Long-term care sustainability in the Canadian healthcare system

Long-Term Care Sustainability as a Major Issue Affecting Canadian Healthcare System

The Canadian Health Act (CHA) provides that provincial governments should cover the entire cost of hospital and physician services. There are however two components that the CHA doesn't require provincial governments to pay for including two other components of healthcare; drug costs and non-acute care provided in nursing homes and other kinds of long-term care facilities. Thus, it is up to provincial governments to decide this element of medical care. This leaves policymakers with the responsibility of using funds available to make sure that long-term healthcare needs of the elderly are taken care of (Blomqvist and Busby, 2012).

Long-term planning for non-acute care is crucial to ensure that Canada's aging population is catered for (Blomqvist and Busby, 2012). Long-term care can be defined as a continual, indeterminate (in terms of duration) care for persons who are no longer able to support themselves. Long-term attention can be classified as both healthcare as medical/nursing care and collective services like cheap housing, means of transport, ability to dress and feed independently, ability to individually and discretely use washrooms and the provision of sports and community programs (Vladeck, 2003).

Different forms of long-term care may include hospital-based long-term care, which is frequently multifaceted, more intense and short-term refers to residential-care. Hospital-care may also refer to assisted living settings which provide basic support levels and is based on the assumption that the patients being cared for are independent and do not need 24-hour attention (Banerjee, 2007). Types of long-term care may include; weekly shopping, assistance to attend to appointments, modern housing, medical examination, nurturing, communal if not, nursing, social or salutary cures. Usually, we associate long-term care with old people and nursing home. Depending on the situation, the younger or the middle-aged individuals may need continuing care in their lives. An accident or occurrence of any kind of sudden incapacitating ailment may demand a 24-hour care for individuals irrespective of their age (Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association Report, 2012).

Introduction

The report released by the Canadian senate in the year 2009 on the country's elderly population, reveals how reprehensively the elderly in Canada are being treated.

Lack of enough sufficient modern housing is making the elderly in Canada to live in isolated places with poor means of transportation.

Present income security measures are not sufficient for the current living standards and thus they cannot even cover their basic needs.

The current income structure for those who care for the elderly is not enough, and many Canadian caregivers have to choose between getting new jobs or caring for the elderly (Silversides, 2011).

The Canadian government is facing a huge challenge on finding the best methods to provide continuing care to its elderly population. The aging population is important in showing demand for the long-term care for the elderly in the years to come in Canada. Thirty three percent of the current Canadian demographic citizens are elderly citizens. As of now, close to 14% of the Canadian population is above 65 years. Going by the present analysis, it is guessed that 25% of the whole nation will be above 65 years by the year 2036. Living longer does not mean leading a good health because as we grow older, it is more likely that we will contract chronic illnesses. This means that the Canadian government may have to look for better ways to provide either residential or home-based care. According to statistics of Canada, 10%, 30% and 50% of people will need continuing care by the time they get to the age of 55, 65 and 75.4 respectively (Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association Report, 2012).

Analysis

Through Extended Health Care Services program (EHCS), the central government disbursed funds for long-term care to the provincial governments. This cost $20 per individual at the start in 1977; this rose to $51.51 by 1990s totaling to $1.5 billion yearly between 1994/5. This project however, later collapsed (Banerjee, 2007).

For long-term care to be realized, Silversides (2011) suggested the following must be checked:

Inadequate staff being the bigger issue,

Conducive working environment is important for long-term care,

Standard of living is important,

Improved expenditure on long-term and residential care,

Overworking without pay for caregivers must stop,

Residential care should be integrated into institutional care,

Palliative care is not fully funded in long-term care, and The care given should be community-based to be more effective.

Summary and conclusion

The majority of Canadians are of the viewpoint that the federal government should cover a substantial part of the long-term care costs. This position is based on the reasoning that such responsibility or funding would be a fulfillment of the government responsibility to ensure that everyone receives the set minimum standard of care, notwithstanding their socioeconomic status. In other words provision of funding for long-term care would be a fulfillment of the government responsibility of providing universal healthcare (Blomqvist and Busby, 2012). However, with limited expenditure on healthcare, as the costs of health also increase, governments will have to either escalate tax rate or cut the cost on other areas of public interest, actions, which will likely paralyze Canada's global competitive ability. Upsurge in taxation will escalate production cost, which will make life expensive in Canada. Infrastructural development and proper funding of Education are very vital in boosting the local economic growth. Loss of its competitive advantage will result in unemployment, slow rate of industrialization, inadequate skills and in the end, a failed state (Stuart & Adams, 2007).

Regardless of the argument that provision of long-term care is a matter of provision of universal healthcare or a question of whether the government has the means to do so, an important objective for the federal government would be to ensure the utilization of funds for the long-term care sector in a cost effective manner. Both the federal and provincial governments must investigate what long-term care services provide the best money value and formulate incentives and regulations to monitor the use of such services (Blomqvist and Busby, 2012).

Recommendations:

Over the last few years reports and studies have investigated the state of long-term care in Canada. Action is required at all levels to make sure that all Canadians receive the minimum standard of care regardless of their age (Canadian Healthcare Association, 2009). Policymakers are now gaining interest in the "continuum of care" as both national and local governments try to do their best to meet the care needs of the people, address unemployment, and improve productivity via integration and coordination of services (Alexander, 2002).

According to the Canadian Life and Health Insurance Association (2012), the government and stakeholders must:

Put forward measures to restructure on the health financing by transitioning at least 20% of people in long-term care facilities to residential care to have more space for more people.

Encourage the people of Canada to save for continuing or long-term care by incentivizing people to buy into related insurance covers. In addition, make Canadians more knowledgeable through education on the importance of health cover and existing alternatives.

Long-term care should be for the benefit of patients: people should be funded directly and not institutions. Canadians should be also given opportunity to choose where to attend them.

Funding should be done according to the continuum of care. Financing should be done by looking at what kind of care organizations offer in terms of care and their sustainability.

Enhance a wholesome range of care, which the government renders which should give room for more well equipped facilities in the country by allowing privatization.

Encouraging health and education promotion: encourage healthy living and change of lifestyle that will improve health of the Canadian people.

Invest in health human resources so as to increase the quality of care offered in long-term care facilities (Canadian Healthcare Association, 2009).