Canadian ident quadruplets born in Montana because Calgary hospitals FULL

[Diuretic]

Um, she was refused care

No she wasn't refused care.

The difference in being full and being refused care would be what exactley?

Being refused care means not being taken care of. The system in Alta. flew her to the States and paid for it. She has now been transported back to Alta. and is receiving care in Canada.

yes the hospital did refuse her. Amazing how you try to spin the unspinnable.

wow lmao, see above. Who again was it who said free healthcare won't be able to meet demand. Oh yeah, me.

You are making a caricature of yourself. You seem to be so bound by ideology that you can't differentiate facts from opinions.

 

[Larkinn]

They didn't have enough beds.

Just like Tim Hortons doesn't have enough workers in Calgary so sometimes they have to shut down selling donuts and coffee. Is that because of "socialized medicine" too?

Yes, yes it is.

 

[Bern80]

No she wasn't refused care.




Being refused care means not being taken care of. The system in Alta. flew her to the States and paid for it. She has now been transported back to Alta. and is receiving care in Canada.

she was turned away at the hospital of her choice. If that isn't refusal of care I don't know what is. Gee I see you have broekn leg there. Sorry we can't fix that here but we can fly you to to Timbuktu to have that done, that okay? is this seriously the path you want to go down? You want to quibble and say care wasn't refused because they were eventually able to get her treated 300 miles away from where she was suppossed to be treated?

You are making a caricature of yourself. You seem to be so bound by ideology that you can't differentiate facts from opinions.

I think you are by barrying your head in the sand and beleiveing this has nothing to do with socialized medicine. The fact is she could not be treated at the hospital she chose because at the time the demand for care exceeded the supply of available resources. The fact that they flew here 300 miles to be treated is not exactley a glowing endoresement of socialized medicine. What it was, was the very least they could do seeing as how they could not provide care to someone who immediately needed it.

 

[Ruby]

she was turned away at the hospital of her choice. If that isn't refusal of care I don't know what is. Gee I see you have broekn leg there. Sorry we can't fix that here but we can fly you to to Timbuktu to have that done, that okay? is this seriously the path you want to go down? You want to quibble and say care wasn't refused because they were eventually able to get her treated 300 miles away from where she was suppossed to be treated?

You are reaching for straws badly here. The hospital did take care of her, they transported her and PAID for it. They will not be stuck with a bill they are still trying to pay when those kids are ready for college. That is not turning you away and saying "cant help ya". Its also a flat out lie that they DROVE to a hospital in the US because the Canadian hospital refused service.

I think you are by barrying your head in the sand and beleiveing this has nothing to do with socialized medicine. The fact is she could not be treated at the hospital she chose because at the time the demand for care exceeded the supply of available resources. The fact that they flew here 300 miles to be treated is not exactley a glowing endoresement of socialized medicine. What it was, was the very least they could do seeing as how they could not provide care to someone who immediately needed it.

I think you are burying YOUR head in the sand if you think a PRIVATE hospital dosent have the same exact issues when faced with a rapidly growing community, 3 premature babies already there and then an additional patient with a premature birth of quads.

They faced quite a unique situation that isnt going to pop up very often and they did indeed take care of her and make sure she was given proper medical care and that it was taken care of financially as well.

 

[Diuretic]

she was turned away at the hospital of her choice. If that isn't refusal of care I don't know what is. Gee I see you have broekn leg there. Sorry we can't fix that here but we can fly you to to Timbuktu to have that done, that okay? is this seriously the path you want to go down? You want to quibble and say care wasn't refused because they were eventually able to get her treated 300 miles away from where she was suppossed to be treated?

I'm used to dealing with complex situations that reek of ambiguity and have to be resolved. In this case the woman was taken into the car of the Alta. health system, she was transported to a hospital for her babies to be born. She was return to Alta. when appropriate. Alta. took care of the costs. She wasn't "refused care", the care she was given was obviously very good quality, it's just that it happened to be re-located to a hospital in Montana.

I think you are by barrying your head in the sand and beleiveing this has nothing to do with socialized medicine. The fact is she could not be treated at the hospital she chose because at the time the demand for care exceeded the supply of available resources. The fact that they flew here 300 miles to be treated is not exactley a glowing endoresement of socialized medicine. What it was, was the very least they could do seeing as how they could not provide care to someone who immediately needed it.

Au contraire mon ami. I understand it has nothing to do with "socialised medicine". Alberta is considered by other Canadians to be the Texas of Canada. That's not simply a reference to its oil industry. It's a reference to the culture of the province. It's one of the more politically conservative provinces and one which is ideologically connected to Bush's America. Stephen Harper, the PM of Canada, although born in TO, spent much of his adult life in Alta. and made his political career there. Stephen Harper ain't Jack Layton trust me. Alta. has been pressured by its economic boom. The hospital is understaffed because it can't attract staff - a possible reason could be the cost of real estate in the province and the fact that you can make more working on the oil shale industry than as a nurse.

If this is all you have as an argument against "socialised medicine" then if I were you I'd back out gracefully.

 

[Said1]

she was turned away at the hospital of her choice. If that isn't refusal of care I don't know what is. Gee I see you have broekn leg there. Sorry we can't fix that here but we can fly you to to Timbuktu to have that done, that okay? is this seriously the path you want to go down? You want to quibble and say care wasn't refused because they were eventually able to get her treated 300 miles away from where she was suppossed to be treated?





I think you are by barrying your head in the sand and beleiveing this has nothing to do with socialized medicine. The fact is she could not be treated at the hospital she chose because at the time the demand for care exceeded the supply of available resources. The fact that they flew here 300 miles to be treated is not exactley a glowing endoresement of socialized medicine. What it was, was the very least they could do seeing as how they could not provide care to someone who immediately needed it.

Do you have any idea how fast Calgary has grown in the last yr? Google it.

I actually lived in Calgary, so I can comment on the type of care I was given and I had no problems. I also live in a city that did experience similar population fluxations and the same thing happened....not enough beds....big hospital built........economy started to suck......people left.....tons of empty beds......hospital closures......The same thing will happen in Calgary.

Further, it's not unusual for people, all over the WORLD to seek treatment in other cities when having multiple births. I bet I could google a few American women who gave birth outside of their home towns, for various reasons.

 

[Annie]

Do you have any idea how fast Calgary has grown in the last yr? Google it.

I actually lived in Calgary, so I can comment on the type of care I was given and I had no problems. I also live in a city that did experience similar population fluxations and the same thing happened....not enough beds....big hospital built........economy started to suck......people left.....tons of empty beds......hospital closures......The same thing will happen in Calgary.

Further, it's not unusual for people, all over the WORLD to seek treatment in other cities when having multiple births. I bet I could google a few American women who gave birth outside of their home towns, for various reasons.

I think I see the differences, with Calgary and major cities, if I understand you correctly. I'm sure you are right in the sense that if a couple in rural area were expecting quads, they would end up at major city hospital. Most major metro areas, such as I live in, have multiple medical centers, both university, private, and public. In this area we have the following high risk neo-natal hospitals that I can think of:

Northwestern's Prentice
University of Ill
University of Chicago
Cook County aka Stroger
Alexian
Loyola
Central DuPage
Elmhurst
Good Samaritan
St. Edwards
Lutheran General

Now go 100 miles West or South, not going to find many hospitals that can easily deal with such a case.

 

[Said1]

I think I see the differences, with Calgary and major cities, if I understand you correctly. I'm sure you are right in the sense that if a couple in rural area were expecting quads, they would end up at major city hospital. Most major metro areas, such as I live in, have multiple medical centers, both university, private, and public. In this area we have the following high risk neo-natal hospitals that I can think of:

Northwestern's Prentice
University of Ill
University of Chicago
Cook County aka Stroger
Alexian
Loyola
Central DuPage
Elmhurst
Good Samaritan
St. Edwards
Lutheran General

Now go 100 miles West or South, not going to find many hospitals that can easily deal with such a case.

That IS more or less what I'm trying to say.

Calgary is a fair sized city, but not really considered a major city. And, add 30K+ people over the last year or two and there are going to be problems with city facilities such as hospitals. I pondered the idea of moving back until I looked at housing prices and availabilities!

The closest major city is Vancouver, all others are comparable to Calgary, in size - minus the mass immigration. There are other hospitals, but Montana might have been the closest, best choice for that type of birth.

Not that there isn't problems with universal health care. My point is that in Calgary's case, available beds has a lot to do with sudden population growth and very little to do with socialism, at this point in time.

 

[Toro]

That IS more or less what I'm trying to say.

Calgary is a fair sized city, but not really considered a major city. And, add 30K+ people over the last year or two and there are going to be problems with city facilities such as hospitals. I pondered the idea of moving back until I looked at housing prices and availabilities!

The closest major city is Vancouver, all others are comparable to Calgary, in size - minus the mass immigration. There are other hospitals, but Montana might have been the closest, best choice for that type of birth.

Not that there isn't problems with universal health care. My point is that in Calgary's case, available beds has a lot to do with sudden population growth and very little to do with socialism, at this point in time.

I think Calgary grew by 57,000 last year, with a population of around a million people.

And what Americans may not understand is that even though there are national standards to Medicare, and the federal government transfers funds to the provinces to partially fund Medicare, medical services are a provincial domain. Each province has its own health insurance system. If you live in Ontario and you go to the hospital in BC, you have to show your Ontario health card, and then BC bills Ontario for your care. Every province has different insurance companies. So the provincial government is going to be agnostic from a financial stand-point about where you receive treatment out of province, be it in a state south of the border or another province, all other things being equal.

 

[Bern80]

I'm used to dealing with complex situations that reek of ambiguity and have to be resolved. In this case the woman was taken into the car of the Alta. health system, she was transported to a hospital for her babies to be born. She was return to Alta. when appropriate. Alta. took care of the costs. She wasn't "refused care", the care she was given was obviously very good quality, it's just that it happened to be re-located to a hospital in Montana.

I suggest you re-read my post. The hospital there owed her that much at the very least. Had they simply said we're full and we will do nothing else for you they would have had a media nightmare on their hands. It really wouldn't do to have the 'exemplary' candian universal health care system wind up with four dead babies on their hands because they couldn't meet demand, now would it. Her care wasn't refused, it was 'relocated'? Man, you can spin anything.

Au contraire mon ami. I understand it has nothing to do with "socialised medicine". Alberta is considered by other Canadians to be the Texas of Canada. That's not simply a reference to its oil industry. It's a reference to the culture of the province. It's one of the more politically conservative provinces and one which is ideologically connected to Bush's America. Stephen Harper, the PM of Canada, although born in TO, spent much of his adult life in Alta. and made his political career there. Stephen Harper ain't Jack Layton trust me. Alta. has been pressured by its economic boom. The hospital is understaffed because it can't attract staff - a possible reason could be the cost of real estate in the province and the fact that you can make more working on the oil shale industry than as a nurse.

Or perhaps the reason there is a shortage of doctors is because UHC has taken away the financial incentive to become one.

If this is all you have as an argument against "socialised medicine" then if I were you I'd back out gracefully.

You know better Diurtec. You've participated in those discussions. I now it's hard to resist adding snide comments here or there, but this time you ended up with your foot in your mouth. I suggest you 'gracefully' admit that before I go posting the pages of issues I have with UHC that appear on this board.

 

[Diuretic]

I suggest you re-read my post. The hospital there owed her that much at the very least. Had they simply said we're full and we will do nothing else for you they would have had a media nightmare on their hands. It really wouldn't do to have the 'exemplary' candian universal health care system wind up with four dead babies on their hands because they couldn't meet demand, now would it. Her care wasn't refused, it was 'relocated'? Man, you can spin anything.

I don't need to read twice, my comprehension skills are good. You tried to make the point that the woman was refused health care. She wasn't.

Or perhaps the reason there is a shortage of doctors is because UHC has taken away the financial incentive to become one.

I do remember listening to a radio documentary from Radio Canada a few years ago which examined the drift of doctors from PEI to the States on money grounds. How many eventually returned I don't know. As for a shortage of doctors due to universal health care. If that were the case wouldn't it mean that there were no doctors in the whole province? I think the critical staff shortage is amongst nurses, who are not as well paid as doctors and who would feel the financial pressure of living in Alta. more than a doctor would.

You know better Diurtec. You've participated in those discussions. I now it's hard to resist adding snide comments here or there, but this time you ended up with your foot in your mouth. I suggest you 'gracefully' admit that before I go posting the pages of issues I have with UHC that appear on this board.

Actually I keep my snide comments to a minimum. I leave that to others because sometimes it's all they have. But if you won't take a bit of friendly advice then be my guest, go right ahead.

 

[Bern80]

Actually I keep my snide comments to a minimum. I leave that to others because sometimes it's all they have. But if you won't take a bit of friendly advice then be my guest, go right ahead.

That wasn't friendly advice. It was an accussation which you knew to be false beforehand. You knew before you even said it, that this is far from my only argument against socialzied medicine. Which begs the question as to why you bothered with that particular sentence int he first place.

 

[Diuretic]

That wasn't friendly advice. It was an accussation which you knew to be false beforehand. You knew before you even said it, that this is far from my only argument against socialzied medicine. Which begs the question as to why you bothered with that particular sentence int he first place.

Actually I wondered if you'd even understood the article and the posts following it. I was merely inviting you to find a way out of the hole you were digging for yourself.

If you have a range of arguments against "socialised medicine" (a meaningless term and only used as a pejorative slogan) then use them. If you have any good arguments trot them out, there's no need to either negligently or wilfully misinterpret a news report to meet your own ideological ends. In other words, don't fuck around with the facts.

 

[Bern80]

Actually I wondered if you'd even understood the article and the posts following it. I was merely inviting you to find a way out of the hole you were digging for yourself.

If you have a range of arguments against "socialised medicine" (a meaningless term and only used as a pejorative slogan) then use them. If you have any good arguments trot them out, there's no need to either negligently or wilfully misinterpret a news report to meet your own ideological ends. In other words, don't fuck around with the facts.

Don't try to wiggle your ass out of a blatant lie. Your statement was my only argument against socialized medicine was an inaccurate (in you opinion) interpretation of an article. Yet we have had several conversations about the many other problems I have with UHC. Knowing all those arguments you still stated that critique of this one article was my only argument. Why on earth would someone say "If this is all you have as an argument against "socialised medicine" then if I were you I'd back out gracefully.", when you know full well (from your own experience with me) that this is not my only argument against socialized medicine. It is absolutely amazing watching some of you pretend that you didn't say the things you said.F

For the record I have no proof that the reason this woman found herself in this situation was direct cause of canada's healthcare system. Nor did I ever state that it was a fact that that was why she was in the situation she was in. I, of course have my suspicions, but in truth just as I can't prove the system was the cause you can't prove it wasn't either. Which makes your opinion no more valid than mine.

 

[Diuretic]

Don't try to wiggle your ass out of a blatant lie. Your statement was my only argument against socialized medicine was an inaccurate (in you opinion) interpretation of an article. Yet we have had several conversations about the many other problems I have with UHC. Knowing all those arguments you still stated that critique of this one article was my only argument. Why on earth would someone say "If this is all you have as an argument against "socialised medicine" then if I were you I'd back out gracefully.", when you know full well (from your own experience with me) that this is not my only argument against socialized medicine. It is absolutely amazing watching some of you pretend that you didn't say the things you said.

Now be nice. Don't accuse me of lying when I didn't lie. Lying means wilfully concealing a fact when asked about it. Calling someone a liar, even on a no-holds barred political forum, is unpleasant. I don't mind being called wrong, I do resent being called a liar.

As far as my style of phrasing is concerned, deal with it.

In my posts I was focused on your wilful twisting of the facts of the original story. Even Fox News ran the piece with a focus on the quads and not on the Canadian health system. But here and there individuals have trotted this out with a "gotcha!" tag and used it to attempt to discredit the Canadian health system. Blatant misrepresentation of the facts. And that is evident and not opinion.

 

[Bern80]

Now be nice. Don't accuse me of lying when I didn't lie. Lying means wilfully concealing a fact when asked about it. Calling someone a liar, even on a no-holds barred political forum, is unpleasant. I don't mind being called wrong, I do resent being called a liar.

As far as my style of phrasing is concerned, deal with it.

your style of phrasing was to willfully state something that you know to be untrue. That is also a lie. And you were wrong to state what you stated because you knew the the truth of it before hand. My 'friendly advice' to you, is to admit and we'll move on to the topic.

 

[Ruby]

I suggest you re-read my post. The hospital there owed her that much at the very least. Had they simply said we're full and we will do nothing else for you they would have had a media nightmare on their hands. It really wouldn't do to have the 'exemplary' candian universal health care system wind up with four dead babies on their hands because they couldn't meet demand, now would it. Her care wasn't refused, it was 'relocated'? Man, you can spin anything.

Ok now you are just trying to assume they only took care of her because they didnt want a media nightmare? How do you come to that conclusion? She is in a nation that provides health care to all its citizens and why should she be any different? The answer is, she isnt so they did provide for her.

The original article DID try to make it sound as if the hospital just told her they were full and couldnt help her which is why the LIE of her driving to the US over 300 miles was added I guess.

Or perhaps the reason there is a shortage of doctors is because UHC has taken away the financial incentive to become one.

Actually some of the higher doctor to patient ratios are in UHC nations. The US does not have the highest amount of doctors per capita among the developed nations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care

and another source for the same info.

http://www.rsm.ac.uk/media/downloads/j06-06moredrs.pdf

On that second link its page 3 of the PDF file.

You will notice that numerous nations with UHC schemes have higher doctor to patient ratios or doctors per capita than the US,

That kinda kills your theory that a UHC system is doomed to have a shortage of doctors.

The nursing stat is pretty much the same, although I think most nations show a shortage...there are numerous UHC schemes that have more nurses per capita than the US.

 

[Diuretic]

your style of phrasing was to willfully state something that you know to be untrue. That is also a lie. And you were wrong to state what you stated because you knew the the truth of it before hand. My 'friendly advice' to you, is to admit and we'll move on to the topic.

That is a fit-up. I've been verballed. Anyway I don't want to be disruptive. Take whichever angle suits you and run with it.

 

[Bern80]

That is a fit-up. I've been verballed. Anyway I don't want to be disruptive. Take whichever angle suits you and run with it.

There is no 'angle' here Dirutec. You intentionally and knowingly misrepresented my stance on something. Your self admitted arrogance is starting to make you look foolish.

 

[Diuretic]

Have it your way then. When things descend into personal squabbles it's time for me to back out. If you believe I deliberately or inadvertently misrepresented your stance then let me say I certainly didn't do it deliberately. If I did it inadvertently then I'm sorry for doing so. I'll be sure to edit my posts for ambiguity in future.