The recent implementation of the (SHA) Saskatchewan Health Authority’s COVID-19 plan has not been well received by the 12 rural communities whose emergency rooms have been closed.
The conversion of these rural centers to “ALC” or alternate level of care sites has brought these communities together in an effort to reverse these changes and show the Ministry of Health and the SHA that the health and wellbeing of these residents is in jeopardy.
The 12 locations which the SHA identified in its surge plan for “temporary” suspension of emergency services and conversion to ALC are: Leader, Kerrobert, Biggar, Herbert, Davidson, Lanigan, Preeceville, Wolseley, Broadview, Arcola, Radville and Oxbow. Most of these communities have been in a fight with their local health region (and now the health authority) over their ER, doctor recruitment and retention, nursing staff shortages and emergency room by-passes for several years. Communities are noticing the commonalities in their hospital situations and do not want to be a budget cut. Real people live near these facilities and depend on them in the worst of circumstances.
A Facebook group was created on May 21 entitled Citizens Concerned about Rural Health Care. The number of members grew to over 450 people within three hours of its creation. Many of the posts share personal stories of people whose lives were saved because of their local emergency room services and the doctors and nurses working there. Many more ask the question “why now?”
When case numbers and hospitalizations are low and people have been doing their part to socially distance, why is the fate of the rural people at stake? Accidents, heart attacks, allergic reactions and strokes are not waiting for the pandemic to be over. All of these things are still happening despite COVID-19. With spring seeding upon us, the assurance of a nearby emergency room is more critical now than ever. These rural residents don’t want to see their health and wellbeing take a backseat to a plan that seems awfully premature considering how well we have done with flattening the curve.
Communities were not consulted in any way regarding this closure. This surge plan was released and simply stated that these facilities could be converted to ALC with ER closures if there was a surge to warrant it. None of these communities took action because they either didn’t see the need at the time due to low case numbers hardly constituting a surge, or because they simply missed the news article or didn’t comb through the pages of the SHA website.
No formal bulletin was sent to communities weeks in advance to prepare residents and community members. No special news release was published on the SHA website or Facebook page. Most communities received 18 to 24 hour warnings that their ER would close indefinitely at 8 a.m. the following day.
First, Preeceville was told that we were chosen because we have a long term care (LTC) wing attached to our facility and this would minimize the exposure of COVID-19 to the vulnerable residents in that wing. However, many designated “COVID hospitals” also have LTC wings attached. This argument doesn’t make sense. Then, the CEO of the SHA said “we did not go out and randomly select these facilities. They were geographically selected so that we could ensure that both our EMS personnel and these communities were all close to other ER facilities.”
It would appear the SHA thinks of these communities as only the town in which the hospital is situated. Many rural residents already drive a half hour or more into Preeceville. So the next ER facility is a great distance away for them. We cannot count on a local ambulance to be in the area every minute of every day. They are also busy with emergency trips and transfers. Neighboring ambulance services cover this area as well, thankfully, but add on an additional hour of transport time just getting to the emergency. This is not the safe and reliable care the SHA is portraying in their statements. This is also a huge burden to put on our already strained ambulance services.
Above all, most communities are suspicious that the pandemic is only an excuse to finally close our emergency rooms for good. With social distancing rules in place and no sittings in the Legislature, protests and public gatherings are not possible physically. Fortunately, the people of rural Saskatchewan are resilient and used to having to fight for many things in our communities. Technology has made it simple for us to plan, congregate and communicate in ways that keep us at a safe distance. A number of these communities have assigned a member as a spokesperson and we are holding virtual meetings via Zoom. Rather than 12 small communities all fighting the same battle, we are becoming one large group with one common goal: re-open our emergency rooms and ensure the health and safety of our community members.
We all know the threat of this pandemic is real and we all want to do our part in the fight against COVID-19 but not at the expense of our residents. How is this “balancing the dangers” when our community members’ lives are at stake with no ER here? We know that “temporary” has a funny way of becoming “permanent” when it comes to these things. We have been waiting four years exactly to have our acute care beds back in Preeceville. We were promised that would happen when “consistent and sustainable on- call coverage” was established. We have three doctors and a nurse practitioner but every time we take a step forward, it seems the health authority pushes us two steps back. Yes, we know the cost of providing health care is high. But don’t people in rural Saskatchewan deserve that same basic right of timely health care like those in urban centers? How do you put a price on the lives of residents in these 12 communities?
We have come to the time when the government is opening up the province. Why are they closing hospitals in the process?
James Bodnar
Health Action Committee Chair
Preeceville
