Ethics

To look at the ancient Grecian traditional Hygeia cult would be like looking at the current Canadian Social system. A limiting system has board coverage to all people funded by the government, which confines the growth of technology. The moral and ethical ramifications have detrimental impact on the patient care of that type of system.

Their system allows for broad equal coverage of all individuals. It would include long waits for scans to make a diagnosis. The individuals would not have to pay out of pocket for the coverage, but a large tax. Preventative medication is offered with strong implementation. They look to be proactive in no creating health issues.

The system ethically covers all individuals, but does a disservice to the patients due to the long wait times for test. It is common for people to wait six months for a CT scan. During that time, the disease process could advance to stage four or incurable in that time. Is this ethically correct, and practice of good medicine? I think this is morally and ethically a disservice to the patient. This is limiting the scope of care that is available.

The government will ensure that healthcare coverage is to all individuals. The quality of care is sacrificed due to the lack of an objective free market. There is a backlog of patients for each diagnostic imaging services. Converting to another system would be difficult for individuals to loose control over the physician they see and when the treatment takes place.

I would try to incorporate the board coverage of care to all individuals. I would like to keep the objective free market to keep the coverage board and current. Competion is good for all individuals involved. It keeps the price to degree under control, and allows individuals to have the control over their healthcare. This would allow for timely diagnosis of disease processes. Morally and ethically, offering board range coverage is good medicine, as long