It was 18 years ago that the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that waitlists for health care in Quebec were an affront to a patient’s constitutional rights – opening the door to private health insurance in the province., which bans extra-billing and private insurance, is so puzzling. And infuriating. Because not much has changed in the nearly two-decade-long span since its landmark decision on this matter.
In June, 2005, the Supreme Court overturned a Quebec law that prohibited people from buying private health insurance for services that were covered by the public health care system. In a 4-3 decision, the court said the monopoly that the state exerted over medical services wasn’t justified. What has changed since then that would persuade the court not to hear an appeal of effectively the same law in a different province?Dr. Brian Day’s effort
Critics of any type of private health care always trot out the same bogus bogeyman: the United States. If we allow private health insurance in Canada, we will have people dying in the streets like they do in the U.S. because they can’t afford health insurance. This odious comparison conveniently ignores the fact there are literally dozens and dozens of other examples of countries that have private health insurance options and also some of the best health outcomes in the world.
The decision is entirely political, not based on sound juriprudence.
Imagine suggesting that spending my own $$ to procure the essential health care I'm effectively denied by the state is a 'privilege' this is liberal_party ndp SCC_CSC totalitarianism only Orwell could envision
suekings35 True, but many in the media in this country, including your paper, have done little to challenge the thinking around healthcare. The Globe is by and large a 'safe space' for readers that prefers to coddle with politically correct nonsense rather than to challenge.
The 'privilege' here is the ability to spend one's own money on needed health services the government fails or refuses to provide, rather than being forced by law to do without this needed health care. Some 'privilege'. It's hard to imagine a more basic economic right.