{"id":2000,"date":"2017-10-13T20:02:12","date_gmt":"2017-10-13T20:02:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/tvndy.ca\/?p=2000\/"},"modified":"2019-06-25T16:27:50","modified_gmt":"2019-06-25T16:27:50","slug":"webcast-archive-review-of-canadian-disability-legislation-british-columbia","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/2017\/10\/webcast-archive-review-of-canadian-disability-legislation-british-columbia\/","title":{"rendered":"Webcast archive: Review of Canadian disability legislation &#8211; British Columbia"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" width=\"1180\" height=\"664\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/bbLwOgxRwpQ?feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p>In this episode of <em>Euthanasia &amp; Disability<\/em>, Amy Hasbrouck, Christian Debray, and Taylor Hyatt discuss:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Review of Canadian disability legislation: British Columbia<\/li>\n<li>Top courts in UK and US reject assisted suicide<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Please note that this text is only a script and that our webcast contains additional commentary.<\/p>\n<p><strong>REVIEW OF CANADIAN DISABILITY RIGHTS LEGISLATION: BRITISH COLUMBIA<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Today, we\u2019re continuing our series on provincial disability rights legislation across Canada. British Columbia does not have a law guaranteeing disability rights. Instead, the provincial government has a plan to make the province \u201cfully accessible\u201d by 2024.<\/li>\n<li>The Accessibility 2024 strategy grew out of a public consultation held in 2013 and 2014. As with the federal legislation, suggestions were submitted online, (via email, in videos, and on social media), through organizations, and in person at 23 community meetings. \u00a0This led up to a one-day B.C. Accessibility Summit in June 2014; a meeting of leaders from the government, businesses, local communities and disability advocates.<\/li>\n<li>Accessibility 2024 is based on 12 \u201cbuilding blocks\u201d identified through the consultations:\n<ul>\n<li>an inclusive government.<\/li>\n<li>accessibility of government services<\/li>\n<li>accessible internet<\/li>\n<li>an accessible built environment<\/li>\n<li>housing<\/li>\n<li>transit<\/li>\n<li>provincial income support<\/li>\n<li>employment<\/li>\n<li>financial security<\/li>\n<li>inclusive communities<\/li>\n<li>preparation for emergencies, especially earthquakes<\/li>\n<li>and the experience of visitors and consumers.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>At first glance, this seems like a fantastic and broad initiative. The most obvious problem, though, is that the program\u2019s promises are not backed up by law. It scatters some \u201ctreats\u201d, rather than guaranteeing rights and imposing obligations that can be legally and consistently enforced. There is no remedy if the government doesn\u2019t meet the program goals.\u00a0 There is no way for someone to fight for recognition of their rights in the future, since the province has already \u201cdone so much\u201d for its disabled residents.<\/li>\n<li>One of the clearest examples of \u201ca treat\u201d is a housing project that involved giving low-rise apartment developers additional funds for each new unit with accessible features \u2013 like lever-style faucets, wider halls and doorways, and lower counters. Developers may apply for the subsidy, rather than being mandated to build a certain number of accessible units.<\/li>\n<li>Other components of the program simply don\u2019t make sense. Among its accomplishments so far, the \u201cbuilt environment\u201d section of the strategy lists giving financial support to a company\u00a0based in BC that provides\u00a0prosthetic limbs to people in\u00a0<em>Haiti<\/em>. The transit section overlooked the lack of automatic stop announcements on buses in many communities, yet it created accessible motorcycle permits. And one way of supporting \u201cinclusive communities\u201d was a large donation to several parasport organizations. Instead of continuing segregation, real integration would have meant enabling disabled people to obtain access to an existing activity they choose.<\/li>\n<li>Accessibility 2024 was designed with good intentions, but it won\u2019t actually change much. Even though disabled people across British Columbia were consulted before the plan was written, it appears to be yet another case of governments doing what is easy rather than what is necessary.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><strong>TOP COURTS IN UK AND US REFUSE ASSISTED SUICIDE APPEALS<\/strong><\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Last week, the UK High Court ruled that protections against assisted suicide should not be removed. Noel Conway has Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and fears that the progression of his condition would leave him \u201centombed\u201d in his own body. He wanted the option to have a doctor end his life once he was given a prognosis of six months or less to live.<\/li>\n<li>Mr. Conway argued that Britain\u2019s prohibition on assisted suicide violates his \u201cright to respect for his private life\u201d without \u201cinterference by a public authority,\u201d under the European Convention on Human Rights. He had proposed a series of safeguards to evaluate requests for assisted suicide, including a written application, the approval of two physicians and one High Court justice, and the creation of an oversight body.<\/li>\n<li>Not Dead Yet UK intervened in the case. They expressed concerns that people with disabilities could view themselves as a burden and face pressure to die. The British Medical Association, the British Geriatric Society and the Royal College of General Practitioners also made insightful comments.\u00a0 They noted that assisted suicide is against the fundamental healing role of a doctor, and is a greater threat to women and people experiencing social isolation. The desire to die may be rooted in other conditions that can be relieved, like depression, pain, and a lack of independence. Most importantly, the BMA highlighted the difference between acknowledging the inevitability of death and taking proactive steps to end life.<\/li>\n<li>The Court concluded that Mr. Conway\u2019s right to privacy could be limited in order to protect \u201cmorals\u201d and \u201cthe rights and freedoms of others.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>In response to the High Court decision, Not Dead Yet UK issued a statement, which reads in part \u201cWe welcome the decision by the High Court to reject this attempt to treat terminally ill and disabled people differently by removing vital legal protections. We are looking forward to the national conversation now focussing on the real issue here, which is a lack of adequate social care being provided to people with disabilities. Similarly, we need a proper discussion on ensuring adequate palliative care is provided for the terminally ill.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>The US Supreme Court also decided that it would not hear the appeal of the case by the Final Exit Network (FEN) in a Minnesota case. The Network was convicted two years ago of encouraging a woman\u2019s suicide. FEN\u2019s lawyers argued that the state law against counseling another person in how to take their life violates freedom of speech. However, the State Supreme Court said the ban was constitutional, and that giving instructions on how to take someone\u2019s life was a form of speech that \u201cassists\u201d in suicide. \u00a0The Supreme Court\u2019s refusal to take the case means the state court decision stands.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n   ","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<div class=\"entry-summary\">\n<div class=\"entry-summary\">\nThis week, we&#8217;re reviewing disability rights legislation in British Columbia.\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/2017\/10\/webcast-archive-review-of-canadian-disability-legislation-british-columbia\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &ldquo;Webcast archive: Review of Canadian disability legislation &#8211; British Columbia&rdquo;<\/span>&hellip;<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/2017\/10\/webcast-archive-review-of-canadian-disability-legislation-british-columbia\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &ldquo;Webcast archive: Review of Canadian disability legislation &#8211; British Columbia&rdquo;<\/span>&hellip;<\/a><\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[92],"tags":[73,121,192,249,118],"class_list":["post-2000","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-webcast-archive","tag-disability-rights","tag-euthanasia-disability","tag-legislation","tag-province","tag-webcast","entry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2000","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2000"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2000\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4321,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2000\/revisions\/4321"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2000"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2000"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/tvndy.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2000"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}