Sunday, September 4, 2011

Liberal Jim Bradley's sicko single-payer moralism

Karen Selick wrote in "Medicare, heal thyself"  (National Post, Sept.2, 2011):

"Pediatrician Karen Dockrill of Whitby, Ont., will go on trial in early October before the disciplinary committee of the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario, charged with conduct that is "disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional." Danielle Martin, spokeswoman for Canadian Doctors for Medicare, was quoted in a recent National Post article, calling Dr. Dockrill's alleged conduct "unethical."
What are the heinous deeds of which Dr. Dockrill stands accused?
She owned and operated a facility called Mom and Baby Depot. For an annual $1,500 membership fee, the Depot provided parents with access to a team of child-care professionals, including breastfeeding consultants, nurses, nutritionists, social workers and a chiropractor. Members could phone in, 24 hours a day, for medical advice, including from Dr. Dockrill herself - reportedly a godsend to inexperienced parents.
Because of the membership fee, Dr. Dockrill was able to offer longer office appointments than the standard well-baby check-up for which OHIP (the Ontario Health Insurance Plan) pays practitioners only $32. But those longer appointments and all that telephone advice (for which OHIP pays nothing) also meant that she had to limit the number of patients in her practice. The College alleges that only babies whose parents paid membership fees were accepted as regular patients.
Ms. Martin, the medicare cheerleader, says it's unethical to "require people to pay again" for something that is already paid for by tax dollars.
But what if taxpayers aren't really getting what they're supposedly paying for? Ontario residents might pay several thousand dollars per year into Ontario's coffers but still find that a 10-minute appointment - all the doctor can afford to give them at OHIP rates - is insufficient to answer all their questions or resolve their children's health problems. Other taxpayers - roughly 7% of Canadians - can't find a family doctor at all. They spend hours waiting with sick infants at overcrowded hospital emergency rooms or walk-in clinics.
No discussion of ethics can ignore the distinction between coercion and voluntariness. Coercion is the very essence of socialized medicine. Under Canadian medicare, extra billing is verboten. User fees - verboten. Competing with the government's monopoly health-insurance plan - verboten. Withholding your tax payments until you get the promised services - verboten.
Forcing people to pay for services and then not providing them is tantamount to theft or fraud. It is the state system of coercive public health care that is unethical.
And it's not just unethical - there's a good chance it's also unconstitutional. In the Chaoulli decision of 2005, three Supreme Court justices pronounced Quebec's health insurance monopoly to be a violation of the rights to life and security of the person under the Charter, saying: "Access to a waiting list is not access to health care." Cases pending in Ontario and British Columbia courts seek similar rulings for their respective provinces.
Dr. Dockrill's service, by contrast, was entirely voluntary. She couldn't force anyone to join. Members who felt they weren't getting value for money simply need not have renewed.
A voluntary transaction between consenting adults, with no harm to third parties and a high probability of significant benefits to those involved - how can that be unethical? Forbidding people to use their own hard-earned resources to optimize their family's health is what's unethical.
Of course, in the topsyturvy moral code of socialists, anything that might produce inequality is abhorrent. By their logic, we should shut down all private schools - after all, customers are paying twice - and permit only hamburger to be sold until filet mignon is affordable to all.
Inexorably, the defects in socialized medicine become obvious. Contrary to official Canadian mythology, our health-care system is far from the best in the world. Among 28 OECD countries, we are the sixth-highest spender relative to GDP. However, we rank 20th out of 22 in the ratio of doctors to population, and 17th in the availability of CT scanners and MRI machines.
Yet we are the only OECD country to ban private medical insurance, and one of only four countries that does not require patients to contribute something towards the cost of using a public hospital, a general practitioner or a specialist. Are those other 24 OECD countries all behaving unethically?
Perhaps when Canada finally realizes the folly of demonizing innovative physicians like Dr. Dockrill, the 12,000-plus Canadian-educated doctors who have taken refuge from our decrepit system in foreign countries will feel more inclined to return.
- Karen Selick is the litigation direcor for the Canadian Constitution Foundation, which is sponsoring a court challenge against Ontario's health-care laws."
The above Orwellian health debacle is the work of Liberals such as MPP Jim 'I hate doctors' Bradley; this is Bradley's kind of state fascism. Bradley was there when Liberal premier David Peterson was destroying health care in Ontario in the early 1980's (see here, pg.33). Jim Bradley doesn't believe in the Chaoulli decision! Bradley's a despot who believes that a voluntary transaction between an MD and a patient IS unethical - and that a jackbooted 'liberal/left' HAS a moral right to intervene.

33 C. difficile patients were killed in Niagara in the summer of 2011, yet secretive Liberal Jim Bradley didn't once say anything about this horror which happened in his own local Liberal-monopoly hospitals. Bradley also neglected to link Niagara's C. diff deaths in 2011, to the false assurances which Bradley's own Liberals made in 2008 that Ontario's hospitals were safe.

It's Liberal health-monopolist-pushing scum such as MPP Jim Bradley who are truly "disgraceful, dishonourable, and unprofessional". It's amazing how the left can always vilify another scapegoat, launch another sanctimonious witch-hunt, yet never have to account for the blowback of their own despotic policies.
The monopolistic state-socialist-single-payer healthcare model charade continued to be pursued by the likes of Danielle Martin, as seen in this nice "fake news" story appearing on Bell media's CTV network , Jan. 11, 2017).
Of course, the reason Martin was suddenly "made into news" again in January 2017, is because the Canadian leftist media are gearing up to revive their anti-US agit-prop groundwork, after 8 years of shameless Obama-fawning, Now that Hillary and Obama's legacies were soundly rejected and demolished in the US election, and with Trump about to become U.S. President, the majority of Canada's media will have to revise their narratives. It's back to the old template, back to America-bashing, back to their usual anti American narratives to demonize the U.S. This timing is meant to coincide with the moves in the States to dismantle that horrible Democrat failed abortion known as Obamacare. Canadian lefties loved Obamacare, so the reason for this story appearing now {....ah, yes - look; Canada GOOD! America BAAAAD..!}is self explanatory.
Canadian Liberals had used that Anti-American narrative as their touchstone for years, Jim Bradley and McGuinty and the Chretien gang used that meme on a daily basis
But what about Dr. Dockrill? Take a look at the fascistic, evil results stemming from the kind of state-socialist 'ethics' beloved by Danielle Martin.
Martin's media sycophants often refer to her espousal of a construct called 'universal' healthcare, but which in reality is no-choice state-run monopolist, single-payer healthcare, They hide behind the true definition and real nature of the system for which they shill, and work diligently to confuse the issue, claiming that only their kind of "universality"should exist - ie, single-payer monopolist health-care fascism.
Furthermore, in order to deflect from Canada's monopolist healthcare failures, Canadian lefties will predictably trot out their usual fear-mongering conflation that the only possible alternative to Canada's current single-payer system, is the American system! (...which is the cue for Canadian media to immediately flame knee-jerk hatred towards the Americans) It's a slick bit of deception, fear, and false-comparison, but this tactic has worked well to cover up for the deficiencies in Canada's single-payer heal monopoly.
I think it is disgusting how Danielle Martin's kind of political 'ethics' helped wipe Dr. Dockrill's practice "off the map". She even traveled to the States to smugly shill for Obamacare, as some kind of hero of Canada's demonic no-choice health-socialism.

No comments: