A major shift in Canada’s refugee health coverage system has triggered widespread concern among medical professionals, as new out-of-pocket costs for vulnerable newcomers come into effect across the country.
Under changes to the Interim Federal Health Program, refugees and refugee claimants are now required to pay $4 per prescription and cover 30 per cent of the cost for supplemental services such as mental health counselling, dental care, vision care, and essential medical equipment—including wheelchairs. While doctor visits and hospital care remain fully covered, the new policy marks a significant departure from decades of comprehensive federal support.
Health organizations across Canada, including the Canadian Medical Association, Canadian Paediatric Society, Canadian Psychiatric Association, and Canadian Nurses Association, have raised serious concerns, warning that even modest co-payments could put essential care out of reach for refugees already struggling to meet basic needs.
Frontline physicians say the consequences could be severe. Dr. Vanessa Redditt, who works at a refugee clinic in Toronto, described the changes as effectively limiting access to care for some of the most vulnerable patients.
She noted that many refugees are already dealing with trauma, poverty, and unstable housing, making even small medical expenses difficult to manage. Without access to critical services such as mental health counselling or medications, doctors fear patients’ conditions could worsen—ultimately leading to more emergency room visits and higher long-term costs for the healthcare system.
Similar concerns were echoed by Dr. Parisa Rezaiefar of the Ottawa Newcomer Health Centre, who emphasized that early investment in refugee health is key to successful integration. Addressing medical issues promptly, she said, allows newcomers to focus on language training, employment, and contributing to Canadian society.
The federal government introduced the cost-sharing measures as part of last year’s budget, positioning them as a necessary step toward controlling public spending. However, critics argue the policy risks shifting costs rather than reducing them—moving the burden from preventive care to emergency services.
Advocates also warn of broader social implications, particularly for refugees dealing with past trauma, including war, torture, or displacement. Limiting access to mental health support, they say, could have long-lasting impacts not only on individuals but on communities as a whole.
As questions mount, the office of Lena Diab has yet to respond publicly to concerns raised by healthcare professionals and advocacy groups.
With the policy now in effect, the coming months will likely reveal whether the government’s cost-saving approach holds—or whether it leads to deeper challenges in Canada’s healthcare and settlement systems.