6 percent with that percentage predicted to rise to 14.9 percent by the year 2002 (Ginzberg, 1994). While the rich, those with good insurance and the very poor all have access to health care, there are a number of individuals and families who fall between the cracks in the United States health care system. .
Canada too, however, is being forced into implementation of cuts in its health care budget (Adams, Bennett, 1993). In fact, the Canadian system of healthcare may be in definite danger of failure (Adams, Bennett, 1993). This is particularly concerning since the Canadian Health Care Act of 1984 at first appearance seems to address all concerns within Canada. The Act not only ensures universal access, comprehensive coverage and public funding but it also allows both patients and physicians substantial freedom to move within the system (Armstrong, 1998). Under the Act patients are allowed to choose their own doctors and to secure as many opinions as they feel are needed regarding their healthcare situation (Armstrong, 1998). Treatments are provided outside of the constraints felt by many health care systems (Armstrong, 1998). .
The Canadian system is not truly unbiased to all Canadian citizens. Although the Act is Canadian federal law, it is administered by individual provinces in the form of block grants to individual hospitals and supplemented in part by provincial revenues (Armstrong, 1998). The hospitals are in turn responsible for the allocation of funds for programs and services (Armstrong, 1998). Doctors are paid according to fee schedules negotiated between the provincial governments and the various medical associations (Armstrong, 1998). The extent of the federally funded program varies according to province. Some provinces meet only the strictest requirements of the Act and provide only hospital and physician funding, others have expanded their health care programs to include coverage for prescription drugs, home care and long-term institutional care (Adams, Bennett, 1993).
