Saturday, October 22, 2016

Dear Kathleen - Does this mean you will stop hiding abortion information?

Received this from Ontario's "Open Government initiative":

"Almost 800 votes were received from ideas submitted as part of our recent Open Government Consultation. We’ve tallied the votes and are excited to share the top-voted ideas in each category.

Top-Voted Idea
Adopt the international Open Data Charter and its 6 principles for all Ontario ministry and provincial agency data.
Implement all of the recommendations made by the Open Government Engagement Team.
Public Participation
Create a way for constituents to communicate with their MPPs online, in order to be included in the decision-making process, such as through surveys of their views on what works best in each riding.
Technology Innovation
Create a dashboard to provide citizens with information about key government outcomes, metrics and initiatives.

Here is a ranked list of all your favourite ideas. 

Remember, the top ideas will be assessed during in-person and online workshops.  So register today to join civil society organizations, public servants and passionate members of your community to help us identify meaningful Open Government Commitments that can be implemented in 2017.

Workshops will be taking place on the following dates:

October 24 – Toronto – Ontario Trade Centre, 250 Yonge St. – 3:30 – 6:00 pm
October 25 – Online – Open ON Forum – 12:00 pm – 2:30 pm
October 26 – Ottawa – University of Ottawa – 3- 5:30 pm

(Full details will be sent out to those who register for the sessions)

Space is limited, so click on the session that works for you and let us know which workshop you want to attend.  Deadline to RSVP is Friday, October 21. Refreshments will be served.

Can’t make these sessions and really want to participate? Email us at Opengov@ontario.caand we will work something out.

Thank you in advance for your participation in this important initiative. 

Open Government Office"

Notice the top voted idea, is Transparency: "Adopt the international Open Data Charter and its 6 principles for all Ontario ministry and provincial agency data."

And the very first principle of this idea is "Open by default":

  1. "We recognize that the term “government data” includes, but is not limited to, data held by national, regional, local, and city governments, international governmental bodies, and other types of institutions in the wider public sector. The term government data could also apply to data created for governments by external organizations, and data of significant benefit to the public that is held by external organizations and related to government programs and services (e.g. data on extractives entities, data on transportation infrastructure, etc.).
  2. We recognize that free access to, and subsequent use of, government data is of significant value to society and the economy, and that government data should, therefore, be open by default.
  3. We acknowledge the need to promote the global development and adoption of resources, standards, and policies for the creation, use, exchange, and harmonization of open data.
  4. We recognize that open data can only be unlocked when citizens are confident that open data will not compromise their right to privacy, and that citizens have the right to influence the collection and use of their own personal data or of data generated as a result of their interactions with governments.
  5. We will:
    a. Develop and adopt policies and practices to ensure that all government data is made open by default, as outlined in this Charter, while recognizing that there are legitimate reasons why some data cannot be released;
    b. Provide clear justifications as to why certain data cannot be released;
    c. Establish a culture of openness, not only through legislative and policy measures, but also with the help of training and awareness programs, tools, guidelines, and communication strategies designed to make government, civil society, and private sector representatives aware of the benefits of open data;
    d. Develop the leadership, management, oversight, performance incentives, and internal communication policies necessary to enable this transition to a culture of openness in all government departments and agencies, including official statistics organizations;
    e. Observe domestic laws and internationally recognized standards, in particular those pertaining to security, privacy, confidentiality, and intellectual property. Where relevant legislation or regulations do not exist or are out of date, they will be created and/or updated; and
    f. In accordance with privacy legislation and standards, anonymize data prior to its publication, ensuring that sensitive, personally-identifiable data is removed."
If this is what Ontario citizens want, I guess it means Kathleen Wynne and her secretive Liberal government will overturn their hiding of abortions information?

Friday, October 7, 2016

Bill C-225 should satisfy pro-life and pro-choice people

My letter published in the National Post on October 4, 2016:
It seems to me that if pro-choice people like Joyce Arthur can’t support a sensible bill like C-225 (that protects a woman’s choice to carry her pre-born child to term), it confirms one thing and one thing only: that is that they are not pro-choice at all, but rather pro-abortion. Hopefully, MPs can see this and vote accordingly. Blind ideology without common sense isn’t useful or helpful. Especially for the women who would be protected by this bill.
Patricia Maloney, Ottawa.

Sunday, October 2, 2016

Canada's assisted suicide law will claim unintended victims

What Dr. Johnston writes about below is frightening. This is where Canada is heading with it's
assisted suicide law. Reprinted with permission from the author. Sorry for the weird formatting.
The Carter decision to allow assisted suicide and euthanasia claimed that Canada could avoid abuses through careful guidelines and screening. Medically facilitated elder abuse bygreedy relatives and medicalized suicide for the depressed — a grim reality where this practice is legal — were supposed to be avoidable, said the judge, because of a superior medical culture in Canada. The abuses of Belgium? Not for us.
Experience proves otherwise.
According to the new law, it will be five years before Canada’s assisted suicide and euthanasia regime has to report back to the nation. Two stories offer reasons why that report will fail to reveal those depressed patients, far from death, who are steered to suicide by others and by their untreated mental illness.
A friend, herself dealing with advanced ovarian cancer, heard from a neighbour that his wife was going to get assisted suicide. The neighbour said they would be going to a doctor in Vancouver to get this done. This baffled my friend, who had seen the woman outside her home, gardening. The husband made other comments suggesting that his wife would be dead soon. She had heart trouble.
My friend tipped off her own nurse to get community services involved and the suicidal woman’s depression began to be addressed by a nurse and social worker. This apparently able-bodied woman did not go to Vancouver right away — but she had been invited, as soon became clear.
This appears to be medical homicide as a solution to depression.
I will let my friend’s words testify to the end of that story:
“A few days later the husband came over with a clipboard and a pen. He started by saying, “Damn government did not pass the bill.” He asked me to sign a form — that he needed two signatures for the doctor in Vancouver. He stated that none of their family and friends would sign. I almost passed out!
Seriously. I told him I would not sign. He assumed that it was on religious grounds and I said no it was experiential. He said “OK, then I will ask your husband.” I told him he had better not even bring it up!
We went on a two-day visit to the grandsons and came back on June 7 (the designated day of the euthanasia) and his balcony was draped in black crepe.
Several days later I bumped into him at the mailbox and he complained that none of the neighbours had given condolences even though he made it obvious that [his wife] had “passed.” I asked him how he was and he said that his wife had a nice last day, that she liked the walk around the seawall.
He also told me that he felt sorry for the poor doctor because she was so tired because she had so many euthanasias that day. He and the boyfriend are now residing together in a big new travel coach parked elsewhere in the same trailer park and the Mustang has become the vehicle of preference and he sold his house. No one talks to him…”
This appears to be medical homicide as a solution to depression, apparently facilitated by a husband with other interests.
Several weeks ago I was contacted by the wife of a young man with a neurological disease. The man had been assured by a euthanasia-performing doctor in Vancouver that he qualified for an assisted suicide. He was depressed and never ventured outdoors.
At the patient’s invitation I visited him in his shared room in a dingy nursing home, a place once described to me as “a prison.” He told me about his struggle to find a cure with massive doses of vitamins. He was less disabled than, for instance, Walter Lawrence, who works in Vancouver as an inspiring peer counsellor to spinal injury patients and others.
Any able-bodied person would be given psychological help to relieve it.
But this patient had lost hope for the future and felt his existence was meaningless and that death was the only solution. This death-focused tunnel vision defines a suicidal depression, and any able-bodied person would be given psychological help to relieve it. This disabled man, who was nowhere near dying, was instead killed by a Vancouver physician.
Follow on Instagram for pro-life pictures and the latest pro-life news.
The physician’s rationale for circumventing the law, reportedly given over the phone before she met or examined the patient, was that he could easily get bed sores and then die of infection, so that his death “was reasonably foreseeable.”
What surprised his wife was “how easy” it was for her depressed, self-isolated husband to be killed under the new regime. What seems obvious is that the whole nature of this death is not going to be reported to the Minister of Health or the Minister of Justice — there is no transparency to this system.
Five years from now, the mandatory report is going to be full of bland and self-justifying statistics presented by the very doctors who have done the killing. By sanitizing these medicalized suicides and homicides with the now-familiar euphemisms about “medical aid in dying,” the uninvolved public will be reassured that nothing has gone wrong.
Canada has simply created a system which offers, and completes, suicide for people whose personalities, disabilities and personal situations put them at high risk for it. Well over a hundred real people have died in the few months since the old law was discarded. To complain that this was repeatedly predicted is to indulge in powerless understatement.
And next, we have the unfolding tragedy of palliative care. That medical specialty has always struggled to reassure fearful dying people that palliation has nothing to do with “mercy killing” and assisted suicide. Reluctant families have been truthfully promised that hospice nurses and doctors are not self-appointed angels of death.
Sadly, palliative care wards and hospices across Canada are, right now, in a hailstorm of administrative edicts to perform euthanasia inside their walls, in whispering range of those families and patients who had been promised a refuge of care.
Violating the principles and purposes of palliative care is in no way required by the new law. The thoughtless imposition of this radical shift needs to be halted. Hospital administrators can and must provide other locations for those few final minutes.
Our Minister of Health and her provincial colleagues would be wise to act quickly on this. The principles of suicide prevention have been betrayed. It is not inevitable that the principles of palliative care must be next.
LifeNews Note: Will Johntson, M.D., is a physician practicing in Vancouver British Columbia.

Life Chain - Ottawa

Some people say when we protest or pray to put an end to abortion, we are violent, or rude of ignorant. Funny that. Video below.

More pictures here.

Friday, September 30, 2016

Cassie and Molly's Law - write to your MP

Please write a letter to your MP about Cassie and Molly's law. weneedaLAW has some great sample letters to help you write your letter. Or after you look at weneedaLAW's sample letters, you can simply write your own letter, in your own words, as I did below. Hand written is best if you can.

I received a letter yesterday from the Clerk of the House of Commons informing me that MP Andrew Leslie will take over Mauril Belanger's riding until a by-election can be held in Ottawa Vanier. So that is who my letter is addressed to.

Letters can be sent postage free to:

House of Commons
Parliament Buildings
Ottawa, ON
K1A 0A6