Editorial

By Paul Schratz

The B.C. government's $10-million Conversation on Health has been called a "resounding success," by the B.C. government, anyway.

One thing is for certain: the government's report is encyclopedic. Weighing in at 1,500 pages, it details the opinions it received from 78 regional forums, 12,000 submissions, and millions of hits on its web site.

Some critics are dismissing the "Conversation" as a colossal waste of time and money, with one columnist suggesting the final report "contains every half-baked comment and loopy idea on the medicare system."

It does seem as though hardly a thought on health care went unexpressed. Take this one on the topic of death and dying: "It's time to remove religion from the health-care system, and separate religion from the ethics that guide health-care decisions in areas such as abortion and prolonging the life of children with disabilities."

With the government seemingly content to let the Conversation go in any direction, regardless of how odious or controversial, it seems strange that its report is so quiet on a topic so controversial that it figured in numerous categories.

Abortion fails to get a word of mention in the main parts of the report. Not a word about it appeared in any of the media coverage, and yet a look at the report's "summary of input" shows abortion popped up again and again during the submission process under a wide range of health topics.

• It found its way into the discussion of health care for seniors, with some elderly concerned that abortion is reducing the younger demographic needed to support older generations.
• In Medical Services Plan discussions, there was a view that abortion is being used as birth control, and as such should not be paid for with taxpayers' money.
• In discussions on PharmaCare there was frustration that government, which does not fund birth control pills, funds abortions.
• When discussions turned to promoting health, the government heard that women's health could benefit if they were offered options for carrying their babies to term and if there were restrictions on abortion access.
• The government received criticism of the fact that it opposes private health care, yet blesses private abortion clinics.
• On the topic of health spending, there was criticism that some women abuse the system by seeking abortions for a second and third time.
• During health financing discussions, there was a suggestion that a user fee for abortion should be instituted.
• On the topic of wait lists and wait times, the government heard criticism over the fact there are line-ups for elective surgeries but not for abortions.
• On the issue of access to health care, at least one person suggested that beds might be freed if they weren't being used for abortions.

There's no indication just how many people expressed these views, but abortion was clearly a concern during the process, since it emerged in so many different dimensions of the Conversation.

We're talking about a health issue that affects 15,000 women a year in B.C., and their unborn children. That's certainly as important an issue as assisted suicide, needle exchanges, and drug injection sites, all of which made it into the government's final summary, a distinction abortion didn't receive.

Let's hope that by the time Victoria releases its proposed health-care initiatives stemming from the Conversation next year, it will have realized that true conversation can only take place if a major topic of concern for many British Columbians is up for discussion.