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.