Saturday, May 12, 2007

My Canadian Blogger Pal's Intake on Deaf Canadians' Predicament

Hi Cy,

I hadn't followed this controversy surrounding the language mode of the cochlear implant surgery recipients. Interestingly, I have a friend who is a CI recipient. She was not forced to drop visual language and that was not what she used anyway. She was raised an oralist.

Yes, our health care system is on the socialist principle. Indeed it complicates the process when you try to intertwine that with the democratic process. How do you combine medical decisions that our health care system are constitutionally authorized to make with the federal law? I think perhaps this is a first.

Upon reading the excerpts you sent me, my take on this is that our government is interested in protecting our tax dollars. I believe they view that by allowing CI recipients continue to use visual language is a misuse of tax money. My understanding is that CI surgery importunes the recipients to be able to hear that they cannot with a hearing aid. This device enables them to acquire speaking skills. This is where I see how our government assess that by allowing the CI recipients to use sign language they are misusing tax money upon which the health care system operates. I can see how they feel that by passing a law for CI recipients to follow an aural/oral regimen justifies spending tax dollars on providing CI surgery to Deaf Canadians.

It is true our health care system makes health and medical decisions for us. We pay taxes to them and they budget our tax dollars to operate the health and medical processes. Our health care system is not privately operated - it is governmental operated. We must fill out forms to request surgical procedures and we must wait weeks, sometimes months, to hear a decision. Our doctors indeed can make in-office decisions for certain routine procedures, but when it comes to expensive procedures such as in-office procedures, expensive medication, hospitalizations, and so forth, we must get authorization. Because our health care is a "Goliath," it can be difficult and complicated. They take so much time to make those kinds of decisions.

For instance, when I had my gall bladder, it took 4 months before I heard back from them. In the meanwhile, I was in a lot of pain and heavily medicated with painkillers. I got the green light, and had to request a surgical appointment. That was another 3 weeks. They found a hospital for me and set it up. After nearly 5 months in pain, I finally had my gallbladder removed. I understand this goes much quicker in the U.S.

As a principle, our socialism-based health care is a wonderful thing. All of us have coverage. However, the levels of coverage vary based on how much tax you pay. As a city employee, I get the full coverage. They automatically deduct specific amount of health care tax from any city and federal employee following a formula.

My mother, on the other hand, is a homemaker. She pays health care tax on a form annually, following a formula upon her income tax. If the formula shows she doesn't work and does not pay taxes, she gets the minimal coverage. Her selection of providers is severely limited. I believe this is similar to America's Medicaid system. Nonetheless, every Canadian, job or no job, has coverage.

Back to your CI controversy, this is perhaps a first (as far as I personally know of) that our health care system attempts to intertwine with the federal government process to make it federal law for the CI recipients follow the aural/oral regimens and depart the visual language route. This would certainly set a precedent for future health and medical cases.

Indeed, I agree with you it is not all that surprising that our health care system would attempt to dictate a social decision in the interest of protecting a capitalistic operation in form of tax dollars. The question here is who initiated this - the health care system or the federal government? I would be curious to know. My bet is on the federal government as it is capitally motivated.

Tracy, a proud Canadian.

Folks, Tracy is a blog pal of mine on another blog. She is not deaf. Knowing she is a Canadian, I sought to get her insight into this controversy and debate on the Canadian health care. I wanted a clarification and a confirmation that what I understood about their health care is accurate.

I received some responses that I am mistaken about their governmental system. I am not referring to the federated democractic part of their government system which IS indeed the same as ours. Their health care is the exception and in that, the reason why their health care can dictate the post-surgical care for their CI receipents.

As I've said time and again, I sincerely hope Americans' and Canadians' voices came loud and clear to them that they will change their position on forcing this law on their Deaf Canadians. Like Oscar and I discussed - what do they know about the Deaf?? Zip. All they understand is the money.


David said...

Hi there

Can you tell me where is the law that forces Deaf Canadians to pick one? I have never heard of that.

In fact, AVT organizations are the ones that forces parents of children with CI to pick one (AVT or ASL). That has caused many parents and Deaf people upset. AVT organizations have voliated parents' rights. But provincial government did not do anything about that. Therefore, parents and Deaf people demand Ontario government to interfere AVT organization and expect AVT to accept any Deaf children (with ASL).

I want to make sure that our Health Care system DOES NOT FORCE Canadians to do that. It would voliate their rights. It even provide Canadians more rights to make choices. Only one challenge we have faced is shortage of doctors who are lured to the USA due to lots of money that forces us to make priorities.

Canadian and provincial governments are very nervous about health care program. They walk a very fine line so that they won't piss off Canadians. So Canadians control governments wisely. Health Care programs in Canada have never forced parents or Deaf Canadians to make a choice. That would voliate our Charter of Rights and Freedoms. (similar to USA's Bill of Rights and Constitution)

Doctors and health care institutions are private operated. They are not government workers at all. They only bill to Health Insurnace Plan. Same with USA but only private insurnaces.

Cy said...


Are you aware Canadian government is currently attempting to write into law for CI receipents to be banned from using or learning ASL once they've had their CI surgery? It is not a law yet but they are contemplating right now. Gallaudet students held a protest yesterday. I understand there was a protest in Ottawa yesterday as well.

Have you ever experienced needing surgical procedures? That is quite different from regular medical procedures that takes place in the doctor office or routine medical prodecure as a well-being health check up. Neither doctors nor patients need authorizations for these. What is being dicussed involves surgical procedures which is a whole another story.

If you are Canadian, then I regret you are not aware your own health care is governmentally operated. Yes, the health care workers are federal workers. Just like postal officer workers and Social Security workers here in the U.S. They work in branch offices but does paperwork for the U.S. government. They are on the federal government payroll. As are the Canadian health care system.

When a deaf person put in a request to authorize a CI surgery, they have to await a medical authorization submitted by their local branch office to the district office who in turn submit the request to a head office. Pretty much similar to our Social Security system. When you apply for benefits, you fill out locally, then they mail the application to the Baltimore, Maryland office which is the head office. This is on the similar principle that your Canadian health care system operates.

Again, this applies only for surgical and several other procedures - not routine stuff that your doctor can authorize without consultation with the health care people.

This is why there is a controversy surrounding the CI because it is a surgical procedure.

Canadian government does NOT force deaf to have CI surgery - this applies only to those who WANTS CI surgery - if they wish to have it, they must drop ASL and take the aural/oral training route following the surgery. The Canadian health care system wants this to become a law.

If the Canadian government succeeds in passing this law, it will leave deaf Canadians with two choices: If they hold precious their ASL, then they will forego the CI surgery; If they hold precious ability to hear and speak, they will sacrifice ASL. This would not be such a sacrifice for oralist Deaf Canadians but this is a conflict for deaf Canadians who uses ASL or LSQ.

This probably is not such an issue for parents of deaf children who are not exposed to ASL or BiBi concept. They would accept it as the appropriate choice or path.

David said...

I do not agree with your opinion.

I work with Health Care system every day as manager and I have not seen anything like taht. Tell me directly where you get the information, I do not want any vague or irrelevant comment. Just give me clear answer on that with good hard evidence such as documents and people (names). (with no opinions or guesses or theories or black markers)


Cy said...

The author of the above post is a Canadian herself. I've known her for years and we've discussed numerous times about comparing American and Canadian health care systems.

It is indeed surprising you are a health care worker and is yet unaware it is socialist based and governmental operated.

I will request for Tracy to find or do research to provide you the verification that you need. If you want OFFICIAL documents, you will need to make this request directly to your own government. What names are you referring to? It is a system.

Cy said...

It concerned me so much you do not appear to be aware or understand how your own health care operates that I accessed your own Canadian healthcare website. Here is the url:

Here is what is seen on the website:
Canada's health care system is a group of socialized health insurance plans that provides coverage to all Canadian citizens. It is publicly funded and administered on a provincial or territorial basis, within guidelines set by the federal government.

Under the health care system, individual citizens are provided preventative care and medical treatments from primary care physicians as well as access to hospitals, dental surgery and additional medical services. With a few exceptions, all citizens qualify for health coverage regardless of medical history, personal income, or standard of living.

Canada's health care system is the subject of much political controversy and debate in the country. Some question the efficiencies of the current system to deliver treatments in a timely fashion, and advocate adopting a private system similar to the United States. Conversely, there are worries that privatization would lead to inequalities in the health system with only the wealthy being able to afford certain treatments.

(Cy here - clarification: This paragraph does NOT say that the health care is privatized. There was a DEBATE whether Canada's health care should be privatized but that never happened. It remains socialist based as it says in the introduction in the first paragraph)

Regardless of the political debate, Canada does boast one of the highest life expectancies (about 80 years) and lowest infant morality rates of industrialized countries, which many attribute to Canada's health care system.

Canada Health Act

The Canada Health Act is federal legislation that puts in place conditions by which individual provinces and territories in Canada may receive funding for health care services.

There are five main principles in the Canada Health Act:

Public Administration: All administration of provincial health insurance must be carried out by a public authority on a non-profit basis. They also must be accountable to the province or territory, and their records and accounts are subject to audits.

(Cy here - notice "public authority?" This is another word for governmental/federal authority)

Comprehensiveness: All necessary health services, including hospitals, physicians and surgical dentists, must be insured.

Universality: All insured residents are entitled to the same level of health care.

Portability: A resident that moves to a different province or territory is still entitled to coverage from their home province during a minimum waiting period. This also applies to residents which leave the country.

Accessibility: All insured persons have reasonable access to health care facilities. In addition, all physicians, hospitals, etc, must be provided reasonable compensation for the services they provide.

(Cy here - I skipped the provinical coverage - concerns policy in each provinical - same as states here in the U.S.)

Private Health Insurance

While the health care system in Canada covers basic services, including primary care physicians and hospitals, there are many services that are not covered. These include things like dental services, optometrists, and prescription medications.

Private health insurance plans are usually offered as part of employee benefit packages in many companies. Incentives usually include vision and dental care. Alternatively, Canadians can purchase insurance packages from private insurance providers.

The main reason many choose to purchase private insurance is to supplement primary health coverage. For those requiring services that may not be covered under provincial health insurance such as corrective lenses, medications, or home care, a private insurance plan offsets such medical expenses.

While private insurance can benefit those with certain needs, many Canadians choose to rely exclusively on the public health system

(Cy here - clarification. Only time insurance is private is to get service NOT COVERED under Canada's health care system which are dental, vision and some prescriptions. Supplemental, as shown in the last paragraph, means additional coverage. It means Canadians can purchase additional private insurance for services not covered by the federal health care if THEY WISH TO.)

(I skipped two sections)
Health Care Funding
Health care in Canada is funded at both the provincial and federal levels. The financing of health care is provided via taxation both from personal and corporate income taxes. Additional funds from other financial sources like sales tax and lottery proceeds are also used by some provinces.

Alberta, British Columbia, and Ontario also charge health premiums to supplement health funding, but such premiums are not required for health coverage as per the Canada Health Act.

At a federal level, funds are allocated to provinces and territories via the Canadian Health and Social Transfer (CHST). Transfer payments are made as a combination of tax transfers and cash contributions. The amount of funding provinces and territories receive is significant, and topped $35 billion in 2002-2003.

In 2000, the new budget injected an additional $23 billion of investment into the health care system.

(Notice that it says health care is federally funded through taxes and some other sources such as lottery. Federal government budgets the taxes to each province.)

Federal involvement in health care: Because provinces and territories are responsible for the actual administration and delivery of health care in Canada, friction is apparent whenever policies are set at a federal level

(THIS is where the CI surgery controversy currently occuring in Canada comes in. They are attempting to make it a federal law which conflicts with SOCIALIST principle which SERVES people, not the government.)


It is possible you are unaware of this taking place because you are in a different province. This apparently is happening in the province where Ottawa is.

Perhaps you work in a PRIVATE health care office? They do have those in Canada which have nothing to do with Canadian health care system. The private health system operates pretty much similar to American insurance system. For-profit businesses. Private insurance is not socialist-based. It is not regulated by federal government. It is a private business operated system. From what you've said, it looks like what you know of and work in?

David said...

Health Insurance program is jurisdiction of all provinces. Actually federal government set up basic health care policy for all provinces to follow.

It is not new. It was set up in Saskatchewan in 1950's. The Canadian government later adopted the model of Saskatchewan in 1960's. The policy has been modified occassionally and sometime amended to the Health Act.
In Canada, all doctors (private) and hospitals (not for profit) are not government workers and institutions at all. Only one thing that government controls is insurance policy (based on what you said socialism) but the rest of health care system is not much socialism. It is mixed of government (insurer and policy makers), private (doctors, some clinic centres and some insurance benefits) and not for profits (hospitals). In Europe, every country has their own different policy. In some countries, doctors are government workers. In Canada, our doctors are not government workers. Only differece between USA and Canada is insurance plan. Of course all medical professionals and institutions must follow policies of insurnace plan (whether its government policy or private policy).

I have no problem with Canada Health Act because as taxpayers (I am one of them) are watching governments very carefully.

I am in same province as Ottawa is. Toronto is capital of Ontario and Ottawa is capital of Canada that happens to be in Ontario. I think you are confused about that.

My friends went to get cochlear implants. They are ASL users. They have rights to do what they want. That is the law of Canada. If government forces on people who want to have CI must use AVT, government does not have a gut to do that and government won't do that. I have always worked with Ministry of Health and Long Term Care and we got money from MOH to run several programs and I have known policies and regulations of Health Act as you posted that I am very much aware of.

It appears it is based on your personal view that government you think or feel one day will make a new law to force CI applicants not to use ASL after their CI operation because of money. If so, then it is based on your personal view. Is that correct?


michele said...


I've been following it with an interest. I wonder if Canada has deaf schools that either have bi-bi method or oral programs like in America. Do parents have a choice of where they want to place their children in? As for AVT, do they also have schools there for kids to go to? Is that funded by the government or is it private school? Because then parents have the power to decide where they want to place their children. If Canada were to order parents to put their deaf children in AVT program after they receive CI, it would be cruel and as what David said, violate parents/deaf children's rights. I also wonder if parents could file a lawsuit if their rights are being trampled when they have to restrict in placing their deaf children in AVT program. I think we need more concrete information because there is so much confusion here.

To me, Canada seems like a democracy country and if they would operate like this way, it is not considered as democracy itself. It may be just peer pressure and AVT having power to brainwash parents and scare them in pushing their deaf children in AVT just like in the 1960's when the experts told parents that oralism was the way to go and that deaf institutions were not a good place for children to go.

David said...

Hi Michelle,

There are schools for the Deaf in Canada that are using Bi/Bi programs.

It is only parents who make the final decision to have their deaf children being implanted (cochlear) or not. It is not government's decision. Sadly many fraud AVT programs have influenced parents to have their deaf children implanted and demanded them that their children with CI being trained only in AVT program as only one option. If they agree to AVT's demands, then AVT provides that to their children. If parents do not agree with AVT's demands, then their children will not be allowed to be in AVT program. That is all.

Government has nothing to do with that. That is why we, the Deaf and parents are pushing Ontario government to interfere AVT organizations and demand AVT to accept children with CI who also learn ASL as well. That is our issue.

In fact, Canada and USA both face the same problems. I am sure AVT organziations are doing the same in the USA. We, the Deaf Canadians, just found out and are ready to fight against AVT organizations. I hope Deaf Amercians should keep their eyes on that too. AVT organizations are very sneaky and snakey too.


michele said...

So would it make sense if the protestors went over to AVT buildings and put up signs to let people know? How many AVT organizations are there in Canada?

Is AGB organization operating on AVT philosophy? I could cite some agency examples (John Tracey, AGB and what else more?)

The One and Only Ridor said...

One thing I liked the most about Canada is its universal health care.

We have too many health insurances here who cajoled the prices. Not only that, these insurance companies lobbied OUR governments (state and federal) and agencies to underwrite the policies.

Why do you think Medicaid and Medicare does not approve of replacing hearing aids but will provide CIs immediately? How did it do that? Well, at USC, they had courses that teaches students who studies in cochlear implants to lobby for insurances, governments and so on.

So attacking Canada based on its universal health care makes you look very silly at its best. Claiming that its universal health care was based on socialism, what is YOUR point of doing that? That socialism is bad? Not really. There are good and bad within every ideology including capitalistic democracy. I can go on and on about how bad the capitalistic democracy is to many of us.


Cy said...

Deaf chip,

It is NOT my personal opionion!!! It is ACTUALLY happening right in Ottawa. This province wants to write into LAW that any deaf people who receives CI surgery must stop using ASL. Please read other blogs about this protest. I DID NOT MAKE THIS UP. THIS IS A FACT.

Cy said...


Right - your federal government collects taxes from all Canadians then they split the tax money to give certain amounts to each province which was explained in these 2 sections I skipped.

The point I tried to make is your health care is SOCIALIST based that is intertwined (combined) with democracy operating system that Canada's government runs on.

Because Canada's health care is governmentally operated, THEY determine that THEY can make it a law that all CI receipents be banned from using ASL because THEY pay for the surgery and THEY pay for their post-surgery care. The protest is about telling the Canadian health care, "Wait. You don't have all the information about the Deaf. You cannot make this law to take away our choices."

I support the protest. I only said hopefully the voice is LOUD enough for the system to hear and listen and change their position on banning ASL for CI surgery receipents.


I never said the national health care was BAD. I support it. I am only educating many who are NOT AWARE that Canada has socialist-based governmentally operated health care which is different from our health care system here in the U.S. which are private business operated.

I was quite disappointed when Hilary Clinton's push for national health care failed to get votes in Congress. I know people are afraid for it to become a law due to forseen problems such as what is happening in Canada in relation to the CI recepients being banned from using ASL. That is one example.

Our legislators can learn from Canada and hopefully create a better model that is less socialist based and more compatibable with democractic operating government system.

I predict that one day U.S. WILL adopt a national health care system - it is only question of when. I believe the right to health care should be written into our U.S. Constitution.

Anonymous said...


I would suggest you go check Canada + Health in Wikipedia... you will understand much better about what we have in Canada.

We are very grateful to have free medicare which is provided to every Canadian citizen and every Canadian resident. We are allowed to pick any doctor, not like your US insurance companies that force you to pick a specific hospital and/ or a doctor that is on the insurance company list. Yes, the patient is very limited to those doctors on the approved list. What if the patient really wants to go to that top-rated surgeon, but is not allowed to do so. He can BUT he HAS to pay a high fee out of his pocket. Not very democratic. It is not fair to the patient.

OK, now, we want to know where you got the info about the federal government (in Ottawa) OR the provincial goverment (Toronto) wanting to make it a law requiring children with CI to choose ASL or AVT.

The provincial and federal governments cannot make laws, BUT can write directives/ guidelines/ policies on any aspect of any program or system.

Members of Parliament (federal level) or Members of Provincial Parliament (MPP in Ontario) can make a resolution/ motion to make it into law.

So, where is the proof?? evidence?? newspaper articles?? We want sources. Thank you.

~Just Deaf

Cy said...

Just Deaf,

What you said was already provided to David, the Canadian, when I went into your own Canadian health care government website where everything is explained.

Your system is SOCIALIST based - socialist = everyone gets the equal service. That is what socialism means. Your OPERATING system is still democractic in all other aspects of your country's government.

Now, is UP to them to fight the protest on the ban on ASL for CI receipents. I believe they are involved.

I am surprised you are in the dark about the protest - it is all over deafread. Gallaudet recently held a protest and there was a protest in Ottawa on Friday. You can check Signcast blog, Gallaudet Protests blog, and Mishka Zena's blog (titled NAD Is Right To...) for links to Canadian newspapers on the ASL ban controversy and protest. That was how *I* learned about the protest - I read about it on deafread.

David said...

Ah, you got it all wrong. You misunderstood. I am very much aware of rallies. I ahve been in touch with Deaf leaders about rallies. My friends are involved in taht. You mixed it up.

Let me clear to you

Ontario, MPPs are now working on to make ASL and LSQ as official languages in Ontario. We hope the new law will pass soon. I think you mix up with taht.

There is no such a plan that force CI children to pick one option for law. You still have not shown us any evidence.

You are simply all wrong! You have wrong inforamtion. Don't insult our intellegence. We know alot about Canada. What you make comment is completely wrong. That is all I can say. IF you want to continue, all we need is evidence but so far you have not done.

Rallies in Canada and USA, I know about that but you got that wrong.

You have to read 8 points of OAD.

You have to remember that I was President of OAD. I have been involved in getting ASL passed as a language of instruction.


Cy said...


it seems you and I are talking about two different things. You are talking about recognizing ASL and LSQ as official language. I am not talking about that at all.

I am only talking about the protest relating to the CI surgery recepients that the Canadian health care system wants to ban them from using ASL/LSQ AFTER they had their surgery. This is not about recognizing official language. I am aware Canada is in dispute over the offical language of the Deaf. That is NOT what I am talking about AT ALL.

Please read carefully. I think you misread a lot of things. Please keep the offical language rallies SEPARATE from the CI surgery controversy and protests. They are not related. BUT the AVT organization IS involved in the CI protest - in attempt to overturn their position and attempt to get this law passed.

Allow me explain in a very simple way:

1. If a deaf Canadian wants CI surgery.

2. Canadian health care provides the surgery

3. The expected result for the CI surgery is for the patients to develop speaking and hearing skills.

4. The Canadian health care doesn't see the desired result of CI recepients speaking because many Deaf Canadians still use ASL/LSQ after CI surgery.

End.....that is the story that is going on for years...until NOW.

1. Canadian health care objects that Deaf Canadians continue to use ASL/LSQ after receiving CI.

2. Reason for their objection is the desired result of them speaking did not happen and they are continuing to use ASL/LSQ which is misuse of government/public funding.

3. Now they are discussing about passing a law to ban FUTURE CI receipents from using ASL and require them to follow their oral and aural training.

4. Deaf Canadians are now protesting against them passing this law. Only THIS LAW - NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE DEBATE!!!

5. This is a MEDICAL debate, not a language debate. A debate with the CANADIAN HEALTH CARE, not AVT.

Deaf Canadians STILL HAVE CHOICE whether they WANT CI. What they protest is that Canadian health care WANTS to ban ASL AFTER they have had their surgery.

I don't know which province you live in. It seems it is happening only in one province, not the rest.

For further information, please look into Mishka Zena, Gallaudet Protests and Signcast blogs who provided links to Canadian newspaper about the protests. This is happening in OTTAWA.

Incidentially, New Zealand is also working on passing law that their "ASL" language is the offical language of the deaf New Zealanders. Sweden had long since passed their own signed language law way back in late 1970s- early 1980s. Their system of referral newly diagnosed deaf children is the model that Canada adopted.

As for Sawaschekewian - (spelling?) where you apparently live in...if it is true they have had this "AVT" system in place since 1950s, I must say this is surprising because it seems to be an obscure information.

You seem angry about the very idea that Canada is violating are right. THIS IS WHY THERE IS A PROTEST. Right now it is all about misuse of public money on CI recipents who continue to use ASL after getting CI. THIS IS THE CANADIAN HEALTH CARE'S view. DEAF CANADIAN's view is they have the RIGHT to choose their own language. That is exactly what they are protesting about.

I get the impression that you think I am AGAINST the protest or Canadian health care, etc. I AM NOT!!! I support the protest. I hope the protest is LOUD enough for the government to hear. I hoper AVT is powerful enough to lobby against this bill to ban ASL/LSQ for future CI receipents.

David said...


I understand what you are talking about. You still have not shown me any document and evidence about forcing Deaf with CI not to use ASL.

So I do not agree with your statement at all. So I guess you won't listen to my experience in health care and poltics. So there is no point for me to continue discussion with you at that point.

Of course we all share same goal is to protect ASL and Culture. But at that one area, I do not agree with you about law.


Buck_LA said...

Hi ya all. In USA, there are federally-funded health care programs like Medicare and CHP (Children Health Program). They can cover the CI as well. I guess that makes us Socialist American.

Anonymous said...

We would like to see explicit documents (about CI children and the choice of communication) that the Ontario provincial government ITSELF stated or wrote. Never mind those newspaper articles because they were based on what Deaf leaders and organizers said. These are secondary sources. We would like to see primary sources.

Socialism is not a dirty word at all. It is apparent that the US politicians fear or frown upon whatever is socialistic. Many countries like Germany, UK, Cuba, China, and Russia provide free health programs to every one. Why can't or couldn't the US achieve it??

We Canadians won't let our federal and provincial governments mess up with our health service. We can raise objections if they try to change or charge us for services.

You have to be a Canadian to understand what is going on in Canada. smile

~ Just Deaf

Cy said...

Just Deaf

WHEN did I ever say socialism is bad?? I am only presenting information how Canadian's health care system is different from here. I wish we have socialist health care myself!

I never claimed to be an EXPERT but I know I present accurate information. Basic information. I never gave any in-depth analysis of the system. What I presented was just a generalized understanding of a socialist health care. Socialst IS NOT A DIRTY WORD!!!


Yes we have "socialist" health care in form of Medicare and Medcaid, but not ALL people qualify for Medicaid. Even Medicaid have limits as to who can receive free health care benefits. Canada's system is accessible to every Canadian - which is what is neat about their system.