We argue that understanding the complexities of home care is one thing, resolution of the issues in the model proposed is another. Although the federal government has agreed that there will be more dollars infused through the Canada Health and Social Transfer, the suggested policy instrument recommended for financing the model does not assure that home care programs will receive the funding that is required when other important and competing interests are considered (e.g., cancer treatment and waiting lists).
We are at a point where there is incredible potential to reconfigure the health system such that home and community-based care can play a much greater role, but how do we fully realize that potential? The first step is to take the opportunity afforded by the huge surplus of the federal government and to invest heavily in developing home care - to create a system by design. That means thinking about funding directed to home care as an investment, and not as a cost. More funding, however, has limited utility without a sense of where the funding should be targeted, and for what purpose.
We agree in principle that a national approach is required to advance and support home care to meet the needs of the future with the correct policy instruments. What happens in the next couple of years will shape that long-term model of home care. Whether that be by default or design is contingent on the willingness and commitment of the politicians and policymakers, and the degree to which the Canadian public have a voice that will be heard.
Be the first to comment on this!
This article is for subscribers only. To view the entire article
Note: Please enter a display name. Your email address will not be publically displayed