Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to follow up on some questions a colleague, Mr. Hawkins, had earlier in regard to a patient who was medevacked to Edmonton and who, in fact, is a constituent of mine. I’m going to ask some questions today. I want to try to get a better understanding of what happened and why it is that the government and the Department of Health would send a patient who had a stroke to a facility if they knew there were no rooms there for that patient. The answer that Ms. Lee provided to Mr. Hawkins yesterday wasn’t clear enough for me. Could she explain why they would knowingly send a patient who had a stroke to a hospital that had no room for them?
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Minister of Health and Social Services, Ms. Lee.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think it is important to note that it is not the Department of Health that makes the decisions on who gets sent to where for medical care. It’s the doctor at Stanton hospital who decided, because of her condition and her medical needs, that she needed to be sent to Edmonton. My understanding is that in most situations the doctor here communicates with a doctor in the receiving location to make sure they agree to take this patient.
Now, I think it’s also important to note that she did receive and she is receiving the care she needed; it’s just that she couldn’t have her own room. She was in a triage facility in emergency. She was being monitored and tested, and she had attending doctors to make sure that they were looking after her. It was not the ideal situation, but she was being taken care of.
Whether it’s the department’s responsibility or the doctor’s responsibility, I think we have to do our utmost to ensure that when patients from the Northwest Territories are sent south, they actually have a room and will be looked after the way they should be. I agree with Mr. Hawkins; I don’t think 34 hours in an emergency room with a daughter and a three month old baby is appropriate.
I’d like to ask the Minister…. I know that yesterday she had mentioned that other centres like Grande Prairie or perhaps even Calgary were looked at as a possible location to send this constituent of mine. Was that in fact done? Did the doctor look at other locations to send this patient?
My understanding is that the receiving doctor at Capital Health decides where this patient should go. The decision was made that the patient should be sent where she went. Our agreement that we have with Alberta is that we are guaranteed the medical services that Alberta residents get, and that’s what we have.
I didn’t hear an answer on whether or not other locations in Alberta or even…. I’m not sure; maybe the Minister could let us know. What other agreements do we have with health authorities in southern Canada to look after our patients? Are there other options? There are going to be huge demands on Capital Health in Edmonton. If their rooms are full, we need to be looking after our patients, and we have to ensure that this type of scenario is never allowed to play itself out again. So will the Minister answer that question?
I don’t have the detailed information. I believe our agreement is with the Government of Alberta. There might be some subagreements with Capital Health. What happened yesterday is unfortunate. We do want to see that that sort of situation does not happen. But I think it is really important, in the political forum that we are in, that these are medical decisions made by medical practitioners in Stanton and in Edmonton in the best interests of the patients.
Thank you. The time for question period has expired. I will allow the member a final supplementary question. Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I want to ask the Minister…. As I understand it, the bigger issue here is that Capital Health in Alberta is going to a one board approach, which is going to mean a reduction in services to NWT residents. What strategy has the Minister got to deal with situations like this that are going to arise?
There is no evidence to suggest that there is going to be a reduction in services because of the amalgamation of boards. There is no evidence to suggest that what happened to this particular patient has anything to do with amalgamation. Obviously, we as a government want to monitor this situation and make sure that we’re not affected negatively in that way.
Now, I think we have to keep in mind that Capital Health does provide us with very valuable services in many regards. Sometimes we run into problems. I could also advise the Member that I, in fact, talked to the Minister of Health in Alberta himself, when we were in FPT meetings, shortly after he had announced that the boards would be amalgamated. I talked to him on the phone as well to make sure that he understands that Capital Health is a very important service provider and that we continue to have a good working relationship with them.
Time for question period has expired. The Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to return to item 8 on our agenda, oral questions. Thank you.
Unanimous consent granted.
