A little birdie contacted therenalunit.com today, suggesting that portable adobe acrobat 8 professional a major public hospital in an Australian capital city is portable adobe acrobat 8 professional in the process of inking a deal with a large (think multinational) private dialysis supplier, to portable adobe acrobat 8 professional send somewhere in the vicinity of twenty public patients to portable adobe acrobat 8 professional dialyse in a center run by the private dialysis supplier.

No only will these publicly funded patients be portable adobe acrobat 8 professional dialysing in a private unit, but they will be transported from portable adobe acrobat 8 professional their homes to the unit before dialysis, and home from the portable adobe acrobat 8 professional unit after dialysis, in taxpayer funded taxis.

This raises numerous interesting questions:

Why are portable adobe acrobat 8 professional taxpayers footing the bill for patients to dialyse in the portable adobe acrobat 8 professional private system? With recently published evidence that portable adobe acrobat 8 professional the number of Australians requiring dialysis treatment for kidney failure has portable adobe acrobat 8 professional increased dramatically, and will continue to increase dramatically in the portable adobe acrobat 8 professional foreseeable future, why is the Government allowing this short-term solution to portable adobe acrobat 8 professional be implemented? Could it possibly be that the introduction of more “chairs” for portable adobe acrobat 8 professional patients in the public system requires infrastructure investment that Governments, with an portable adobe acrobat 8 professional eye to the next election, rather than the long term health and portable adobe acrobat 8 professional fiscal benefit of their constituents, see as a way of delaying the portable adobe acrobat 8 professional long term cost of caring for these people?

Will patients with private health insurance be portable adobe acrobat 8 professional turned away, and forced into the public system, as a result of these “chairs” being taken by publicly funded patients? Surely no-one can portable adobe acrobat 8 professional guarantee that, as the private dialysis provider has a guaranteed twenty (public) patients, they would not turn away privately insured patients looking for portable adobe acrobat 8 professional somewhere to dialyse. It would be nothing short of a laughable situation to portable adobe acrobat 8 professional find publicly funded patients in the private system, whilst privately insured patients are portable adobe acrobat 8 professional forced into the public system, thus doubling the burden on the portable adobe acrobat 8 professional taxpayer.

Why are portable adobe acrobat 8 professional these public patients being afforded the luxury of taxpayer funded taxis to portable adobe acrobat 8 professional and from dialysis? One can portable adobe acrobat 8 professional be sure that any public patient who was told that they were from portable adobe acrobat 8 professional now on going to be dialysing in a private facility, and portable adobe acrobat 8 professional that they would be ferried to and from that facility at public expense, would be portable adobe acrobat 8 professional thinking that someone was having a lend of them. Surely this portable adobe acrobat 8 professional is overkill? It is portable adobe acrobat 8 professional difficult to understand how, if a patient was previously managing to portable adobe acrobat 8 professional find his or her own way to dialysis, they now need a portable adobe acrobat 8 professional taxpayer funded chariot to acheive this purpose.

A thought must also be portable adobe acrobat 8 professional spared for the patients who currently hold private health insurance. There is portable adobe acrobat 8 professional no doubt that a large percentage of patients dialysing in private units, pay for portable adobe acrobat 8 professional their health insurance through great sacrifice and toil. Logic says that portable adobe acrobat 8 professional very few people undergoing dialysis treatment have the capacity to undertake high-paying employment, therefore must give up a portable adobe acrobat 8 professional great deal to retain their cover. This move by the public health system could well be portable adobe acrobat 8 professional taken as a slap in the face by these people. What is portable adobe acrobat 8 professional the point of sacrificing and saving at every turn, when there is portable adobe acrobat 8 professional no perceived benefit? Will this portable adobe acrobat 8 professional facilitate a drop in privately insured dialysis patients, hoping that portable adobe acrobat 8 professional their “number will come up”, an they’ll be able to dialyse in a private unit anyway? This could possibly be portable adobe acrobat 8 professional to the long term detriment of the private dialysis industry in Australia, as if more patients drop their cover to portable adobe acrobat 8 professional be dialysed publicly, there may not be enough patients for the portable adobe acrobat 8 professional private providers to operate profitably.

All in all this portable adobe acrobat 8 professional is very poor form by our public health system. One cannot point the portable adobe acrobat 8 professional finger at the private provider. They are a business which has portable adobe acrobat 8 professional shareholders to answer to, and are not concerned from where their income is portable adobe acrobat 8 professional derived, be it private health funds, private citizens, or short-sighted government health departments. I believe that portable adobe acrobat 8 professional the decision makers who have implemented this plan should consider its long term ramifications, and portable adobe acrobat 8 professional build the infrastructure required.