WINNIPEG FREE PRESS COLUMN: Debbie’s Law: a common-sense change
Imagine meeting with a specialist about some chest problems you’ve been having. After a few tests, you’re told you have a very serious heart problem and require surgery within three weeks.
You’re not told this at the time, but the system is backed up as staff are taking holidays. As a result, you’re going to have to wait more than three weeks for surgery — the system is gambling with your life.
Sadly, the example above is based on a true story — something Manitoba patient Debbie Fewster experienced last year. The mother of three, and grandmother of 10, felt chest pains in July, proceeded to have some tests shortly after and was told she required surgery within three weeks. Debbie waited and waited, ultimately lasting until Thanksgiving before passing away.
Debbie’s son told us that if they had known at the beginning that it would have taken so long for surgery that he and his sisters would have remortgaged their homes and scraped together money to pay for surgery abroad. Again, the system never told Debbie that it couldn’t provide treatment in time, so they never explored that option. Now that she is gone, there is a huge hole in the Fewster family, she meant everything to her kids and grandkids.
While some health reform options can be contentious, one policy solution that could help in situations like this is pretty straightforward. Politicians across the political spectrum should be able to get behind what we’ve called “Debbie’s Law.”
“Debbie’s Law” would require health regions to be up front with patients and let them know if they can’t provide potentially life-saving treatment within the recommended time frame. Patients could be advised that they may want to look outside the province for treatment.
This situation, of course, is not ideal.
No health system wants to tell a patient that it can’t provide treatment in time.
But what’s the alternative? Lead patients on? We know how that story ends — ask Debbie’s children.
Consider that governments impose very high taxes on the public in the name of quality health care, then fail to deliver treatment in a timely manner. At the same time, governments impose bans on private alternatives.
The least governments could do is be honest and upfront with patients.
While not all patients have the ability to scrape together funds to pay for treatment abroad, everyone would benefit from Debbie’s Law.
If patients are notified when life-saving treatment is not available within the recommended time frame, some would travel abroad for treatment and leave the government’s waitlist, allowing others to move up in the queue.
Perhaps the great irony in Debbie’s Law is that it would actually bring governments in line with what they require private businesses to do.
If a car company discovers a safety problem with a vehicle it manufactured, it is required to notify consumers.
Similarly, if a food distributor discovers e-coli on food products it has sold, it too must notify consumers.
So, if government health regions know their wait times for surgery are putting patient lives at risk, why don’t they have to notify patients? Rules for thee but not for me.
Debbie’s Law of course will not fix deeper problems in Canada’s health-care system. Broader reform is obviously needed. The fact that Canada has 10 provinces that are run by a mix of NDP, Liberal and Conservative parties — and not one of them is providing anything remotely close to exceptional health care — well, that demonstrates that the system itself needs reform.
But in the meantime, Debbie’s Law is a non-ideological solution that all parties should be able to get behind. Unless, of course, someone actually believes that patients should be kept in the dark.
Colin Craig is president of SecondStreet.org, a public policy think tank that worked with Debbie Fewster’s family to propose “Debbie’s Law.”
You can help us continue to research and tell stories about this issue by making a donation or sharing this content with your friends. Be sure to sign up for our updates too!
