Read Article Here
To the Editor of the Sudbury Star,
(Published August 9, 2010)
In reading the article about the gentleman's complaint and Dr. Andrew Caruso's response, I noted that approximately 90 of the 429 beds in our new Sudbury Regional Hospital are presently being occupied by alternative-level-of-care patients. The ALC crisis has been swamping our hospital system in Sudbury for years, interfering with the ability of our medical community to provide timely health care to the remaining citizens.
We have waited for the Sisters of St Joseph facility in Chelmsford to be built and expansion at Pioneer Manor to be completed. In the interim, 136 beds were commissioned at the old Memorial Hospital Site to make up for the lower bed capacity at the new one site hospital, but I see that 36 of those beds were taken out of service last month without explanation and extended funding to keep the Memorial site open is not a sure thing.
Sudbury has an aging population and the capability to deal with older people who require and deserve ALC treatment has been lagging the curve for many years. When will the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care realize that providing Long Term Care is part of their title and mandate. Don't pass the buck by talking about community solutions, LHIN's or the Feds. Step up to the plate with concrete plans and funding to immediately start the process of developing facilities for each and every one of the ALC individuals we can reasonably expect to require the system today and in the foreseeable future. They owe it both to them and to the other patients whose care has been disrupted by the ALC impact on the hospital due to government inaction.
--
Jim 'Skid' Robinson
Sudbury, Ontario, Canada
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Re: Cops take aim at "curb crawlers - June 1, 2010
Read Article Here
To the Editor of the Sudbury Star,
(This letter was not published)
I read this article with great interest. Setting aside any arguments on the actual prostitution laws, GSPS Sgt. Rumford seems quite pleased that they will be targeting individuals who have, in fact, not committed any unlawful activity. The mere act of driving slowly through a certain area will cause the police to send the person a "community safety letter" instructing them to stop this legal activity. The article goes on to say that police will keep an internal list of these people and, if they persist in this legal activity, "criminal charges may follow". I'd be interested in what charges could be laid against someone who has not violated any law.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees anyone present in Canada certain fundamental rights including freedom of association and freedom of movement. It appalls me that our law enforcement community would target and intimidate individuals, who have violated no law, merely because the activity does not meet with police approval. I didn't know that thinking of a criminal act, if this was actually what the individual was doing, would be a legitimate cause for enforcement action.
Shades of George Orwell, it appears Big Brother may be raising his thought controlling head right here in the Nickel Capital.
To the Editor of the Sudbury Star,
(This letter was not published)
I read this article with great interest. Setting aside any arguments on the actual prostitution laws, GSPS Sgt. Rumford seems quite pleased that they will be targeting individuals who have, in fact, not committed any unlawful activity. The mere act of driving slowly through a certain area will cause the police to send the person a "community safety letter" instructing them to stop this legal activity. The article goes on to say that police will keep an internal list of these people and, if they persist in this legal activity, "criminal charges may follow". I'd be interested in what charges could be laid against someone who has not violated any law.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees anyone present in Canada certain fundamental rights including freedom of association and freedom of movement. It appalls me that our law enforcement community would target and intimidate individuals, who have violated no law, merely because the activity does not meet with police approval. I didn't know that thinking of a criminal act, if this was actually what the individual was doing, would be a legitimate cause for enforcement action.
Shades of George Orwell, it appears Big Brother may be raising his thought controlling head right here in the Nickel Capital.
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Re: Not Enough Parking - March 11, 2010
Read Article Here
To the Editor of the Sudbury Star,
(Published March 22, 2010)
So once the final patients are moved into the new hospital, it will be short 225 parking spaces?
I am astounded that now, when we are in the absolute final stages of the transition, this tidbit is made public. The hospital spokesperson says that the spaces were considered adequate thirteen years ago when the original designs were done, but I recall that same original scope had significantly more beds that we have today. I have trouble understanding how the beds have been downsized while the parking requirements have been increased. I would suggest that the original specifications weren't sufficient.
Further, they claim they have been aware of this problem for several years but this is the first we publicly hear about it, mere weeks from the time when those spaces will be required. And how much is this shuttle going to add to our already stretched health care costs?
I remember the justification for the high compensation paid to hospital administrators. They need to be on top of everything within their facility and manage it effectively and efficiently. This is just one more example of where the hospital administration has been woefully short sighted in the development of this whole project. As one who will rely on this new hospital for my ongoing health care, I can only wonder with trepidation what other oversights will turn up when all our eggs are in this one basket.
To the Editor of the Sudbury Star,
(Published March 22, 2010)
So once the final patients are moved into the new hospital, it will be short 225 parking spaces?
I am astounded that now, when we are in the absolute final stages of the transition, this tidbit is made public. The hospital spokesperson says that the spaces were considered adequate thirteen years ago when the original designs were done, but I recall that same original scope had significantly more beds that we have today. I have trouble understanding how the beds have been downsized while the parking requirements have been increased. I would suggest that the original specifications weren't sufficient.
Further, they claim they have been aware of this problem for several years but this is the first we publicly hear about it, mere weeks from the time when those spaces will be required. And how much is this shuttle going to add to our already stretched health care costs?
I remember the justification for the high compensation paid to hospital administrators. They need to be on top of everything within their facility and manage it effectively and efficiently. This is just one more example of where the hospital administration has been woefully short sighted in the development of this whole project. As one who will rely on this new hospital for my ongoing health care, I can only wonder with trepidation what other oversights will turn up when all our eggs are in this one basket.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Re: Williams deserves a break - February 4, 2010
Read Article Here
To the Editor of the Sudbury Star,
(Published February 12, 2010)
In his column today, Greg Weston wonders why there is such a fuss about Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams going to the U.S. for a heart procedure not available in his province. After all, Williams has loads of money and he is saving Canada health costs and relieving wait time space by not lining up with the rest of us.
The Health Act has tried to ensure a single tier government provided system where, regardless of means, all Canadians are treated equally. In fact, we have always had a two-tier system giving preference to those with suitable funds. That second tier is the United States.
One statement Weston made particularly caught my eye. "Reality is health care costs are already pushing provincial budgets to the breaking point, and some crucial treatments are only available in a timely way south of the border." This is the real issue highlighted by Williams flight to the land of private health care. And that, Mr. Weston, is a very good reason to 'flap our gums'.
I am a supporter of universal health care, but our model based on a government monopoly providing all the services is in trouble. Costs continue to rise while elective surgery wait times are often excessive and some services (PET scan, anyone?) are denied to certain areas in an arbitrary fashion. The global funding model for hospitals remains a ludicrous way to do business and the 3P hospitals raise a whole other bundle of problems.
I am not upset Danny Williams chose the best health care he could afford. I am, in fact, pleased that it will stimulate yet more discussion and anger about the current Canadian system under siege. Maybe when the politicians and bureaucrats are faced with enough outrage from the citizens, they will change the paradigm promoted by the Canada Health Act and look at some fundamental and meaningful ways to improve the model for health care delivery in this country.
--
Jim Robinson
Sudbury, Ontario, Canada
To the Editor of the Sudbury Star,
(Published February 12, 2010)
In his column today, Greg Weston wonders why there is such a fuss about Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Danny Williams going to the U.S. for a heart procedure not available in his province. After all, Williams has loads of money and he is saving Canada health costs and relieving wait time space by not lining up with the rest of us.
The Health Act has tried to ensure a single tier government provided system where, regardless of means, all Canadians are treated equally. In fact, we have always had a two-tier system giving preference to those with suitable funds. That second tier is the United States.
One statement Weston made particularly caught my eye. "Reality is health care costs are already pushing provincial budgets to the breaking point, and some crucial treatments are only available in a timely way south of the border." This is the real issue highlighted by Williams flight to the land of private health care. And that, Mr. Weston, is a very good reason to 'flap our gums'.
I am a supporter of universal health care, but our model based on a government monopoly providing all the services is in trouble. Costs continue to rise while elective surgery wait times are often excessive and some services (PET scan, anyone?) are denied to certain areas in an arbitrary fashion. The global funding model for hospitals remains a ludicrous way to do business and the 3P hospitals raise a whole other bundle of problems.
I am not upset Danny Williams chose the best health care he could afford. I am, in fact, pleased that it will stimulate yet more discussion and anger about the current Canadian system under siege. Maybe when the politicians and bureaucrats are faced with enough outrage from the citizens, they will change the paradigm promoted by the Canada Health Act and look at some fundamental and meaningful ways to improve the model for health care delivery in this country.
--
Jim Robinson
Sudbury, Ontario, Canada
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
