• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Hospital to charge Dieppe veteran $700 a day

armyvern

Army.ca Myth
Mentor
Reaction score
34
Points
530
"By choice" - operative word there. Here, public transit is not an option and jaunts of well more than 30km are the norm.

Come to New Brunswick where our vets don't have a nursing home every 30km ... or even one in the next community to theirs ... and NO public transit systems to speak of unless you're in one of the "big" (debateable) cities.

As for "lowest cost" - I don't think that's a factor in this case ... for if it were ... they'd have accepted the offered spot a mere 30km away with that access via public transit if required. Doing that would certainly have been much cheaper than what he's faced with as a daily rate now.
 

Armymedic

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Choices are hard to make. Think I said that elsewhere here recently.

If he chooses to refuse a reasonable offer, then he chooses to "pay" the price.

Again I reiterate that this is not an issue of mistreatment of a veteran, but a sign of lack of long term beds and staff.

 

the 48th regulator

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
0
Points
410
His son, the youngest of five children, says he's discovered his father's predicament is not unique among veterans.


Probably because he spent his life savings supporting all five children, which is why he is in this predicament.

If they care for dear old dad, take the remainder and divide it by five.  Pay back dad's kindness by supporting him now.

Then again, an e-mail to Stoffer and the the Mass media cost little.....

dileas

tess



 

armyvern

Army.ca Myth
Mentor
Reaction score
34
Points
530
the 48th regulator said:
His son, the youngest of five children, says he's discovered his father's predicament is not unique among veterans.
...
...

Then again, an e-mail to Stoffer and the the Mass media cost little.....

dileas

tess

Exactly ... given that this predicament is not limited to veterans, but is applicable to all Canadian elderly.
 

F.I.R.S.T.

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
60
ArmyVern said:
Exactly ... given that this predicament is not limited to veterans, but is applicable to all Canadian elderly.

Or any 'special interest' group based on gender, sexual orientation, religion or ethnicity!

If the hospital is applying the rules equally to all, no matter how unfair the rules may seem to those who only read the soundbites, then the hospital is in the right.

 

1feral1

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Hi Vern,

This is a little long winded, but I beleive it answers many questions.

-------------

Australian Veteran's Gold Card

There are four levels of treatment that may be provided:
  o under Part V treatment may be provided:
  o for any injury suffered or disease contracted regardless of when the
  injury or disease was suffered or contracted. Eligible veterans or the
  eligible dependant of a deceased veteran receive a Repatriation Health
  Card - For All Conditions, better known as a Gold Card;
  o for war or defence-caused injuries or diseases, or certain specified
  conditions such as malignant neoplasia and post-traumatic stress
  disorder. Eligible veterans receive a Repatriation Health Card - For
  Specific Conditions, better known as a White Card;
  o specified treatment to otherwise ineligible veterans, dependants or
  former dependants for certain specified conditions. Eligible veterans
  receive a White Card; and
  o under Part VA of the VEA, Commonwealth and allied veterans and allied
  mariners may receive pharmaceuticals through the Repatriation
  Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Eligible veterans and mariners receive
  a Repatriation Pharmaceutical Benefits Card, better known as an Orange
  Card. The Orange Card provides pharmaceuticals only and does not
  provide eligibility for other treatment.

Background (Cont.)

 
Explanation of the Changes

  These amendments to the VEA will extend eligibility for a Gold Card to
  Australian veterans who are aged 70 or over and who have post-World War
  2 qualifying service.

Definition of Veteran

  `Veteran' is defined as follows in subsection 5C(1) of the VEA:
  veteran means:
  (a) a person (including a deceased person):
  (i) who is, because of section 7, taken to have rendered eligible war
  service; or
  (ii) in respect of whom a pension is, or pensions are, payable under
  subsection 13(6); and
  (b) in Parts III and VIIC also includes a person who is:
  (i) a Commonwealth veteran; or
  (ii) an allied veteran; or
  (iv) an allied mariner.
  Only paragraph (a) of the definition applies to this measure because
  paragraph
  (b) of the definition, which provides for a Commonwealth or allied
  veteran or an allied mariner, applies only to Parts III and VIIC of the
  VEA, and this measure relates to Part V of the VEA.

Definition of Veteran (Cont.)

  A `veteran', as defined in paragraph (a) of the definition in
  subsection 5C(1), is a person with `eligible war service' or a person
  in respect of whom a pension is, or pensions are, payable under
  subsection 13(6) of the VEA. `Eligible war service' is achieved by
  having `operational service'. `Operational service' for post World War
  II periods is defined in sections 6C - 6F and applies only to members
  of the Australian Defence Force or a member of a defence force of a
  Commonwealth or allied country who was domiciled in Australia
  immediately prior to their appointment or enlistment.
  Veterans, covered by paragraph (a) of the definition in 5C(1), who may
  now be eligible for a Gold Card are:
  o members of the `Defence Force' of Australia; or
  o a member of a defence force of a Commonwealth or allied country who
  was domiciled in Australia or an external Territory immediately prior
  to their appointment or enlistment.

Qualifying service

  `Qualifying service' is defined in section 7A of the VEA. The major
  test for qualifying service is that the veteran has, in operations
  against the enemy, "incurred danger from hostile forces of the enemy".
  This is an objective and not a subjective test.
  If a person is determined not to have qualifying service, the person
  has a right to request a review of the determination.
  For such service to constitute post-World War 2 `qualifying service'
  for the purposes of this measure, a person must meet the requirements
  of either subparagraphs 7A(1)(a)(ii), (iii), or (iv) or paragraphs
  7A(1)(b), (c) or (f) of the VEA.
  It should be noted that, in relation to persons who served in a
  Commonwealth or allied defence force as per paragraphs 7A(1)(b) or (c),
  only those who were domiciled in Australia prior to their appointment
  or enlistment are covered by this measure.

Some veterans will be automatically sent a Gold Card

  Many veterans will not need to submit an application for a Gold Card.
  The Department of Veterans' Affairs (the Department) will be able to
  identify from its records, many veterans who will qualify by virtue of
  their age and qualifying service and these veterans will automatically
  be sent a Gold Card before 1 July 2002. (Although, the Gold Card and
  subsequent eligibility for treatment will not commence until 1 July
  2002.)

Application for Gold Card

  Veterans not readily identifiable to the Department will be able to
  complete a new application form for the Gold Card. If the Commission
  has not already made a determination about whether or not the veteran
  has qualifying service, then a determination will be made as a result
  of this application.

Commencement Dates

  It must be noted that, under no circumstances can a veteran become
  eligible for treatment under new subsection 85(4B) before he or she
  meets the criteria set out in paragraphs (a) and (b) of new subsection
  85(4B). Nor can a veteran become eligible under new subsection 85(4B)
  before 1 July 2002 as the Act will not commence until 1 July 2002.
  For those eligible veterans who automatically receive a Gold Card in
  the mail before 1 July 2002, their eligibility will commence on and
  from 1 July 2002.
  Eligible veterans who do not automatically receive a Gold Card and who
  are or turn 70 before 1 July 2002 and who apply before 1 July 2002 will
  be eligible from 1 July 2002.
  Eligible veterans who do not automatically receive a Gold Card and who
  are or turn 70 before 1 July 2002 and who apply after 1 July 2002 will
  be eligible from the date their written application is received by the
  Department.
  For those eligible veterans who turn 70 after 1 July 2002, and who
  apply before they turn 70, their eligibility will commence on and from
  the date they turn 70.

                          Explanation of the Items

  Item 1

        Item 1 inserts new subsection 85(4B) after subsection 85(4A). New
        subsection 85(4B) provides the new criteria under which full
        Repatriation health care benefits may be granted to eligible veterans.
        To be eligible under new subsection 85(4B) a person must be a
        `veteran', as defined in paragraph (a) of the definition of `veteran'
        in subsection 5C(1), must be aged 70 years or over and must have
        qualifying service of a kind referred to in either subparagraphs
        7A(1)(a)(ii), (iii) or (iv) or paragraphs 7A(1)(b), (c) or (f). These
        subparagraphs and paragraphs contain post-World War 2 qualifying
        service provisions.
        Paragraph (c) of new subsection 85(4B) provides that a veteran's
        eligibility for treatment cannot commence before either of the
        following have occurred:
        o the Department has notified the veteran, in writing, that he or she
        is or will be eligible for such treatment; or
        o the veteran has notified the Department in writing that he or she
        seeks eligibility for such treatment.

  Item 2

        Item 2 provides that the notifications referred to in new subparagraphs
        85(4B)(c)(i) or (ii) may be given before this Schedule commences. The
        Schedule will commence on 1 July 2002.
        The Note after this item goes on to explain that the notifications may
        be issued before 1 July 2002 so that a veteran can be eligible for
        treatment from the earliest possible date, being 1 July 2002. This will
        ensure that administrative tasks, such as the determination of
        applications, will not delay the commencement of a veteran's
        eligibility for full Repatriation health care benefits. However, a
        veteran must have first satisfied the criteria in new paragraphs
        85(4B)(a) and (b), that is, be aged 70 years or over and have post
        World War 2 qualifying service.
        Where a veteran has been notified by the Department that they will be
        eligible for a Gold Card from 1 July 2002, the veteran will become
        eligible for treatment from 1 July 2002, the commencement date of the
        Act, but not before.

Item 2 (Cont.)

  No veteran can become eligible for treatment by virtue of this Act
  before
  1 July 2002. For example, a person who is aged 70 before 1 July 2002
  and who notifies the Department in May 2002 that they seek eligibility
  for treatment, cannot become eligible before this Act commences, the
  earliest date being 1 July 2002, which is the commencement date of this
  Act.

    __________________________________________________________________


IMPORTANT: This email remains the property of the Australian Defence Organisation and is subject to the jurisdiction of section 70 of the Crimes Act 1914. If you have received this email in error, you are requested to contact the sender and delete the email.


-------

Cheers,

Wes
 

YZT580

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
493
Points
930
For those of you not familiar with the area, 30 km. in that vicinity can be a one hour drive, dependent upon traffic. Popping in for a half an hour or to share a meal is not possible when you have to schedule the drive around rush hour: something not found everywhere in Canada.  The distance is just enough that instead of being part of the routine and remaining part of the family, he becomes a Sunday afternoon obligation: and there is a big difference.  The highway is one of the busiest in all of North America: including the notorious Bay Bridge.  Agreed that this is not a VETS issue per se but, the price of admission to a POW camp should include some priority and I would extend that to anyone who signed up during wartime service.  The System is not supposed to look outside of the selections made or at least the same region and believe me, Etobicoke is not the same region as Oakville.  We are dealing with the same issues and were told this by the case worker when we discussed the priority listing: it is first selection from the options picked.  There are numerous immigrant families (not citizens) who have brought their elderly parents over legitimately under Canadian law and are now placing them into care.  No complaints provided priority is given to those who have earned it as stated above.
 

armyvern

Army.ca Myth
Mentor
Reaction score
34
Points
530
YZT580 said:
For those of you not familiar with the area, 30 km. in that vicinity can be a one hour drive, dependent upon traffic. Popping in for a half an hour or to share a meal is not possible when you have to schedule the drive around rush hour: something not found everywhere in Canada.  The distance is just enough that instead of being part of the routine and remaining part of the family, he becomes a Sunday afternoon obligation: and there is a big difference.  The highway is one of the busiest in all of North America: including the notorious Bay Bridge. 

Not anywhere else in Canada? So, it's rush hour - so there's a bridge - so you can't always get there for meals. So what??

What do they do up in northern Ontario (or here in NB) with shitty roads ... 1 hour drives (or a lot more!!) on secondary rural roads which are usually poorly plowed in the winter etc., no public transport to speak of ... Give your head a shake. Some places here you have to go 140 kms to hit the closest nursing home.  ::) That's over a hour trip on a good day - try it in the winter ... I have. You think that I get to pop in for a meal on a whim here? I do it (the drive) because it's my family member - that makes it worth it.

As for this guy being a Vet, he is already subsidized by VAC for that reason - something other Canadians aren't due to his service.

His situation is not unique, not special. There are far more elderly in even worse situations who are not getting a subsidized ride.

Are you willing, as a Canadian taxpayer, to build a Seniors residence every 30km throughout this country so that no one is in this situation? 30km is diddly squat. His family is lucky. Or would you rather build a nursing home every 10km throughout Canada ... for his families (and every other Senior's family) benefit instead just so no one is 'put out'?
 

Kat Stevens

Army.ca Fixture
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
1,468
Points
1,060
It's a 50 KM round trip for me to buy a jug of milk and a loaf of bread, 60 KM round trip to be able to see my Mum, or Dad (RIP, Dad) a couple of times a week is a drop in a very big bucket.
 

the 48th regulator

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
0
Points
410
Kat Stevens said:
It's a 50 KM round trip for me to buy a jug of milk and a loaf of bread, 60 KM round trip to be able to see my Mum, or Dad (RIP, Dad) a couple of times a week is a drop in a very big bucket.

Here here,

Phucking rush hour traffic.

YZT580, why don't his five children offer the same type of sacrifice that their dear old dad offered for their own freedom, and drive the 1 hour that it takes.

I was born, raised and served in the GTA, and still live here, your reasoning is a poor excuse for five Canadian Citizens finding a way for them not to pay homage to a Veteran, that gave us our freedom by giving up 5 years of his own.  Even further, they are his children.  They are just trying to not pay out of their pockets, and riding on dear old Dad's coat tails.

dileas

tess
 

PMedMoe

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Reaction score
764
Points
940
My mother is in a home almost 55 kms from where my Dad lives.  As much as I understand this veteran's desire to stay in his home town and close to family, sometimes it's just not possible.  Take the offered home and get put on a waiting list for the others.  My mother is still on waiting lists for two or three, as far as I know.
 

Journeyman

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
1,110
Points
940
ArmyVern said:
here you have to go 140 kms to hit the closest nursing home.  ::) That's over a hour trip on a good day

Geez girl, you should go easy on that Maserati of yours  ;)
 

40below

Member
Reaction score
0
Points
160
They call such patients "bed blockers" in the hospital I volunteer at. People have had cancer surgeries and other procedures cancelled at the last minute and rescheduled months later because somebody is in a bed they don't need to be, meaning the hospital can't cascade people from stepdown into critical care or other beds because someone is refusing to go to an open nursing home bed because it's not the one they want. (And this is a hospital with a Victory Wing for veterans.)

The only reason this is newsworthy is that it's a veteran doing the bed blocking, which I guess makes it OK or at least excusable to a lot of people, at least those who aren't standing behind this guy waiting for a cancer op or a joint replacement.
 

Marauder

Sr. Member
Reaction score
0
Points
210
Wow, a Toronto media "story" that's long on manufactured outrage and short on how the real world actually fucking works. If any of these "journalists" spent more than five minutes outside their cubicle, they might actually learn how those of us working in the "heartless bureaucracy" are fighting tooth and nail to provide the best possbile care for seniors (not just vets, EVERY SENIOR), while getting splattered every damn day with political ass-covering, inertia, and downloading of one stupid decision at the cabinet level after another.

As Edward so adroitly pointed out, community care remains the red-headed step child of the healthcare spectrum. This despite mounting and reproducible evidence that properly funded home health care service serves the interest of greater numbers of people in "the system" for the same resources than are used in acute care service delivery models. But funding community care doesn't provide specialists a license to print ungodly sums of money, nor does it let our "elected elite" pose for "shovel in the ground" photos. Community health care isn't, what do you call it, "sexy". So even though it serves the interests of "the people" (i.e. you and me and average Ontario taxpayers), it doesn't serve the interests of "the *right* people".

As sparse as those pesky "fact" things are in this article, it sounds like Oakville Trafalgar is possibly in a massive bed crunch if the CCAC is looking for any and every available LTC bed in a reasonable radius. In 'normal' circumstances, if Mr. Parkin's three choices were in Oakville, he would have waited in that acute care hospital bed until one of his choices was available. If there was a designated veteran's bed in any of those three choices, Mr. Parkin would already be at a huge advantage over non-vets (like say someone who had even poorer eyesight, and was told to stay home and help on the family farm, to meet the massive need for foodstuffs to help maintain the war effort...you know, one of the lesser-deserving types); that bed set aside for vets would cut his wait from up to a year OR MORE down to months.

But say the hospital is in a 1A crisis status. This means the hospital has an "occupancy rate" of over 105%, mostly due to Alternate Level of Care patients filling beds that are meant for treating acutely ill people (provided they have an OHIP card or are a refugee receiving Interim Federal Health funding).

ALC is the designation for patients like Mr. Parkin; they have been ministered back to a manageable level of health (or less sickness), and their needs should be met in another setting, mostly long term care (aka "the nursing home"). This is because while their acuity does not *require* the level of treatment/intervention that acute care beds are designed to provide, they cannot, however, be properly managed at home, even with CCAC putting in the maximum time for care (pay real close attention here) THAT THE LEGISTLATION IN THE LONG TERM CARE ACT CAPS THEM AT PROVIDING FOR THESE CLIENTS. When there is a slowdown of clients being admitted from hospital to LTC via the usual waitlist process, mostly because families never do the rational thing and make at least one choice with a short waitlist, then the hospital gets into a real dilemma. This total lack of turnover in acute care beds (which is how the system has been designed to work up till now) leads to undesirable things such as,for example, postponing or canceling altogether elective or even non-emergency surgeries, and/or having to divert ambulances from ER. Both of these things happen when there are no more beds (both in the physical sense, and in the nursing staffing sense) to admit people into. This of course lead to us "regular taxpayers" screaming bloody murder about this. This makes the government of the day and hospital boards of directors nervous and queasy.

So, sometime in these crunches, the CCACs are "asked" by MOHTLC to work with hospitals to find any appropriate LTC bed they can for these ALC clients, to permit a crisis placement of the client into LTC. Now again, PAY ATTENTION HERE. This crisis placement does not mean the patient will be staying there in that bed forever. They still have the RIGHT to be placed on the waitlist for their original choices. That's right, if Mr. Parkin had accepted the bed outside of Oakville, he could have stayed on a waitlist to go back to an LTC facility in Oakville of his choice, waiting in an environment that would have provided for his every need that he or his biological offspring (kids denotes a member of a family unit that gives a shit about their progenitor, as Tess has highlighted) could not provide for himself. The DIFFERENCE is that instead he and his family have CHOSEN to wait in a bed in that Oakville hospital that could be used to care for someone after their cancer surgery, or after a non-urgent exploratory surgery that might have found that cancer even faster, or for someone who could have stayed near home to recover from their heart attack instead of having their ambulance diverted to an ER who knows where that is open because that ER's available beds are maybe only at 95% occupancy.

So you can rant and rave about the necessarily evil decisions made by those "heartless bureaucrats" that are busting their collective ass each and every day to keep a system designed and funded by politicians who don't have clue one about health or health care running along as best they can. Feel free to spew rightous indignation and deride them for making the hard, if not impossible, decisions each minute they are on the clock. But keep in mind the next time you are waiting two years for an elective surgery that YOU ARE SUPPORTING THAT by making ignorant comments in support of your fellow citizens (veteran or not) choosing to act in a selfish manner that throws the idea of the common good out the window.

Once that realization hits, you can then call the O2 wasting babykisser that "represents" you to tell him/her/it to spend more time figuring out a long term solution to properly funding and supporting health care, and less time thinking about what meaningless, short sighted bread and circuses they can buy you in the next four years to get their sorry worthless ass re-elected.
 

GAP

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Mentor
Reaction score
20
Points
380
Marauder said:
Wow, a Toronto media "story" that's long on manufactured outrage and short on how the real world actually fucking works. If any of these "journalists" spent more than five minutes outside their cubicle, they might actually learn how those of us working in the "heartless bureaucracy" are fighting tooth and nail to provide the best possbile care for seniors (not just vets, EVERY SENIOR), while getting splattered every damn day with political ass-covering, inertia, and downloading of one stupid decision at the cabinet level after another.

And All the stuff inbetween these two paragraphs included

Once that realization hits, you can then call the O2 wasting babykisser that "represents" you to tell him/her/it to spend more time figuring out a long term solution to properly funding and supporting health care, and less time thinking about what meaningless, short sighted bread and circuses they can buy you in the next four years to get their sorry worthless ass re-elected.

You really shouldn't dodge around the issue, just say what you are thinking.... ;D

(ps: I happen to agree with you, good explanation...)
 

jacksparrow

Banned
Banned
Reaction score
0
Points
160
Some good points have been raised here so far, but am going to add my 2 pence worth.

It's not like they are throwing this geezer out on the street, they are offering him another home in Etobicoke for crying out loud. Now for those that know the area, that is like a 2-30mins drive away.

Could you imagine if every Vet starts doing the same and denying people that really need the beds? I relate this to people that go to restaurants, finish their food but sit there and watch people in-line waiting for a table :-(

There are some that think being a Vet gives them carte blanche to do whatever
 

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,985
Points
1,060
jacksparrow said:
Some good points have been raised here so far, but am going to add my 2 pence worth.

It's not like they are throwing this geezer out on the street, they are offering him another home in Etobicoke for crying out loud. Now for those that know the area, that is like a 2-30mins drive away.

Could you imagine if every Vet starts doing the same and denying people that really need the beds? I relate this to people that go to restaurants, finish their food but sit there and watch people in-line waiting for a table :-(

There are some that think being a Vet gives them carte blanche to do whatever

And then, there are arseholes like you that refer to a vet who served, was wounded and a POW protecting the freedom you enjoy today as "geezers". 

Anyways...on top of wanting to kick JackassSparrow in the 'nads right now, I have 2 points.

1.  I feel for the man, who just wants to remain in his hometown for his remaining days, and hope he can get some resolution he is happy with.

2.  What the hell is wrong with this son of his?  Can't he do something like, gee...put a wheelchair ramp in??

For the last two years, Parkin had been living with his youngest son and daughter-in-law until kidney failure required him to be hospitalized at Oakville-Trafalgar on Jan. 3. They almost lost him, but with the help of a feeding tube, he's regained enough of his health that he was ready to be discharged a few months ago.

An assessment by the Community Care Access Centre determined that Parkin couldn't go back home to his son because he's now confined to a wheelchair, requires constant care and the house isn't wheelchair accessible. So CCAC began looking for a spot in a long-term care facility and Parkin's family was assured that as a veteran, he would receive priority.

For the love of God man, how about being part of the solution for your own father instead of being part of the problem you are actually complaining about? 

I feel for this man, who must feel like a 'hot potato'. 
 

PMedMoe

Army.ca Legend
Donor
Reaction score
764
Points
940
Eye In The Sky said:
What the hell is wrong with this son of his?  Can't he do something like, gee...put a wheelchair ramp in??

An assessment by the Community Care Access Centre determined that Parkin couldn't go back home to his son because he's now confined to a wheelchair, requires constant care and the house isn't wheelchair accessible.

Maybe you missed the part that I've put in bold?
There are more requirements to home care for this vet than a wheelchair ramp.
 
Top