Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

In the eyes of provincial law going back 175 years, and which is still in use today, a great many lives are considered worthless

 

According to the BC Wrongful Death Law Reform Society the fight for a fair wrongful death law has recently generated considerable media attention in British Columbia, with news outlets across the province reporting on the campaign.

 

I have to admit I was not aware of this campaign, until I saw it on a Global News story out of Vancouver early last week.

 

According to the society, BC’s current Family Compensation Act (FCA) only takes into account the direct financial losses resulting from death, while others who may not represent an immediate financial loss ‘are a class of people whose lives are not fully valued or respected when they are killed in BC’.

 

In other words, a great many lives are worthless in the eyes of B.C. law, a point which was also made several times in the news story I saw. And even though the provincial government has been made aware of the issue over many years, BC’s wrongful death laws, unlike every other province, have not had any meaningful changes that provide a modern standard of human value. 

 

A number of days ago I spoke with a woman who shared the story of her mother who died in care 10 years ago. With a voice filled with emotion, she said to me:

 

‘While I am not part of the group currently trying to get changes made to the legislation, I was incredibly pleased to see the issue in the news.  

 

When my mother died in ‘care’ due to gross negligence on the part of the facility, I spoke to many lawyers, none of whom would touch a wrongful death suit. They all said that, with the current legislation, it was a waste of time and that the only award the court would give would be based on lost income.  

 

I did not wish to profit from my mother’s untimely death; however, I did want to see a financial punishment that would help in bringing about much needed change. The act under which they operate had been contravened in three separate places yet there was nothing that could be done, and no penalties administered. Sadly, despite that, seniors are still in their care.’

 

It certainly seems that often those who wrongfully take the lives of others can enjoy tort immunity – in other words shielded from the consequences of their negligence -- where there is little or no financial cost to those who have lost a family member considered to be a financial dependent. 

 

Meaning, in the eyes of provincial law going back 175 years (1846), and which is still in use today, a great many lives are considered worthless.

 

I have to wonder, as countless others have for some time now, how many more years will this be allowed to continue before our provincial government makes long overdue changes to this situation?

 

Image credit – Stephens and Holman personal injury lawyers. From a commentary posted at https://www.stephensandholman.com/family-compensation-act

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

'Very good news' that Supreme Court will hear B.C. mineral claims case, Eby says

The BC government needs clarity from the Supreme Court of Canada on a landmark mineral rights claim, Premier David Eby says. But the lawyer representing the challenger says that they would have preferred the province respect the lower court's decision. Eby said Thursday it is very good news that the court will hear its appeal of a ruling that found the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the provincial mineral claims regime are "inconsistent." The BC Court of Appeal ruled in December that the provincial Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, or DRIPA, should be "properly interpreted" to incorporate the UN declaration into the laws of B.C. with immediate legal effect. That ruling set off the appeal from the province amid concerns that it could cause economic uncertainty ... CLICK HERE for the full story 
Post a Comment
Read more

EBY OFFSIDE WITH NATIONAL INTEREST AS CARNEY AND SMITH BUILD BC'S ECONOMIC FUTURE WITHOUT HIM ~~ BC Conservatives

IMAGE CREDIT :  CBC News   Prime Minister Mark Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith announced a landmark agreement today committing Ottawa to designate a new pipeline to BC's west coast as a project of national interest by October 1, 2026, with construction approval targeted for September 1, 2027. The deal pairs the pipeline with a new industrial carbon pricing framework and a fall 2027 construction start. British Columbia, the province where the pipeline ends, where the jobs would land, and where the export terminal would be built, was nowhere at the table. "This is a nation-building deal, and the BC NDP have been locked out of the room," said Trevor Halford, Interim Leader of the Official Opposition.  "While the Prime Minister and the Premier of Alberta were doing the hard work of growing the Canadian economy, the NDP is on the sidelines calling this pipeline a 'fiction' and an 'energy vampire.'  He chose petulance over partnership, and now BC ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Kamloops - North Thompson BC Conservative MLA Ward Stamer speaks to Bill 20 — K’ómoks Treaty Act

The following is a condensed version of Kamloops – North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer’s remarks, to the BC Legislature, on the afternoon of Tuesday May 19th : I rise today to continue remarks on Bill 20, the K’ómoks treaty, and to address what I believe are some of the most important constitutional, democratic and governance concerns facing this Legislature today. At the centre of this debate are two major issues. First, unresolved overlapping territorial boundaries tied to this treaty process. And second, the growing legal and political consequences arising from the provincial government’s implementation of the Declaration of Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, more commonly known as DRIPA. Much of the government’s defence on DRIPA rests upon references to the United Nations declaration on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, commonly known as UNDRIP. And this is where we must begin having a more honest and mature conversation in this province. UNDRIP was never originally designed to function ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Labels

Show more