Monday, March 31, 2025
Brock's Only Independent Student Newspaper
One of the only worker-managed newspapers in Canada

Doug Ford privatizing surgery to the pragmatic right’s applause

|
|

Ontario’s premier, Doug Ford recently announced that he will be moving 50 per cent of non-essential surgeries as well as diagnostic assessments to for-profit clinics to help with a backlogged surgery list, due to Ontario’s stressed medical system. This has been understood as just another attempt by the Ford government to use their deliberate attacks on the medical system, from capping nurse’s wages with Bill-124 to withholding funding to the system with a $2.1 billion budgetary surplus in 2021.

Ford claimed in a press conference that our system is like those in Cuba and North Korea and that it’s time to move forward. Private eye surgery clinic owners who have lobbied Doug Ford have already seen gains in the past with the government licensing private eye clinics as independent health facilities soon after their lobbying efforts. It’s no secret that Ford is for sale, however the right has to do performative backflips to make his gutting of Ontario’s healthcare system look pragmatic.

Jesse Kline, Deputy Comment Editor at The National Post and a hardline apologist of the Israeli occupation and de facto open-air prisons of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, felt he still has a reliable gage on human well being not just abroad but domestically too, having recently put out an op-ed claiming that Ford’s change was “modest” and the left was simply being hysterical about the recent announcement:

“As much as the left would like us to believe that any private involvement is antithetical to a universal health-care system, the fact remains that much of the care we receive is provisioned privately, even if it’s paid for through the public purse.”

This is true. Many walk-in clinics, diagnostic assessment centres, doctor’s offices and so on, are privately funded. However, the idea that expanding private clinics will help with a backlogged system is not a safe bet. As the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario precautioned, simply diverting responsibilities and procedures to the private sector doesn’t ensure less wait-times and could even mean longer backlogs if the systems aren’t connected because of a lack of continuity with patient information between centres. The College also stated they weren’t brought into the conversation in regards to the recent decision to push certain surgeries to for-profit clinics.

Kline goes on to say that Ford ought to go further and privatize more of the healthcare system: “if ever there was a time for some premiers to stand up and say, ‘To hell with it, we’re going to stop insuring a handful of non-critical elective surgeries and allow the private sector to start charging for them, Canada Health Act be damned,’ now is it.”

This is a profoundly surface-level solution. For one, Ford plans to eventually move from currently outsourcing basic cataract surgeries, soft-tissue plastic surgery of the hands, and the likes, to more non-invasive surgeries such as colonoscopies, endoscopies, as well as MRI and CT scans. The issue is that these latter items can be preliminary procedures in discovering more serious health complications. This means that the wealthy Ontarian who doesn’t want to deal with the public system’s backlogged lists can get their MRI scan from a for-profit and so pays up front in the form of user fees, higher costs—or in Kline’s vision of a scrapping of the CHA, the full cost of surgery. Let’s say this MRI scan reveals something of serious concern, then this person is moved up the priority list in the public system. The person who is in the same position but can’t afford user fees for an MRI wouldn’t be able to skip the line.

However, this is already giving too much credit to the idea that using for-profit clinics for surgery means better care. As the highly cited (over 400) meta-analysis from the Canada Medical Association Journal which explored for-profit against non-profit hospital mortality outcomes, looking at 26,000 hospitals and 38 million patients, from 2002 demonstrated—”​​Our meta-analysis suggests that private for-profit ownership of hospitals, in comparison with private not-for-profit ownership, results in a higher risk of death for patients.”

Of course, critical surgeries aren’t on the docket for privatization in Ontario, yet. However, that doesn’t hinge on the point that for-profit clinics don’t have the patient’s care as a top funding priority.

One other important aspect that the study points to when considering why for-profit clinics have worse mortality outcomes is that because the clinics are beholden to shareholders, senior administrator reimbursement packages cut into funding that would go towards patient care and infrastructure. This puts for-profit clinics on unequal footing with publicly funded healthcare which isn’t beholden to anyone’s expectations for a monetary return.

Instead, public healthcare is concerned with the public’s wanting a return in the form of their health outcomes.

More by this author

RELATED ARTICLES

Chibi-Robo: Nintendo’s strange, charming and underappreciated hidden gem 

I’m willing to bet that you haven’t played Chibi-Robo. 

Dating apps are the way of the future, and that absolutely sucks 

Dating apps are set to dominate the future of finding love, and I couldn’t be unhappier about it. 

Dissecting the embarrassing Trump-Vance meeting with Zelenskyy 

On Feb. 28, U.S. President Donald Trump met with the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to discuss strategies for dealing with the Russo-Ukrainian War that has ravaged the streets of Ukraine since the Russian invasion over three years ago. What ensued can’t simply be described as a failed negotiation — the meeting put the embarrassing ineptitude of the Trump administration on display for the whole world to see. 

Diving into the subreddit that hates Taylor Swift 

The behaviour of the Reddit community r/travisandtaylor goes far beyond fair criticism of Taylor Swift — it’s devolved into full-on hating for the sake of hating, with a dash of misogyny. 

“The Giving Tree” isn’t as bad as people say 

The Giving Tree has faced a lot of rightful criticism over the years, but the book is still a very important piece of literature. 

There’s nothing wrong with Shrek 5’s new look 

The teaser for Shrek 5 might use a different visual design for the franchise’s characters than what fans are used to, but the public backlash isn’t warranted. 

Trump is using tariffs to assert power, not to increase Canadian border security 

Don’t be fooled by the false pretenses of punishing a lack of border security behind Trump’s tariffs on Canadian industries; his trade wars are simply an expression of his desire to exert economic power onto other nations to see if he can bully them around. 

Who is the iPhone 16e actually meant for? 

Cost-effective purchasers would be wise to avoid Apple’s new “budget” iPhone 16e.