to save the refugees completely (McClelland, A. 2014.

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).

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.

Under Canada’s healthcare system, citizens are provided with primary care and medical treatments, as well as easy access to hospitals, clinics, and any other additional medical services. Regardless of annual income, this system allows all Canadian citizens access to medical services without immediate pay. Canada is fortunate to have a free healthcare plan since this necessity comes at a substantial expense for people living in the United States of America. For instance, the Commonwealth Fund's Health Insurance Survey mentions that “80 million people, around 43% of America's working-age adults, did not go to the doctor or access other medical services because of the cost” (Luhby). Evidently, Canada’s healthcare system is notorious in supporting the demands of the population, and creating a healthy and happy society at a manageable cost.

Since 1971 the health care system has deviated from each other. While Canada has had publicly funded national health insurance, the United States has relied largely on private financing and delivery (Goran Ridic). The current health Care act (Canada health act) was introduced in 1984 and it covers almost all the cost of citizens medical cost.  In the course of this period, spending in the United States has grown much more rapidly despite large groups that either not covered or minimally insured.

The delivery of health care services in both Canada and the U.S. is discriminative towards immigrants. Immigrants in Canada are adversely affected compared to those in the U.S. In Canada, immigrants are less likely to have a pap test on time compared to immigrants in the U.S. (Guyatt et al., 2007).

America has a very disorganized and fragmented healthcare system while Canada has a very structured and established system. Since there is no healthcare system in the world that is considered perfect all countries implement polices that they believe will be the most beneficial for their residents, The United States’ and Canada’s systems are both constantly being reformed to fit the current needs their residents however there are strengths and weaknesses for both of the systems.

A literature review conducted using Pub-med database, La Trobe University library resources and collected data from the refugee health related web sites on the rights and access of the health system for the refugee. I used content analysis for analyzing my data. Qualitative interpretation is taking place to analyzing and synthesis the data.

In the book on a citizens guidelines to policy and politics, Katherine Fierlbeck argues that, “The 1983 Canada Health Act replaced the 1947 Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services act

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

The Canada Healthcare act [R.S. 1985, c. C-6] passed in 1984. It ensures that all residents of Canada have an equal access to necessary physician services, no extra billing from physicians and hospital. The act is on five main principles, Public administration necessary services are to offer on a non-profit basis. Next, accessibility coverage with no extra charges and comprehensiveness coverage for all medically necessary services at all times. Portability coverage is to extend to all residents in all provinces and territories. The fifth principle is universality coverage for all eligible residents of all provinces and territories (SEDAP, 2007).

The Canada’s health care system is very interesting in the fact that it is government-funded and individuals are provided preventative care, medical treatments, dental surgery and other medical services with few exceptions. All citizens qualify for health coverage regardless of medical history, personal income or their standard of living. Medicare is Canada is a government funded universal health insurance established by legislation passed in 1957, 1966, and 1984. The Canadian healthcare system evolved, rising cost of hospital and medical services led citizens, progressive health professionals and some politicians to argue that healthcare was a social good not another purchasable commodity. This viewpoint was challenged by those who stated that individuals must take responsibility for their own healthcare needs through private, prepaid insurance plans and that the government should underwrite the cost for those who could not afford such benefits.