In keeping (loosely) with the theme of my blog, I headed to the Health Sciences Centre Winnipeg, grabbed a well-worn plastic tray of cafeteria food, sat down in a blue plastic chair, and observed the surroundings. People in scrubs, on a lunch break, ate and discussed workplace politics. Various folks, visiting hospitalized friends and relatives, discussed the progress or decline of their conditions, plastic utensils in hand. Others were killing time, nervously waiting for loved one’s procedures, tests, or appointments to end, while eating buffet style plates of bland, pre-fab hospital fare.
Having recently watched Peter Nicks’ documentary film The Waiting Room, I wanted to get a first hand look at another part of hospital life and ponder some of the issues Nicks’ film had stirred up in my mind.
The most obvious distinction between the Canadian and American health care systems, is that health insurance in Canada is public. In Canada that makes health insurance a right, whereas in the U.S. under the private system, health insurance is a privilege. For all the inconsistencies and problems that there are with our system, this is something I try very hard not to take for granted.
With the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), signed in to law March 23, 2010, the American government aims to decrease the number of uninsured citizens by encouraging employers and citizens to get insurance by offering incentives like subsidies and tax credits.
The PPACA also requires insurance companies to cover all applicants, and at the same rates.
In Canada, according to Health Canada www.hc-sc.gc.ca, the 13 provinces and territories have interlocking health insurance plans that share basic standards and common features which are framed by the Canada Health Act (CHA), our federal health insurance legislation. The CHA sets out conditions and criteria that have to be satisfied by the provincial and territorial insurance plans in order for them to be eligible to receive their full share of federal dollars.
Nicks’ film is a character-driven documentary. This style of storytelling gives the viewer a more personal interaction with the characters in the film. The absence of narration or fact revealing text, as well as Nicks’ deliberate use of close-ups, drawn out shallow depth-of-field shots and slow focus rack shots create an intimate portrayal of the characters.
Voiceovers were used effectively, particularly when patients were describing their woes, a picture of worry, captured in close-up, on their faces. There was no use of drama producing sound effects or music, and these, I feel, would have detracted from the stark realism of the film.
The film did a great job of exploring the reality of life in the ER in a balanced and unbiased way. The range of emotions that are churning around in a place like the ER, nervousness, anger, frustration, hope, patience, and concern, to name a few, were vividly portrayed in a way that creates a strong connection to the characters.
I am sometimes frustrated by the complaints of friends and acquaintances who, I feel, take our system for granted. They ignore their symptoms, too lazy to take the appropriate measures when they feel an illness coming on, only to dash off to the ER when their symptoms get scary. They whine about being ignored and made to wait “forever” and expect my sympathy. Nope, none there.
