[hutchibk]

That is a good question Carolyn. I have never heard that about Canada, but I personally knew of a story in the UK about 6 years ago... a dear friend's sister died from metastatic breast cancer because she had gone through all of the options that were limited by national health care, and it would not pay for her to continue or change to any new treatments as she was deemed terminal - it would essentially have been what the system considered "a waste of time and health care $$"... It reminds me of what almost happened to a man named Randy Stroup in Oregon this past summer. He is a stage 4 prostate cancer patient who is covered under their state universal health care experiment called Oregon Health Plan, and they originally turned down his treatment as "too pricey" and offered to pay for assisted suicide instead... luckily he took it to the media, and they relented and let him have the treatment. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,392962,00.html

And a similar occurence with a friend's wife in Australia 7 years ago with stage 4 ovarian cancer. She chose to stay on treatment as long as she could, but their healthcare system would not pay for things such as neupogen or good anti-emetics and pain relievers since she was considered terminal and it could end up being a "waste of money and resources". Believe it or not, she is still here today, but her journey was not an easy one, that's for sure.

Caya, no harm, no foul. No offense taken, but it seemed you might be singling me out as an "opponent", and I prefer to not play that role. There are lots of differing opinions. I am not the only one who is not in agreement with your point of view, and I certainly know you are not the only one who sees things differently from me...