Alberta Premier Danielle Smith has officially announced that her government plans to permit physicians to work in both the public and private healthcare sectors concurrently. Smith detailed the proposed “Dual Practice Surgery Model” in a social media video, emphasizing its potential to alleviate wait times by increasing the capacity for surgeries. The legislation, as confirmed by Hospital and Surgical Health Services Minister Matt Jones, may encompass family doctors as well, not just focusing on surgeries.
With over 80,000 Albertans awaiting elective surgeries such as hip or knee replacements, Smith emphasized that the changes would mandate surgeons to continue performing a specific number of publicly funded surgeries annually. However, they would also have the option to conduct additional elective surgeries privately during their free time. Smith highlighted that this approach would expedite the process for those on public waitlists to receive their surgeries sooner.
Furthermore, Smith underscored that these adjustments aim to retain Alberta doctors and attract those who may have sought better opportunities outside the province. She reassured that under the new system, Albertans would not have to incur out-of-pocket expenses to consult their family doctors or receive essential treatments.
The proposal drew parallels to dual-model systems in countries like Sweden, Germany, and Australia. Jones noted that the changes would offer more flexibility for doctors wishing to engage in both public and private sectors. The Canadian Medical Association (CMA) has urged the Alberta government to reconsider the idea, expressing concerns that patients might face prolonged wait times and financial burdens.
Responding to the speculations, the Alberta Medical Association stressed the importance of evidence-based reforms and meaningful consultations with stakeholders. The Calgary Medical Students’ Association and the University of Alberta’s Medical Students’ Association voiced apprehensions about potential disparities in access to care based on affordability.
While some view the initiative positively, others caution that it could conflict with the Canada Health Act, which prohibits charging for publicly insured services. Dr. Paul Parks warned that the reforms might jeopardize the act’s principles, prompting debates on the ethical implications of healthcare accessibility based on financial means. Jason Sutherland from the University of British Columbia raised concerns about potential legal challenges or repercussions on federal health transfers.
