I am a volunteer with South Muskoka Memorial Hospital, and I support two existing hospitals, each with an Emergency Department, for several reasons.
- The MAHC Task Force has already conducted two surveys, both of which show overwhelmingly that the community does not support only one hospital. One has to wonder why the single site model is still being considered, against such opposition. Who is trying to force this issue, and why?
- I believe that the catchment area is simply too large to accommodate only one Emergency department without potentially endangering lives.
In July 2004, my husband and I were just north of Port Sandfield when he had a heart attack. By the time we arrived at SMMH, we were told that his blood pressure measured 268/216! (120/80 is considered normal). I firmly believe that, had we needed to travel to HDMH in Huntsville, or to a hospital located near Port Sydney, my husband would not be here with me today.
To reassure myself, I looked at the study commissioned by the MAHC Task Force regarding average travel time to the nearest hospital by patient residence region. (See attached) However, on examining the published data, I became very concerned with the accuracy of the results.
For example, on the first row, the time from Gravenhurst to existing Huntsville is listed as 39 minutes.
However, the travel time from Gravenhurst to Hwy 11 & Taylor Rd. is shown as 22 minutes, and the time from Huntsville to the same intersection of Hwy 11 & Taylor Rd (row 4) is listed as 29 minutes, making the total time to travel between Gravenhurst and Huntsville 22+29 = 51 minutes.
Similarly, the travel time from Gravenhurst to Hwy 11 & Hwy 141 is listed as 31 minutes, and the time from Huntsville to Hwy 11 to Hwy 141 is 18 minutes, making the travel time from Gravenhurst to Huntsville 31+18 = 49 minutes.
Which of these is accurate?
Similar discrepancies appear throughout the table. And the travel time data for Georgian Bay, for Wahta Mohawk Territory, and for Moose Point 79 is the same across all locations. How is this possible?
Due to these inaccuracies, I am very concerned that this information is being used as a basis for determining the possible location of future healthcare services.
- The cost for needed improvements and repairs for the existing two midrange emergency/acute care hospitals is approximately $39 Million. However, the cost for a completely new hospital is approximately $400 million, or almost 10 times more, putting a burden on the community for its portion of the cost. As a tax payer, I am concerned.
- It is my understanding that, once a decision is made to go ahead with building only one new hospital, at that point, the Ministry will fund only the most urgent upgrades to the existing locations. Although it has been stated that it may take 15-20 years before we have a new hospital, I am concerned that the current hospitals may fall into disrepair during the ensuing period. As a senior citizen, there is a chance that I will need to use the existing hospitals before the new one can be built, so I am anxious to ensure that they maintain their effectiveness.
- There are a few hundred volunteers at both HDMH and SMMH, and our hospitals rely on the contributions of the services which they provide. It is very likely that, with single siting one hospital, many of those volunteers may be lost, as the travel distance could become an obstacle.
These are just a few of the reasons why I support maintaining the two existing hospitals.
Sincerely,
Leslie Jennings