Disruption to Families

Being required to access health care services outside your
community is an additional burden on families. One parent is often
left at home to care for children while the other is away. When
one child is sick, a parent will also travel outside to seek care,
incurring extra travel cost. Prohibitive travel costs also keep
families from travelling south to visit family members receiving
care. The best solution from a family point of view is local
health care. The patient feels closer to loved ones, the family
can visit the patient, and resulting increased peace of mind can
speed recovery.

Government Funding Allocation

In determining when a piece of equipment or service should be
offered in an area, the Ministry of Health makes an assessment to
prove up a desired level of usage. Underlying such desired usage
is the objective of maximizing health care dollars through the
optimum relationship between benefits and costs. The Ministry
naturally does not want to put in expensive equipment or establish
services when there is not sufficient cost justification.

Our concern is that the allocation formula does not adequately
recognize all costs. The only costs recognized are those to
purchase, install, maintain and operate equipment and to staff the
service with qualified people. Travel cost Savings which would
result from local service are not recognized and therefore not an
integral part of allocation formula application. Social costs,

too, are not recognized.

To address the concerns raised above we would put forward the following
four recommendations.

1, Travel Expenses to be Covered by M.S.P.

Sometimes travel for medical treatment is necessary. To
provide basic economic equality, reasonable travel expenses to
access services not available in your region, should be
covered by M.S.P.. Rural British Columbians pay more than
their fair share for the services we receive. In health care
we should not be economically disadvantaged to receive
required treatment.