ACanada's Practices Suck

ACanada's Practices Suck

Canada's Practices Suck

Anderson was also very concerned with the government’s half-hearted commitment to online privacy. Nowhere in the strategy was any mention of reviewing the massive collection of Canadians’ data by CSEC or its spy agency partners in the Five Eyes. When even President Obama is embarking on a plan to rein in a few of the most invasive practices of US spy agencies, you’d think that Canada’s government would at least pay lip service to this important issue.


One may argue that the level of evidence for BPA causing harm to human health is extremely limited, and yet Health Canada has taken a definitive step toward its banning. Those that practice evidence-based paediatrics may be initially bewildered by this action. Others may support this precautionary approach as definitive proof of harm may be decades away. Others may still question the availability of a safer alternative. Currently, we are reassured that safer alternatives exist both for baby bottles and for food containers – these being the glass or ceramic variety – despite risks of injuries due to breakage. That relatively narrow gap was not created by a desire to “sit around,” either. The Ontario government’s own website recognizes that “entry to practice” issues, caused by discrimination, bias and a lack of recognition of credentials, contributes to unemployment. Other complicated mitigating factors are involved. In 2006, 51 per cent of recent immigrants had a university degree, compared to 20 per cent of people born in Canada. And yet, a recent Statistics Canada study of hiring trends over the past two decades showed that immigrants are increasingly unable to find work that matches their education, while the rate of education-employment match for Canadian-born workers increased. And never mind that when foreign workers are employed here, they can face working conditions that Mr. Ford’s own Minister of Labour recently described as “modern-day slavery.”

Michael Bahar is a partner in Eversheds Sutherland's Washington, D.C., office and co-leads the firm's global cybersecurity and data privacy practice, providing comprehensive advice to companies. He previously served as deputy legal adviser to the National Security Council, as minority staff director and general counsel for the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, and as an active duty Navy JAG. He can be reached at MichaelBahar@eversheds-sutherland.com.The poor conditions of care in nursing homes have, with increasing frequency, been given prominence over the last 50 years in more than 100 published reports (Table S1). Those reports come from all high-income countries, but Canada has far more than its share. A quick search of the media for just the past 10 years yields over 150 reports in Canada alone (Table S2) describing unacceptable and sometimes scandalous conditions experienced by our older adults in nursing homes. They all report similar findings, they all reflect our underlying outrage, they all make recommendations, they are all read, one or two actions are taken and then they all sit on a shelf. Nothing changes. Not really, not fundamentally. Of course great strides have been taken since the mid 20th century—newer nursing homes are organized with opportunities to better support quality of care and quality of life, dementia care programs are more regularly embedded in nursing homes, and encouraging examples of promising practices exist (Armstrong and Baines 2018, 2019). But still, concerns about quality of care and safety persist, tragic events continue, inequities deepen, root issues are not challenged, older adults suffer needlessly, and many Canadians are truly frightened at the prospect that they themselves may need to be admitted to a nursing home (2nd Canadian Division and Joint Task Force (East) 2020; 4th Canadian Division Joint Task Force (Central) 2020; Brewster and Kapelos 2020; DiManno 2020; Holroyd-Leduc and Laupacis 2020; Kirkup 2020; Lapierre 2020; Perron and Marquis 2020). (Source: www.facetsjournal.com)


Related Articles