The idea of a more comprehensive universal health care plan for Canada has been examined in depth by the Domestic section of this playbook. The conclusion drawn was that NAFTA impedes on Canada’s ability to make such changes to their health care plan due to various provisions within the trade agreement. Although the scenario’s suggestions are aimed at the general effect it would have on Canadian and American consumers, the argument lacks deep insight outside of commercial interests. As stated in our definition of feminism, marginalized groups need to be heavily considered in order to ensure that the most vulnerable individuals in Canada are protected.[1] Therefore, we believe that this section is important to audit because access to medical expertise and prescription medication is crucial to an individual’s well being.

​

Improving the health of all Canada means “paying attention to education, economic and social policies, housing, and the environment.”[2] Health is a factor that extends beyond physician offices and requires policies that are curated to all needs. Although the scenario highlights that some provinces have expanded their health care coverage based on factors such as age or income, a person’s sexual orientation, gender, and geographic location have largely been left out. Despite the fact that, these three factors play a large role in determining if individuals are able to get adequate health care.[3] By suggesting that provinces will likely inhibit the purchase of privatized health insurance if the federal government were to implement further coverage, the scenario ignores the role private companies play in providing medications that may not be covered under a universal plan. This would disproportionately affect marginalized populations, such as people with multiple sclerosis, whose medication is funded by the government on a case by case basis.[4]

Likewise, if certain medications are covered, it is typically the cheapest form of that medication that is available to consumers at a reduced rate. This inhibits individuals from getting the best prescriptions and leaves customers at a disadvantage for a multitude of reasons. In the instance of birth control, every body reacts differently to the drug, which inhibits the medication from being truly universal when it is covered under the Canadian healthcare plan.[5] The varying strength needed depends on who is taking the pills, which makes the ‘one-size-fits-all’ mindset obsolete. Similarly, “there continues to be a systematic lack of attention to [LGBTQ2S+] health issues.”[6]

Feminism is a theory that applies far beyond the needs of women and girls. It supports equity for all, regardless of social determinants, sex, ethnicity, and class. Although the scenario does a good job of covering the economic and political aspects of implementing a more cohesive universal health care plan for Canada, it deals primarily with corporate ramifications rather than the consequences the decisions would have on Canada’s most vulnerable populations. In terms of LGBTQ2S+, the “social location of [these] communities and the discrimination and stigmatization experienced by these populations…influence health outcomes.”[7] One of the methods proposed by the scenario suggests implementing a more cohesive health care plan, which would force provinces to prohibit the purchase of private coverage. However, considering that vulnerable populations require these privatized companies for their specific medical costs and that these costs are typically not be covered by a universal health care plan, the scenario ignores a large portion of Canadians.