Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
Grace-Marie Turner :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Canadian System Failed Natasha Richardson
by Grace-Marie Turner
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



Questions are rightly being raised about whether actress Natasha Richardson could have been saved if her skiing accident had occurred in the U.S. rather than in Canada. No one ever will know if the tragedy could have been averted, but it is worth looking at the timing and medical resources available to her.

Ms. Richardson did not wear a helmet during her beginner’s skiing lesson and she sent medics away just after she fell. But once they were called back, it was four precious hours before she began to get the care that could have saved her life.

Medical reports indicate she had an intracranial bleed, and every pump of her heart put more pressure on her brain. The lack of a med-evac helicopter meant she had to be driven in an ambulance from the Mont Tremblant ski resort to the Centre Hospitalier Laurentien in Ste. Agathe, 40 minutes away.

She was there for two hours, but the hospital had no scanning equipment and no neurosurgeon available to do the emergency surgery she needed to relieve the pressure on her brain. She then had to be driven another hour to Sacré-Coeur Hospital in Montreal to get trauma care.

The delay between the 911 call from the resort and reaching the specialized trauma center in Montreal could have been shortened considerably had helicopter transport been available or if the hospital near the resort had more sophisticated diagnostic equipment and surgical capabilities.

Montreal’s top head trauma doctor, Tarek Razek, said, “Our system isn’t set up for traumas and doesn’t match what’s available in other Canadian cities, let alone in the States.”

Government officials decided against paying for a med-evac helicopter for the province of Quebec, despite a population of 7.5 million, half of whom live in Montreal. And they have repeatedly rebuffed a private air transport company that wanted to offer its services. Instead, government officials opted to buy two airplanes, but they need much longer landing strips and weren’t an option for Ms. Richardson.

The questions are relevant to the U.S. About 800 medical helicopters in the U.S. fly 400,000 missions each year, plus about 100,000 fixed wing medical flights. Major U.S. ski resorts tout their medical capabilities.

Natasha Richardson’s tragic death shows the danger of government decisions about what medical equipment is available. We don’t think about helicopters as being medical equipment, but when a centrally-planned health care system is making decisions about what the government will pay for, the big ticket items are often the first to go.

In the U.S., helicopters to airlift trauma patients, widely available scanning equipment and specialized doctors are often taken for granted.

Canada and other countries with government-controlled health systems spend less per capita on health care than the U.S. does, but the lack of investment in health care technologies that literally can save lives has come with a different price.

Ms. Richardson’s organs were donated to help save the lives of others. But friends say her two teenage sons are distraught, even blaming themselves because their mother was trying to learn to ski for them. They must see that it was the system that failed their mother.

It is a tragedy indeed.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Grace-Marie Turner is president of the Galen Institute, a non-profit research organization in Alexandria, VA, that focuses on health reform.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
I'm so relived
Phew, I'm so relieved to know the the underprivileged skiing demographic in the US has state of the art medical facilities. That, with high end feline emergency rooms helps me sleep at night knowing to US is the medical envy in the world. Now if we can just do something about that pesky high infant mortality rate (higher then Cuba)!

sparky
You mean the same Cuba that never lies about anything, let alone health care statistics? If they still have elections, I wonder who wins 99% of the vote? Wait a minute, all the money they save driving cars from the 50s must be funneled into health care right? There wouldn't be a two-tiered system, would there? The top one for party hacks and those few rich enough to bribe the medical staff, and the other one for everyone else that has a hard time affording aspirin?

If you believe those stats, I have some beach front property in Arizona I'm dying to sell someone...

Sparky, check again
First off, people of all demographics ski in the United States. The fact that we have trauma centers that are much more accessible than those in Canada are a product of PRIVATE enterprise.

And you had to go with the infant mortality rate which has been completely turned on it's head. In case you didn't know, according to the way statistics are calculated in Canada and most countries around the world (this includes Cuba), a premature baby weighing under a certain birth weight is not considered a living child.

But in the U.S., such very low birth weight babies are considered live births. The mortality rate of such babies, considered “unsalvageable” outside of the U.S. and therefore never alive is extraordinarily high. This skews U.S. infant mortality statistics.

sparky
Our high infant mortality rate is directly attributable to lack of prenatal care among the poor -- who, at least in my state have the gov't coverage available to them, but still don't use it (maybe it's because they'd be asked to stop using drugs) and in-hospital births. There is a strong correlation between countries that have a high percentage of direct-entry midwife deliveries and infant mortality. Take births out of the hospital, make them less medical, and babies live, is the short statement on that. It also dramatically reduces the number of C-sections. The Netherlands has the lowest C-section rate, the highest at-home direct-entry midwife rate, and the lowest infant mortality rate in the industrialized nations. There's something about making it less medical, perhaps. Of course, less medical means no pain meds for the mother. How many Americans would jump on that bandwagon. I did, for the overall health of my children, but most women -- nah!

Netherland Health Insurance anyone?
It is now almost three years old, which is not enough time (I don't think) to develop the sort of problems seen in France, Canada and England. It's basically like a giant HMO. The gov't requires that everyone buy a basic insurance package that pretty much covers what my college insurance package covered. Those who cannot afford it are subsidized by those who (supposedly) can. Insurance is still private; companies are paid by the gov't to take high-risk clients.

So far, the system is working great and costs less than the per capita costs in the US. BUT ...

The Dutch have a different attitude toward pain and medication than we do. Only 8% of pregnant women have an epidural for delivery, for example. They don't medicate for ADHD or minor arthritis. If you fall off your bike and bruise your butt, you're told to go home and sit on an ice pack. They don't give you pain medication. You often cannot get psych meds for depression or anxiety. You're supposed to just tough it out.

I'm sort of the tough-it-out type myself -- two children by direct-entry midwives; I think epidurals are dangerous for children. But, I've worked in behavior health long enough to know that some psych meds are needed and not just to keep the schizophrenics from killing the rest of us. Would we be willing to give up a large percentage of the medical care that makes our lives (for those of us who can afford it) more livable longer just to buy into a system like the Netherlands has? Think about that. Also think about whether or not two years is a fair trial for this. England's health care system seemed like a dream come true back when it was instituted. Now it's a nightmare for people who can't afford to come to the US for treatment they can't get at home.

Don't worry
Obama will soon have our healthcare working just like Canada's.

sparky
Also consider that Canada doesn't have a massive third world nation backed up on it's southern border nor does it have a birthright citizenship rule (Canadian citizenship REQUIRES a parent to be a citizen). This attracts huge numbers of expectant mothers from Mexico and elsewhere with extremely poor medical systems (which, like Canada, are socialist) where proper prenatal care is not provided, among other things like poor diet and unsanitary living conditions. These expectant mothers usually wait until the final month before birthing a child to better avoid immigration officials, further damaging the chances of a healthy birth as travel in the third trimester is a bad idea.

Simply ending birthright citizenship and blocking hospital care to illegal aliens will dramatically cut infant mortality rates (but dramatically increase left wing nuts screaming about how evil America is).

aurorawatcher
Don't forget, the Netherlands is highly reliant on foreign medical technology to continue to operate as well. If the US went into a social medical system, nearly all the world's medical advancement would outright cease. We do provide some 90+% of all the medical research in the world, none of which would be possible under a government funded health care system.

Sparks
High infant mortality is also related to the numbers of children being born to children who do not know how to take care of them. The number also includes infanticides.

Netherlands
In parts of Europe, medical staff practice "mercy-killing" of newborns all the time if they deem the baby's "quality of life" unsuitable (according to their definition). They euthanize infants with spinabifida or other birth defects. I know people with spinabifida. Yes, they are disabled, but they are human beings in every way. What's next? Euthanizing blind babies or deaf babies? How about babies with cleft palates? I bet these numbers are not included in the infant mortality rates of that great nirvana, the EU.

Here in Kanukistan
the medical care available depends on what your province will cover and how many mentally disabled and Third World people clog your system. My cardiac treatment so far is first rate (although apparently the sleep clinic lost my paperwork and the doctor merely shrugged that maybe it would turn up by my next appointment in June...) but when I developed a serious eye problem that led to the loss of most of my vision in one eye, I was told that the only treatment if it got worse would be lying flat on my back for six months with my head between sandbags. This was the treatment offered in the USA in the mid 1960s; today the surgery I would have needed is available as day surgery in the USA.

For those concerned about infant mortality in the USA, you might want to check on how many seriously ill Canadian babies or expectant mothers are rushed across the border to be treated in small-town America because there is no neonatal intensive care bed available in the entire country of Canada. Little Americans are being born to Canadians every day and living to grow up due to the alternative available to those who can pay. Who will save Canadian babies when the same situation obtains in the USA?

Another "dirty little secret" . . .
about "Canadian health care" is the number of patients that are sent to US border hospitals for treatment. OHIP (Ontario Health Insurance Program) sends patients with certain conditions to the US for treatment. It helps that there are many Canadian nurses working in these hospitals. Maybe this is the reason that these waivers for treatment in the US are granted.

My mum would probably still be alive
had she decided to do the actual*** diagnosis/treatment of her lymphoma at a private (such as Apollo) hospital in India, rather than cutting short her intended long visit and returning to Calgary in early 1999 (she passed away in October 2001)--and she would have had the added-plus of having her surviving (her oldest brother had passed-on in 1995 from CVD) siblings around her for support.

***a local doctor in Bengaluru had stated "it may be a lymphoma" (but he had not taken a biopsy); my mum had consequently flown back from there to Calgary where she had to wait a month to even get a diagnostic appointment, and ANOTHER month to start treatment.

Also, another tidbit for tj @ 07:33: I actually heard from a one-off attender at a North American Summer Retreat (of LEF) that Canada also has a nurses shortage. Reason that so many Canuckistani nurses work in US is due to the fact that by the time their application is even viewed by any Canuckistani hospital (assumption: the nurse didn't simply ignore these entirely and start job-search in US in the first place) to which they've applied, they've most oft already interviewed multiple times for US hospitals, gotten offer-letters to US on TN-1 temp work permit--and, prior to October 2008 (when the max validity of unrenewed TN-1 was extended to three years from one) even RENEWED the TN-1 at least once. (former--renounced citizenship in 2008 due to security-clearance issues--Canuck, naturalised to US in April 2005)

Healthcare
As a physician, I can tell you that if a patient really need a treatment and the insurance company denies the treatment, you can usually reason with them to a point. You can't reason with government run programs. They don't veer from their protocol books and don't show a lot of compassion

Fact Checking Mrs. Turner
"The lack of a med-evac helicopter meant she had to be driven in an ambulance from the Mont Tremblant ski resort to the Centre Hospitalier Laurentien in Ste. Agathe, 40 minutes away."
----------------------------------------------------
Montreal does in fact have a medical helicopter service, a private one at that, called AirMédic.

====================================================
"She was there for two hours, but the hospital had no scanning equipment and no neurosurgeon available to do the emergency surgery she needed to relieve the pressure on her brain."
----------------------------------------------------
While Centre Hospitalier Laurentien does not have a full time neurosurgeon, they do have a CT Scanner.

Canadians in my town
It's been well-known in the medical field that Fairbanks, the nearest city with medical facilties inside the Alaska-Canadian border, gets a lot of Canadians for medical care. We even get some emergency evacs from west of Whitehorse. A friend who works at the hospital tells me that 25-30% of the surgeries at F-Memorial are Canadians paying out of pocket for treatment they can't get their gov't to provide, let alone cover. My neighbor runs a bed and breakfast and she was telling me last night that 50% of her winter clientel are Canadians here on "medical vacations". Clearly there's a problem.

My guess is that Ms. Richardson encountered the same problem my friend Sylvia reports exists in Australia. You must go to a regional facility to be evaluated before you can go to another facility to be treated. Sylvia's a nurse and she tells me that a lot of Australians with head injuries die or suffer permanent long-term damage while going through this process. Here in the States, we evaluate on-site and determine that we need to skip the regional facility and go right to the real treatment. We save a lot of lives that way.

Sylvia tells me that when she first came to the US 10 years ago, she thought we must have a lot of people dying because our government doesn't provide health insurance, but she has gradually changed her mind because she has seen that our hospitals cover even indigent patients (Hill-Burton funds do that) and the vast majority of Americans have health insurance. About 6% of our population is not insured, by the way, and most hospitals cannot deny them in life-threatening situations because of Hill-Burton legislation.

Trash the American system for 6%
Just thought I'd throw that out there. All that angst is for 6% of the population. Those include people like my father-in-law who is a rich man and doesn't feel like paying for health insurance. He has a catastrophic policy and a big bank account -- plus, I think he's Medicare eligible starting this year.

What we really need is not a gov't-controlled health care system or even gov't health insurance, but a change in certain insurance laws. Remove the barriers that prevent my agency from negotiating with other like-agencies nation-wide for group insurance rates. It's estimated my rates would drop at least 50% from that alone.

There's other things that could be fixed that are small and cost-effective -- coverage for preventative care, for ex. None of this requires the gov't to get involved. It may require, in some states, changes in the laws. Basically, it requires deregulation of the insurance industry. I know that has a dirty connotation these days, but if done right, it will lower costs.

I know from Personal experience

Alzheimer’s is the only disease where the caretaker suffers more than the patient.


Have you suffered as a caretaker of an Alzheimer’s
patient?

Comments please!!!

E-Mail This Column To Michael Moore!
Hey Ms. Turner be careful what you say about the failures of nationalised healthcare especially involving Canada.
Mr. Hollywood healthcare documentary auteur-Micheal "fidel's honey" Moore has all but sanctioned Canada and Cuba as the Rosetta Stone of nationalised healthcare.
This debate continues unabated, the Black Caucus just visited Cuba and you just know they are going to have glowing things to say about it, and then you'll hear the liberal hue and cry: We're the richest country in the world but we don't have nationalised healthcare.
The next thing you know, we're spending another 750 billion to nationalise the healthcare system because that Obama is a wild and crazy guy when it comes to government spending. It's all part of his Hope & Change Community Organiser Strategy to spread the wealth.
So, Ms Turner if you're ever in the same proximity as Micheal Moore and she's giving you dirty looks, she probably got a copy your column. Keep up the good work.

AudiR10
"Little Americans are being born to Canadians every day"

Not. That's the myth of anchor babies. You are not a citizen of the US just because you are born here. Canadian citizens are under the jurisdiction of Canada, not the US. If the parent isn't an citizen of the US, neither is the baby.

aurorawatcher
If your father-in-law is a rich man, why would he bother with Medicare?

Barb
"You can't reason with government run programs. They don't veer from their protocol books and don't show a lot of compassion"


You speak the truth - I hope advocates of socialized medicine are listening.

So big
To understand that Canada is one tenth the population of the USA and more than twice the size on this Continent. You would need billions to carry this kind of service in Canada. Then in the USA most are private companies.

It's more than a tragedy
What happened to Ms Richardson is not just a tragedy, it's manslaughter by depraved indifference. Those responsible for a system that kills people should be charged and jailed.

If your system can't provide the lifesaving resources needed it should be scrapped and replaced. To not do so is vile and depraved.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.