this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
141 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

8995 readers
2009 users here now

What's going on Canada?

Related Communities

🍁 Meta

🗺️ Provinces / Territories

🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.

🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer

💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.

💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales

🗣️ Politics

🍁 Social / Culture

Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
otter@lemmy.ca
mp3@lemmy.ca
141
Why Canadian-trained doctors should be allowed to practise anywhere in Canada without additional licensing (theconversation.com)
submitted 1 day ago by otters_raft@lemmy.ca to c/canada@lemmy.ca
14 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

While politicians tout the benefits of reducing interprovincial trade barriers to unlock prosperity amid escalating trade tensions, our most precious health-care resources — fully qualified doctors — remain shackled. Physicians face a maze of regulations when attempting to practise beyond their home province. We must break these chains.

See articles for full details

Authors:

  • Anthony Sanfilippo - professor of Medicine (Cardiology), Queen's University, Ontario
  • Neil Seeman - Senior Fellow, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, and Adjunct Professor, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 0 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

Excuse me but that just dodging the question, or outsourcing the responsibility to tHE fReE mARkeT.

Let's say he speaks really shitty basic English and there is a big need for his specialty and he's hired with the assumption that it will get better...over time, maybe. Then YOU take your kid who you suspect might have something going on and are assigned to this doctor who barely speaks English. Your doctor can barely communicate with you the parent or the kid in English and you have to monkey around with chatgpt, google translate and hand gestures to explain what hurts, and at what situation. He comes back with some kind of response and then you have follow up questions, like is this invasive test necessary, can it be rescheduled, are there alternatives, what about that other drug the kid is taking and so on. And again, you have to do this with Google translate and chatgpt or whatever because the guys English is limited to "little girl test blood no needle, day tomorrow, no worry, if pain come back".

Does this sound like hell to you? It does to me.

Now flip the script, and imagine you're a francophone. That's what I'm talking about.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

This could be easily solved without stopping doctors from having mobility to the majority of Canada. Moreover, some regions have people who speak English or French poorly, if at all. The concerns you raise will almost always apply to them, so how many languages are you going to require doctors learn before they can practice? Or do you insist that all doctors just be bilingual? Is just French okay?

You could easily craft a federal law that requires any doctor to be licensed in a given region be fluent in the primary language of that region. Yes, that would limit doctors going in or out of Quebec (and other regions to a lesser degree). But how does stopping someone from being able to practice in both BC and Ontario without needless hurdles help or harm Quebec?

[–] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 3 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

This whole thread started with me saying:

In principle yes, but don't forget language requirements.

The rest of what I wrote is just trying to get people with dismissive attitudes towards my argument ("absolute nonsense") to empathize with my point of view.

Now, your second paragraph basically operationalizes exactly what I'm talking about. We are in agreement.