Skip to comments.
Overeaters, smokers and drinkers: the doctor won't see you now
Macleans ^
| April 18, 2006
| NICHOLAS KOHLER AND BARBARA RIGHTON
Posted on 04/25/2006 9:20:47 AM PDT by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-91 next last
This is an excerpt from Macleans -- Canada's dead-tree answer to Newsweek.
When the public health care monopoly was introduced in Canada, the deal was equal treatment for everyone. Now, we see that some people are more equal than others. We've gotten used to waiting lists, and other more subtle forms of rationing. Now, we're seeing flat-out social engineering.
This is an excerpt; because I'm not sure about the rules for posting from Macleans. The whole article is available on line at the link & is worth reading as a cautionary tale about socialized public health care monopolies.
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
Doctors should have the right to refuse patients just as business owners should be able to turn away potential customers.
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
Ah, socialized medicine. Always so good.
3
posted on
04/25/2006 9:26:09 AM PDT
by
wizardoz
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
They're not going to have many patients if they turn down Canadians who drink.
4
posted on
04/25/2006 9:27:06 AM PDT
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: fanfan
5
posted on
04/25/2006 9:27:52 AM PDT
by
Springman
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
I guess this means that homosexual AIDS patients will go to the back of the line. /sarc
6
posted on
04/25/2006 9:27:52 AM PDT
by
garv
To: Cathryn Crawford
To: ConservativeMind
Doctors should have the right to refuse patients just as business owners should be able to turn away potential customers. In a free market certainly, but medical care is socialized in Canada.
They've forced people into an system where they're denied medical care. And there are no other options in the country.
8
posted on
04/25/2006 9:29:45 AM PDT
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: ConservativeMind
''Doctors should have the right to refuse patients just as business owners should be able to turn away potential customers.''
... and the first people they should refuse to treat are lawyers and politicians.
9
posted on
04/25/2006 9:30:50 AM PDT
by
Lexington Green
(Politician - Lawyer - Journalist.... when you lie for a living)
To: ConservativeMind
The problem is, we have a health care monopoly. If doctors within the system won't treat them, there is no where else for these patients to go.
This would be comparable to your HMO refusing to treat you, after you've been making payments your whole life. If an American HMO tried that on a wholesale basis, it would quickly lose its client base to competitors. Canadians don't have any alternative to the public monopoly.
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
"Transplant teams who turn drinkers down flat."
If the transplant is for a liver that the person ruined by drinking it's no shock. Same thing happens here in the U.S.
11
posted on
04/25/2006 9:31:47 AM PDT
by
Bikers4Bush
(Flood waters rising, heading for more conservative ground. Vote for true conservatives!)
To: garv
"I guess this means that homosexual AIDS patients will go to the back of the line."/sarcasm
and, the elderly should be shuffled far, far back in the line since we all know its all down hill for them anyway...../sarcasm
12
posted on
04/25/2006 9:32:14 AM PDT
by
cherry
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
Guess after they (the doctors' offices) get through the gene marker screening (DNA) for hereditary diseases, HIV+ folk, drinkers, smokers, overeaters, workaholics, drug abusers, mentally handicapped, physically handicapped, sex addicts, insomniacs, caffeine addicted, diabetics, hypertension afflicted, and the folks that already are sick to send to the back of the line, being a doctor in Canada will be a breeze, right?
13
posted on
04/25/2006 9:35:15 AM PDT
by
RSmithOpt
(Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
To: dead
Socialized medical care = rationed medical care.
Soon, rationing will be by government guidelines and edicts.
Then, the sad commentary will be:
First, they came for the drug addicts. But I didn't use drugs, so it didn't matter to me.
Next, they came for the drinkers. But I didn't drink, so it didn't matter to me.
Then, they came for the obese. But I wasn't obese, so it didn't matter to me.
Then, they came for the weak and unproductive. But I was afflifted by neither, so it didn't matter to me.
Then, they came for the elderly. But I'm only 50, so it didn't matter to me.
14
posted on
04/25/2006 9:35:50 AM PDT
by
Mad_Tom_Rackham
(A Liberal: One who demands half of your pie, because he didn't bake one.)
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
That makes sense. However, in the light of such potential behavior from the State, we must seek a more healthy life as insurance against asinine policies.
We can greatly limit the problems we would need to bring to a doctor. As conservatives, such a "can-do" attitude should already be a part of each of us.
To: garv
"I guess this means that homosexual AIDS patients will go to the back of the line. /sarc"
Your /sarc tag indicates you already know the answer to that one.
In addition, a BC Human Rights tribunal has ruled that the health care system must pay for "sexual reassignment surgery" for transsexuals.
http://www.tgcrossroads.org/news/archive.asp?aid=688
To: garv
I guess this means that homosexual AIDS patients will go to the back of the line."
They have priority...
17
posted on
04/25/2006 9:38:57 AM PDT
by
Paisan
To: garv
I guess this means that homosexual AIDS patients will go to the back of the line. /sarcHave you ever got that right! (The sarcasm, I mean)
Still and all, what if the patient is an overweight, cigarette smoking Muslim? Or an overweight sot of a queer? Will/can they be denied treatment?
18
posted on
04/25/2006 9:40:09 AM PDT
by
yankeedame
("Oh, I can take it but I'd much rather dish it out.")
To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
The more health care becomes an individual responsibility, the better.
19
posted on
04/25/2006 9:45:27 AM PDT
by
JmyBryan
To: Springman; GMMAC; Pikamax; Former Proud Canadian; Great Dane; Alberta's Child; headsonpikes; ...
Thanks for the ping, Springman.
20
posted on
04/25/2006 9:45:42 AM PDT
by
fanfan
(FR is the best/biggest news gathering entity in the whole known history of the world. Thanks Jim.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-91 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson