'It's insane': Ont. patient told she'd have to wait 4.5 years to see neurologist

[Political Junky]

Welcome to socialize healthcare. You know who always benefits in such a system? Government employees of all stripes. Just ask the RCMP, OPP and TPS how much they are stealing. The system is truly bankrupt with little innovation or private business expansion.

You want this system? Send this news link to Bernie Sanders and get his response. You see, even if you believe something is free (which it is not), you have to access it for it to have any value to you.

'It's insane': Ont. patient told she'd have to wait 4.5 years to see neurologist

An Ontario doctor says health-care wait times have reached “insane” lengths in the province, as one of her patients faces a 4.5-year wait to see a neurologist.

When Dr. Joy Hataley, a family practice aneredsthetist in Kingston, Ont., recently tried to send a patient to a neurologist at the Kingston General Hospital, she received a letter from the specialist’s office telling her that the current wait time for new patient referrals is 4.5 years.

The letter said that, if the delay is “unacceptable” to Dr. Hataley, she should instead refer the patient to a neurologist in Ottawa or Toronto.

Dr. Hataley, who has been outspoken about wait times and other issues plaguing Ontario’s health care system, said the wait time “shocked” her.

She wanted to shock others as well, so she tweeted a photo of the letter and tagged Ontario Health Minister Eric Hoskins and Kingston-area MPP Sophie Kiwala.

View image on Twitter

Just wait until they can't do a trip to America for treatment. Customer service in monopolies only moves in one direction.

Few Canadians come to the US for treatment. They love their system.

 

[OnePercenter]

Welcome to socialize healthcare. You know who always benefits in such a system? Government employees of all stripes. Just ask the RCMP, OPP and TPS how much they are stealing. The system is truly bankrupt with little innovation or private business expansion.

You want this system? Send this news link to Bernie Sanders and get his response. You see, even if you believe something is free (which it is not), you have to access it for it to have any value to you.

'It's insane': Ont. patient told she'd have to wait 4.5 years to see neurologist

An Ontario doctor says health-care wait times have reached “insane” lengths in the province, as one of her patients faces a 4.5-year wait to see a neurologist.

When Dr. Joy Hataley, a family practice aneredsthetist in Kingston, Ont., recently tried to send a patient to a neurologist at the Kingston General Hospital, she received a letter from the specialist’s office telling her that the current wait time for new patient referrals is 4.5 years.

The letter said that, if the delay is “unacceptable” to Dr. Hataley, she should instead refer the patient to a neurologist in Ottawa or Toronto.

Dr. Hataley, who has been outspoken about wait times and other issues plaguing Ontario’s health care system, said the wait time “shocked” her.

She wanted to shock others as well, so she tweeted a photo of the letter and tagged Ontario Health Minister Eric Hoskins and Kingston-area MPP Sophie Kiwala.

View image on Twitter

'It's insane': Ont. patient told she'd have to wait 4.5 years to see neurologist

An Ontario doctor says health-care wait times have reached “insane” lengths in the province, as one of her patients faces a 4.5-year wait to see a neurologist.

Surprise! Not.

• 2008 -- Neurologists warn of service shortage in Ontario -- There weren't enough neurologists in 2008, the ones who were there were retiring, and there are no new neurologists taking their places.

The shortage was anticipated almost ten years ago. That there aren't enough neurologists in Ontario isn't exactly a problem that political action can correct, and what little politicians can do cannot be effected "overnight," as it were. Not just anybody can be a neurologist and it takes about 12 years, from the start of college to the end of residency, for someone to become one.

While it's not Ontario residents' fault that there is a neurologist shortage in their city, it is their fault for not paying attention to the "writing on the wall" that appeared nine years ago and making plans to be or to, if/when it becomes necessary to do so, to move to someplace else (or at least see a doctor in a different city), somewhere that wasn't projected to have a shortage of neurologists. If people would heed the "writing on the wall" while it's on the wall, they wouldn't have problems later when the portents come to fruition.

So while it's not the residents' fault there is a neurologist shortage, it is their fault that they are sitting there needing to see a neurologist in a city that has a shortage of them, a shortage that was predicted. We all know we cannot control things like how many people pursue neurology careers, but we can control our own readiness to handle whatever challenging situations are foreseen and foretold. [1]

Also, the "socialized medicine" line doesn't hold water. Neurologist earnings in Ontario (a good deal more for surgeons) are high enough to attract people to the profession, and the government in CAN/Ontario didn't enact a moratorium on neurologists. Socialized "anything" is an economic situation whereby the government owns the given factors of production and the government defines what will be produced, how much and how, where and when it will be distributed. Nothing of the sort has happened in Canada with regard to neurologists.

What am I saying by way of the comments above? I'm saying take responsibility and ownership of one's own life and stop blaming someone else for what one should have done and, for whatever reason, did not do.


Note:

1. Obviously one cannot predict that one will have an acute need for a neurologist. One can, however, reasonably anticipate whether one will, within the next decade or so, need a neurologist for a chronic condition. To do that, all one needs to do is know one's age. If one is 55 today, one will in a decade or soon after, likely need to see a neurologist.
   
   Seeing as ones 50s are part of one's peak earning years, that's the time (at the latest) to evaluate and lay the foundations for what one is going to need/want -- socially medically, etc. -- when they are 65, 75, and older. When one is 68 and needs a neurologist and can't see one for four years because there is a shortage of supply, unless one is very well off, it's too late to do much about it but "cry woe is me" and blame others for something that one could have planned for ages ago so that it's not a problem one now must endure.

Aside:

I wonder...Do young people searching for career paths pay attention to reports like the one linked above and make their educational and career choices in light of them. Few things make figuring out what to do with one's life, career-wise, easier. It's "writing on the wall" that's there for all to see.​

Think about it; Nine years of education and training to become a Physician, or six years of education and training to become an IT professional making twice or more than a Physician.

The blame rests with the GOP attacking Physician wages.

Think about it; Nine years of education and training to become a Physician, or six years of education and training to become an IT professional making twice or more than a Physician.

First of all, the typical IT professional in Canada doesn't earn 300K+/year, which is the neurologist salary cited at the reference to which I linked in my post, to say nothing of twice, triple or more than that. (There's a reason -- well, several actually -- I put links in my posts, most particularly when the links are connected to my own effing prose, which one can distinguish from other's remarks by the absence of quotation marks.)

• Information Technology (IT) Manager Salary (Canada)

The blame rests with the GOP attacking Physician wages.

This dearth of neurologists, as discussed in the OP, is in Ontario, Canada. One knows that to be so by reading the rubric article linked in the OP as well as by reading this sentence in the OP:

An Ontario doctor says health-care wait times have reached “insane” lengths in the province, as one of her patients faces a 4.5-year wait to see a neurologist.

The GOP is an U.S. political party. Canada, IIRC, had a Republican party, but it existed, IIRC, in Quebec, not Ontario. AFAIK, the Canadian Republican party isn't these days "a thing;" I believe, for all intents and purposes, it's gone the way of the dodo.

You seem to have misquoted me. I stated Physician vs. IT professional.

I did not misquote you.

1. The entirety of your remarks in post 26 -- two sentences -- are included in my response to post 26.
2. I addressed both of the two sentences.
   • In the first sentence, you assert that it takes more time and more training to become a physician, which in this thread's context means neurologist because that's the medical specialty the OP rubric article and discussion specifically notes is in short supply in Ontario, CAN and it's the specialty that a patient was told it'd take her 4.5 years before she could see one, than it does to become an IT professional. That is true, it does.
   • In the first sentence, you assert also that following their respective training periods IT professionals make "twice or more" than a physician. That simply is not so in Ontario/Canada, and you'd know that had you bothered to click on the links you'll find in the post to which your post 26 is a reply and the one in my post that replies to your post 26. As shown in those links, the average neurologist earnings in Canada are about $300K as compared with about $100K for IT professionals.
     • Furthermore, though the years of internship, residency, and, if one pursues it, fellowship are part of a physician's training, medical interns and residents (and fellowships) are paid positions in that training process. Moreover, the salaries a medical resident earns in Ontario, Canada are roughly comparable to the average earnings of IT professionals, and that's before the medical resident has even become a fully-fledged doctor.
       
       Essentially, a medical resident is a middle income worker; however, once they commence practicing as a doctor who does not require clinical tutelage (that's what medical residency, like any apprenticeship or journeyman's role, is), their earnings become upper middle ones immediately, and not long afterwards, if they are even just reasonably good, become upper income earnings. In contrast, the wage path for most IT professionals never reaches $300K, though for some, the very best ones, it can and does.
       
       Very capable IT professionals can and do parlay their talents into new roles in business, and those roles can match, or best, the earnings of doctors; however, upon assuming those roles, the IT professional is no longer performing IT professional work. Rather they are performing business management and entrepreneurial work.
       
       For instance, many of the partners in my firm began as IT professionals -- DBAs, programmers, etc. -- but upon becoming senior managers, and later partners (roughly, it takes about 10 to 12 years to make partner in a large and highly regarded IT professional services firm), their job activities, barring exceptional circumstances, have no hands-on technical functions. Their roles are those of salespeople, relationship managers/builders, and project managers. As one moves higher in the partner ranks, the job takes on a practice management aspect. After that, the partner role becomes one of firm management in exactly the same way an EVP, SVP, or C-level employee's role is. (FWIW, unlike their opposite numbers at the C-level in publicly traded firms, partners in partnerships of the sort I'm describing don't generally command $10M+ salaries, but they're doing just fine all the same. Senior partners in I-banking firms do.)
       
       Be that as it is, even the most junior partner at a large firm that performs IT work earns $300K. What's important to note is that most people do not make partner, and most partners do not rise to the senior partner or managing partner level. So while it is possible for one to begin one's career as an IT professional and develop it into something else, it's that "something else" that provides one with wages that keep pace with or surpass doctors', especially neurologists, who are among the more highly paid doctors, wages; however, when that happens the IT professional has transformed themselves into a business professional, making them a worker who, broadly speaking has two valuable skillsets.
   • In the second sentence of your post, you blame the GOP for "attacking physician's wages," and though I have no clear idea of what the hell "attacking physician's wages" means, I'm certain that what it means is irrelevant because the GOP does not exist in Canada. Republicanism is not universal in the way, say, Catholicism is, and Republicanism and conservatism are not synonymous. The GOP is a U.S.-only "thing."

Bloviating aside, I stated Physician vs. IT professional.

 

[usmbguest5318]

Surprise! Not.

• 2008 -- Neurologists warn of service shortage in Ontario -- There weren't enough neurologists in 2008, the ones who were there were retiring, and there are no new neurologists taking their places.

The shortage was anticipated almost ten years ago. That there aren't enough neurologists in Ontario isn't exactly a problem that political action can correct, and what little politicians can do cannot be effected "overnight," as it were. Not just anybody can be a neurologist and it takes about 12 years, from the start of college to the end of residency, for someone to become one.

While it's not Ontario residents' fault that there is a neurologist shortage in their city, it is their fault for not paying attention to the "writing on the wall" that appeared nine years ago and making plans to be or to, if/when it becomes necessary to do so, to move to someplace else (or at least see a doctor in a different city), somewhere that wasn't projected to have a shortage of neurologists. If people would heed the "writing on the wall" while it's on the wall, they wouldn't have problems later when the portents come to fruition.

So while it's not the residents' fault there is a neurologist shortage, it is their fault that they are sitting there needing to see a neurologist in a city that has a shortage of them, a shortage that was predicted. We all know we cannot control things like how many people pursue neurology careers, but we can control our own readiness to handle whatever challenging situations are foreseen and foretold. [1]

Also, the "socialized medicine" line doesn't hold water. Neurologist earnings in Ontario (a good deal more for surgeons) are high enough to attract people to the profession, and the government in CAN/Ontario didn't enact a moratorium on neurologists. Socialized "anything" is an economic situation whereby the government owns the given factors of production and the government defines what will be produced, how much and how, where and when it will be distributed. Nothing of the sort has happened in Canada with regard to neurologists.

What am I saying by way of the comments above? I'm saying take responsibility and ownership of one's own life and stop blaming someone else for what one should have done and, for whatever reason, did not do.


Note:

1. Obviously one cannot predict that one will have an acute need for a neurologist. One can, however, reasonably anticipate whether one will, within the next decade or so, need a neurologist for a chronic condition. To do that, all one needs to do is know one's age. If one is 55 today, one will in a decade or soon after, likely need to see a neurologist.
   
   Seeing as ones 50s are part of one's peak earning years, that's the time (at the latest) to evaluate and lay the foundations for what one is going to need/want -- socially medically, etc. -- when they are 65, 75, and older. When one is 68 and needs a neurologist and can't see one for four years because there is a shortage of supply, unless one is very well off, it's too late to do much about it but "cry woe is me" and blame others for something that one could have planned for ages ago so that it's not a problem one now must endure.

Aside:

I wonder...Do young people searching for career paths pay attention to reports like the one linked above and make their educational and career choices in light of them. Few things make figuring out what to do with one's life, career-wise, easier. It's "writing on the wall" that's there for all to see.​

Think about it; Nine years of education and training to become a Physician, or six years of education and training to become an IT professional making twice or more than a Physician.

The blame rests with the GOP attacking Physician wages.

Think about it; Nine years of education and training to become a Physician, or six years of education and training to become an IT professional making twice or more than a Physician.

First of all, the typical IT professional in Canada doesn't earn 300K+/year, which is the neurologist salary cited at the reference to which I linked in my post, to say nothing of twice, triple or more than that. (There's a reason -- well, several actually -- I put links in my posts, most particularly when the links are connected to my own effing prose, which one can distinguish from other's remarks by the absence of quotation marks.)

• Information Technology (IT) Manager Salary (Canada)

The blame rests with the GOP attacking Physician wages.

This dearth of neurologists, as discussed in the OP, is in Ontario, Canada. One knows that to be so by reading the rubric article linked in the OP as well as by reading this sentence in the OP:

An Ontario doctor says health-care wait times have reached “insane” lengths in the province, as one of her patients faces a 4.5-year wait to see a neurologist.

The GOP is an U.S. political party. Canada, IIRC, had a Republican party, but it existed, IIRC, in Quebec, not Ontario. AFAIK, the Canadian Republican party isn't these days "a thing;" I believe, for all intents and purposes, it's gone the way of the dodo.

You seem to have misquoted me. I stated Physician vs. IT professional.

I did not misquote you.

1. The entirety of your remarks in post 26 -- two sentences -- are included in my response to post 26.
2. I addressed both of the two sentences.
   • In the first sentence, you assert that it takes more time and more training to become a physician, which in this thread's context means neurologist because that's the medical specialty the OP rubric article and discussion specifically notes is in short supply in Ontario, CAN and it's the specialty that a patient was told it'd take her 4.5 years before she could see one, than it does to become an IT professional. That is true, it does.
   • In the first sentence, you assert also that following their respective training periods IT professionals make "twice or more" than a physician. That simply is not so in Ontario/Canada, and you'd know that had you bothered to click on the links you'll find in the post to which your post 26 is a reply and the one in my post that replies to your post 26. As shown in those links, the average neurologist earnings in Canada are about $300K as compared with about $100K for IT professionals.
     • Furthermore, though the years of internship, residency, and, if one pursues it, fellowship are part of a physician's training, medical interns and residents (and fellowships) are paid positions in that training process. Moreover, the salaries a medical resident earns in Ontario, Canada are roughly comparable to the average earnings of IT professionals, and that's before the medical resident has even become a fully-fledged doctor.
       
       Essentially, a medical resident is a middle income worker; however, once they commence practicing as a doctor who does not require clinical tutelage (that's what medical residency, like any apprenticeship or journeyman's role, is), their earnings become upper middle ones immediately, and not long afterwards, if they are even just reasonably good, become upper income earnings. In contrast, the wage path for most IT professionals never reaches $300K, though for some, the very best ones, it can and does.
       
       Very capable IT professionals can and do parlay their talents into new roles in business, and those roles can match, or best, the earnings of doctors; however, upon assuming those roles, the IT professional is no longer performing IT professional work. Rather they are performing business management and entrepreneurial work.
       
       For instance, many of the partners in my firm began as IT professionals -- DBAs, programmers, etc. -- but upon becoming senior managers, and later partners (roughly, it takes about 10 to 12 years to make partner in a large and highly regarded IT professional services firm), their job activities, barring exceptional circumstances, have no hands-on technical functions. Their roles are those of salespeople, relationship managers/builders, and project managers. As one moves higher in the partner ranks, the job takes on a practice management aspect. After that, the partner role becomes one of firm management in exactly the same way an EVP, SVP, or C-level employee's role is. (FWIW, unlike their opposite numbers at the C-level in publicly traded firms, partners in partnerships of the sort I'm describing don't generally command $10M+ salaries, but they're doing just fine all the same. Senior partners in I-banking firms do.)
       
       Be that as it is, even the most junior partner at a large firm that performs IT work earns $300K. What's important to note is that most people do not make partner, and most partners do not rise to the senior partner or managing partner level. So while it is possible for one to begin one's career as an IT professional and develop it into something else, it's that "something else" that provides one with wages that keep pace with or surpass doctors', especially neurologists, who are among the more highly paid doctors, wages; however, when that happens the IT professional has transformed themselves into a business professional, making them a worker who, broadly speaking has two valuable skillsets.
   • In the second sentence of your post, you blame the GOP for "attacking physician's wages," and though I have no clear idea of what the hell "attacking physician's wages" means, I'm certain that what it means is irrelevant because the GOP does not exist in Canada. Republicanism is not universal in the way, say, Catholicism is, and Republicanism and conservatism are not synonymous. The GOP is a U.S.-only "thing."

Bloviating aside, I stated Physician vs. IT professional.

Why are you repeating, verbatim, a remark I've already addressed?