Friday, July 7, 2017

You can't say NO at end-of-life. Why did Canada not listen to Justice Lynn Smith. Lynn wanted euthanasia stopped if there was any ambivalence. The Supreme Court of Canada later decided that doctors should have the last word as they would know if a medical vunlerable really meant it or not.

Dutch euthanasia getting so out of hand that even assisted-death docs want to hit the brakes

July 5, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) — An advertisement taken out in a major newspaper in the Netherlands by more than 200 Dutch doctors begins, “[Assisted suicide] for someone who cannot confirm he wants to die? No, we will not do that. Our moral reluctance to end the life of a defenseless man is too great. "
The doctors, many of whom currently serve as assisted-suicide providers, are objecting to the unchecked growth of euthanasia in their country, where people who have reduced mental capacity due to dementia are being euthanised.
Current law allows doctors to euthanize without verbal consent if a written declaration of will has been provided in advance. In addition, a doctor has to also first determine that the patient is undergoing unbearable suffering. But with reduced mental capacity, patients are often unable to confirm that their former request to be euthanized — executed perhaps years earlier — is still valid.

A turning point

Alarm bells began to sound for these doctors a few years ago when an elderly woman was euthanized against her will.
The 80-year-old suffered from dementia. She had allegedly earlier requested to be euthanized when “the time was right” but in her last days expressed her desire to continue living.
Despite changing her mind about ending her life, her doctor put a sedative in the her coffee. When that wasn’t enough, the doctor enlisted the help of family members to hold down the struggling, objecting patient so that she could administer the lethal injection.
"Doesn’t someone have a right to change their mind?" asked Alex Schadenberg, executive director of the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition. He told LifeSiteNews earlier this year, "They sell it as choice and autonomy, but here’s a woman who’s saying, 'no, I don’t want it,' and they stick it in her coffee, they hold her down and lethally inject her."
"It's false compassion," Schadenberg continued. "It’s killing people basically out of a false ideology" that treats euthanasia as somehow good when "it’s the exact opposite of what it actually is."
In 2016, the Dutch doctor was cleared of wrongdoing by a euthanasia oversight panel. The chairman of that panel expressed hope that the case will go to court – not so the doctor can be prosecuted but so a court can set a precedent on how far doctors may go in such cases.

Troubling new legislation

That case remains fresh in the minds of the Dutch as ‘groundbreaking’ new legislation is being floated by the country’s lawmakers.
Legislators in the Netherlands have now proposed the ‘Completed Life Bill’ that would allow anybody age 75 or older to be euthanized even if they are healthy. If the legislation passes, it would be a big step toward the ultimate goal of making euthanasia available to any adult who wants it.
Alexander Pechtold, leader of the Dutch political party D66, said, “It’s my personal opinion that in our civilization dying is an individual consideration. You didn’t ask to be brought into the world.” He went on to explain that this new legislation would be one more step toward the universal availability of euthanasia, part of a process of steady incremental gains over the last few decades.

Belgium’s culture of death seeping into the Netherlands

As reported by Schadenberg several years ago, according to available data, more than 1,000 Belgian deaths were hastened without explicit request in 2013.
Schadenberg quoted Belgian ethicist Freddy Mortier from an Associated Press article:
“Mortier was not happy, however, that the ‘hastening of death without explicit request from patients,’ which can happen when a patient slumbers into unconsciousness or has lost the capacity for rational judgment, stood at 1.7 percent of cases in 2013. In the Netherlands, that figure was 0.2 percent.”
The Netherlands appears to be going the way of nearby Belgium, with that 0.2 percent statistic climbing rapidly. In 2009, 12 patients with dementia were euthanized. In 2016, there 141 cases reported. And for those with psychiatric illness, there were no cases in 2009 but 60 in 2016.
Boudewijn Chabot, a psychogeriatrician and prominent euthanasia supporter, said in June that things are “getting out of hand.” He continued, “[L]ook at the rapid increase … The financial gutting of the healthcare sector has particularly harmed the quality of life of these types of patients. It’s logical to conclude that euthanasia is going to skyrocket.”
In North America, Alex Schadenberg warns, “People need to recognize that euthanasia or assisted-suicide laws will be abused. Will assisted death be your choice or will it be imposed on you?”

Saturday, July 1, 2017

CMPA June 2017

This from the CMPA Perspectives June 2017

Document carefully in the medical record the processes and discussions around MAID, especially assessments on eligibility and mental capacity (competence), informed consent discussions, consultations with other healthcare professionals, and, if appropriate, discussions with family members.

What I like is, if appropriate, discussions with family members.  That leaves it up to the physician to decide if the family should know about the euthanasia.  Since the death certificate will say the preexisting medical condition caused death, the family would never know if the medical vulnerable person did euthanasia or not. There is suicide prevention, why not euthanasia prevention.

This is what happened to Randy.  On November 15 2013 his physician put a DNR/DNT Order on him without telling us. I found out by accident.  I was not to know.  VCHA did the same thing to him in 2012.  At that time, after I found out, a trio of three went to see Randy, without me, and he said no to a DNR.  So I was confident that VCHA would not do that again.  But they did, they put on a DNR on Randy without telling me on November 15, 2013.

If VCHA is fearful that you will talk a patient out of a decision to die, they will just not tell you.  They will even go so far as getting the PGT involved so the process is sanctioned by her. If a patient is brave enough to want euthanasia, then he should be brave enough to tell his family of his intention.

Euthanasia requests should be announced/published in the newspaper asking if there is any reason why this should not happen.

Saturday, June 24, 2017

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition: Ontario judge extends terminal definition for euth...

Euthanasia Prevention Coalition: Ontario judge extends terminal definition for euth...: Alex Schadenberg Executive Director - Euthanasia Prevention Coalition On Tuesday I wrote about Canada's euthanasia law - one year la...

Sunday, June 18, 2017

Snowflake Allegation Defence

I keeping thinking what did I do to anger VCHA.  How can frontline medical personnel be snowflakes. Snowflakes are those who thinks they are entitled to special consideration.  They are ultra sensitive (snowflake delicate) to the point that they demand that no emotion or discourse be allowed.  In my case, I am not allowed access to all VCHA properties. Now I have to spend thousands of hours to prove it in a court of law.. But alas, the lawyers are the ones who are going to be $enriched: make work projects are what they excel in.  Their own evidence will prove that their clients are snowflakes. I only need patience with the court process. And that is going to be hard as there are other things I want to do in this my last decade of  life.

Sunday, June 11, 2017

Loose Association of the truth

The purpose of pleadings apparently is to plead a loose association of the truth.  And the job of a judge is to try to bring these together so he can make a fair decision.

Tuesday, June 6, 2017

A time consuming project

I am working on a project so I won't be addressing my blog much.  It is very upsetting what I am doing.  It brings backmemories and tears.  And the haunting words that Randy is afraid. He was afraid to die.

Tuesday, May 30, 2017

Fake Lawyers

Again I got two rejections today from lawyers who refuse to help me.  I am coming to the conclusion that all lawyers outthere are fake lawyers. They do not want to do real law.

This last lawyer I asked to help with Carolanne and all he did was send back the money I sent him.  At least he did not charge me $200 for opening a file.  I cannot get over what VCHA did to Carolanne.  I got a court order so that we could visit each other and as soon as VCHA found out about it they got to Carolanne and I was told hat she did not want to see me. And I was not allowed on any VCHA properties. So I could not talk to her and convince her not to be afraid.   And they will not let me see her.  I suspect that she does not know what is going on as she is a quad, can't talk, can't move, and the only thing she knows is that I have abandoned her. Who is going to tell her any different.  She is at the end of her life and she will die alone like Randy did.

VCHA won't even give me how to contact her family.  They do not have to do it. VCHA does not have to do anything.  I asked Carolanne on February 26 2017 if her family ever visits her and she said no.

Even though her family has not visited her in years I am sure that they will be furious if they knew how their daughter is being treated. I am sure they believe that their daughter has been looked after legally i.e. her rights are being protected.    VCHA imprisoned her, they lied to her, they coerced her, and she would have a cause of action to sue VCHA.

I saw Carolanne on Februry 26 and 28, 2017 and she said that she wanted to see me both times. We were going to be sisters.And no one could stop us from seeing each other as there was a court order.

When this first happened the lawyers said that Carolanne was incompetent but now that she has been coerced to do what they want, she is competent.

Just like what they did to Randy.  The physician who put a DNR on him said he was competent but the next day he was incompetent. Because if you are incompetent only the instructions given prior to the incompetency are legal.  And then to make it worse, this same doctor assessed him to say he was incompetent. This opened the door to get the PGT involved to make Randy a non-person.

I still do not know how the PGT was able to convince the Designated Health Authority to revoke my power of attorney.  But the lawyer for the PGT said that the PGT does not have to share those reasons.


Law Society of BC v. Goodwin: When court orders are disobeyed or ignored, the court is demeaned.  If the court is demeaned, respect for the rule of law declines.

Sunday, May 21, 2017

Carolanne May 21 2017

I am thinking about Carolanne.  Since I can't see her she just might decide to tell her doctor to withdraw her life suppor.  But that is rather impossible because she cannot speak or write.  So a medical person would have to suggest it.  I have seen it happen at George Pearson before.  Patients are isolated and soon they see no hope, and soon the patient is dead. The only connection they have with the world is a television.  With Bill C-14 there is some safeguards but with withdrawal of treatment; nothing.

I hope that this is not the designated pathway for Carolanne.

On October 20 2016 I sent an email asking Tristin Wayte, Manager of Risk Management, that I wanted to see Carolanne.  She replied that

 "The restriction will remain in place as long as you continue to harass those on VCH sites about the death of Randy Walker. "

None of her allegation of harassment was explainedI have no knowledge of harassing anyone while on VCHA sites.  Dr. Tristin Waye has four advanced degrees but the degrees does not give her any credibility as  she does exactly what she is told by Edgar Hoover.  Am I banned from seeing Carolanne because I dare to speak.
In March 2017 VCHA convinced Carolanne that she does not want to see me; thereby neutralizing the court order obtained on February 24 2017. What a smart chess move.  And this was reinforced numerous times by their $800 an hours lawyers in writing.

Everyone who was part of convincing Carolanne that we should not see each other, should be disgraced.

I wonder if VCHA threatened Carolanne with taking away her pain medicine (hydromorphine) if she was not compliant.

I have hired a tracing agency to locate Carolanne's family.  It would be interesting to know what VCHA told them.  Or maybe VCHA never even attempted to communicate with them.  VCHA never even attempted to communicate with Randy's family when he was dying or after he died. 

Sunday, May 14, 2017

Civil Conspiracy (definition)

In a 2012 judgment of Justice K. Campbell of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, Dale v. Toronto Real Estate Board, offers this description of the two variants of the tort of civil conspiracy, referred to as predominant purpose conspiracy (also known as conspiracy to injure) and unlawful means conspiracy (also known as conspiracy by unlawful means):
"(T)he elements of predominant purpose conspiracy require the plaintiff to establish that: (1) the defendants acted in combination, that is, in concert, by agreement or common design; (2) the predominant purpose of the defendants was to intentionally harm the plaintiff; and (3) the defendants' conduct caused harm to the plaintiff. The elements of unlawful means conspiracy require the plaintiff to establish that: (1) the defendants acted in combination, again that is, in concert, by agreement or common design; (2) the defendants committed some unlawful act such as a crime, a tort, or breached some statute; (3) the defendants conduct was directed towards the plaintiffs; (4) the defendants knew or ought to have known that injury to the plaintiffs was likely to occur from their unlawful act; and (5) the defendants' unlawful conduct in furtherance of their conspiracy caused harm to the plaintiff."

May 15 2017

Memo from Terry Schiavos web page.

To have strangers come in and forcibly tear you from your loved ones, to abduct your person, because that is exactly what this is — an abduction — is terrifying for a person with a brain injury and other such patients,” Yolanda wrote in her petition. “It is terrifying for an incapacitated person who has relied heavily on and whose life, happiness and well-being has depended on a family member.”

I still like to know what egregious thing I did to cause VCHA to demand that I be banned from seeing Randy and also to be banned FOR LIFE from all VCHA properties. 

If anyone knows, let me know.


Tuesday, May 9, 2017

Michael Lee, MLA for Langara

I just came back from the Liberal campaign office and I said to Michael that I hope that he becomes the next premier of BC and he said it is a bit close right now. It was 42, 42.  So he is the new designated leader of the Liberal Party.  He is perfect for the job.  And the job is perfect for him. Perfect education; Perfect timing; Perfect profession; Perfect community involvement; Perfect family; Perfect political campaign; Perfect political supporters; Perfect marketing; Perfect Wife; Perfect Win;

10:42pm May 9 2017

Sunday, April 30, 2017

Getting Old

I was at the senior's center this afternoon for the Happy Gang coffee hour.  The discussion went to being old and all of us were of the opinion that were still thinking as we were when we were 25 athough most of us were in our mid 70s. We did not see ourselves as "old" until we looked in a mirror.  This aging is very interesting.  I know I am at the end of my life but the thought of the end is surreal.

I am still being haunted by the memory of Carolanne. .How dare VCHA get to her and coerce her to say that she does not want to see me.  If I cannot see her how can I convince her that she can see me and that no bad things will happen.  But then I do not even know if I can promise her that because her care is in the hands of the health authority.  VCHA even said that Carolanne was incompetent which is not true.  I countered that by communicating with the Public Guardian and Trustee saying that if and when a Certificate of Incapability was to be issued for Carolanne that I wanted to become her committee. This is the kind of power VCHA has over its patients.  It can assess you as being incompetent even if you are not and you will become a non-person hidden from view with no rights.  That is what they did to Randy, so why not Carolanne. Randy was not incompetent, he was depressed or was sick.  Just because he did not want to be interrogated that does not mean he was incompetent. And VCHA did not include me in Randy's incapability assessment although I had Randy's power of attorney and health representation agreement and I should be involved.  And the doctor who said Randy was incompetent was the same doctor who decided to put on an unauthorized DNR on him without telling Randy or me.

I still cannot get over the fact that the VCHA was able to revoke my power of attorney in 2014. The PGT/VCHA decided that I could not be Randy's power of attorney as I was not spending Randy's money.  It was rather hard for me to spend Randy's money when I was not authorized to do so as he was competent to decide on what he was to spend his money on.  When the PGT told me on a complaint submitted by Ro Ang, the manager of George Pearson Centre, that I was abusing Randy, I did not think much about it. Let Ro be Ro. Find nothing. So after they discovered that I was not recklessly spending Randy's money, they created the scenario that I should have been spending Randy's money.  I was not allowed to hoard it.  It did not matter if it was $200 or $20,000. It did not randy's money was in a lawyer's trust account. I was frantically spending money on Randy but it was my money like the $240 I had to spend to apply for a court visitation order. Then I was told that since Randy was incompetent that I had no authority to start a visitation order to see him.  And pray tell me when did he become incompetent.  No one told me. The first I heard of it was on April 4 2014 and Randy died a week later. I remember a wife of a resident/patient in GPC said to me that with VCHA, the left hand does not know what the right hand is doing. 

The PGT/VCHA remind me of wannabe police officers who are inadequately trained security officers who practice their martial arts training by beating up homeless people targeting the elderly and the disabled.

Friday, April 14, 2017

Brief History of Euthanasia in Germany.

When I read this I could see the similarities of the use of DNRs to hasten the death of those who have a poor quality of life.  Canadian Bill C-14 requires "foreseeable death" but a DNR does not. 

Spicer and his critics are historically off

My Passover holidays were interrupted by the news, shared by friends in the synagogue, that the press secretary to the president of the United States had just said that Syrian President Bashar Assad was worse than Adolf Hitler because Assad gassed his own people.
I was astounded and saddened by the comment referring to an event in the village of Khan Sheikhoun on April 4. Press Secretary Sean Spicer’s remark was not, as my distinguished colleague professor Deborah Lipstadt said in The New York Times, “anti-Semitism,” masked or real, but ignorance pure and simple, an ignorance that should disqualify one from so exalted a position.
My mood didn’t lighten as I read critique after critique discussing the murder of German Jews by gas in such “extermination camps,” to use the Nazi term for killing centers, such as Auschwitz and Treblinka.
Their critique overlooked the origin of Germans gassing their own population, which had nothing to do with Jews.
Forgive the history lesson, but permit me to explain.
Mass murder began with the death of a few individuals. In October 1939, Hitler signed an authorization permitting his personal physician and the chief of the Führer Chancellery to put to death those considered unsuited to live. He backdated it to Sept. 1, 1939, the day World War II began, to give it the appearance of a wartime measure. In the directive:
Reich leader Philip Bouhler and Dr. Brandt are charged with responsibility for expanding the authority of physicians, to be designated by name, to the end that patients considered incurable according to the best available human judgment of their state of health, can be granted a mercy killing.
What followed was the so-called euthanasia program, in which men, women and children who were physically disabled, mentally deficient or emotionally disturbed were systematically killed. They were termed “useless eaters” and “life unworthy of living.”
Within a few months, the T-4 program (named for Berlin Chancellery Tiergarten 4, which directed it) involved virtually the entire German psychiatric community. A new bureaucracy, headed by physicians, was established with a mandate to “take executive measures against those defined as ‘life unworthy of living.’ ”
A statistical survey of all psychiatric institutions, hospitals and homes for chronically ill patients was ordered. At Tiergarten 4, three medical experts reviewed the forms returned by institutions throughout Germany but did not examine any patients or read their medical records. Nevertheless, they had the power to decide life or death.
Patients who doctors decided should be killed were transported to six main killing sites: Hartheim, Sonnenstein, Grafeneck, Bernburg, Hadama, and Brandenburg. SS members and other health care personnel in charge of the transports donned white coats to keep up the charade of a medical procedure.
The first killings were by starvation: starvation is passive, simple and natural. Then injections of lethal doses of sedatives were used. Children were easily “put to sleep.” But gassing soon became the preferred method of killing; 15 to 20 people were killed in a chamber disguised as a shower. The lethal gas was provided by chemists, and the process was supervised by physicians. Afterward, black smoke billowed from the chimneys as the bodies were burned in adjacent crematoria. Communities adjacent to these facilities could see that smoke even in the heat of summer and they could smell the burning flesh.
Families of those killed were informed of the transfer. They were assured that their loved ones were being moved in order to receive the best and most modern treatment available. Visits, however, were not permitted. The relatives then received condolence letters, falsified death certificates signed by physicians, and urns containing ashes. There were occasional lapses in bureaucratic efficiency, and some families received more than one urn. They soon realized something was amiss.
A few doctors protested. Karl Bonhoeffer, a leading psychiatrist, worked with his son Dietrich, a pastor who actively opposed the regime, to contact church groups, urging them not to turn patients in church-run institutions over to the SS. (Dietrich Bonhoeffer was executed by the SS just before the end of the war.) A few physicians refused to fill out the requisite forms. Only one psychiatrist, professor Gottfried Ewald of the University of Göttingen, openly opposed the killing.
Doctors didn’t become killers overnight. The transformation took time and required a veneer of scientific justification. As early as 1895, a widely used German medical textbook made a claim for “the right to death.” In 1920, a physician and a prominent jurist argued that destroying “life unworthy of life” is a therapeutic treatment and a compassionate act completely consistent with medical ethics.
Soon after the Nazis came to power, the Bavarian minister of health proposed that psychopaths, the mentally deficient and other “insane” people be isolated and killed. “This policy has already been initiated at our concentration camps,” he noted. A year later, mental institutions throughout the Reich were instructed to “neglect” their patients by withholding food and medical treatment.
Pseudoscientific rationalizations for the killing of the “unworthy” were bolstered by economic considerations. According to bureaucratic calculations, state funds that went to the care of criminals and physically and mentally disabled persons living in institutions could be put to better use, for example by loans to newly married couples. Incurably sick children were seen as a burden for the healthy body of the Volk, the German people. In a time of war, it was not difficult to lose sight of the absolute value of human life. Hitler understood this. Wartime, he said, “was the best time for the elimination of the incurably ill.”
Historian and Auschwitz survivor Henry Friedlander traces the origins of the Final Solution to the “euthanasia” program. The murder of handicapped people was a prefiguration of the Holocaust. The killing centers to which the disabled were transported were the antecedents of the death camps. The organized transportation of the disabled foreshadowed mass deportation. Some of the physicians and other health care workers and hospital personnel as well as ordinary guards and mechanics who became specialists in the technology of cold-blooded murder in the late 1930s later staffed the death camps. All their moral, professional and ethical inhibitions had long been lost.
Psychiatrists, voluntary participants in the German “euthanasia” program, were able to save patients, at least temporarily, but only if they cooperated by sending others to their death.
Gas chambers were first developed at the “euthanasia” killing centers. The perpetrators cremated the dead bodies. In the death camps, the technology was taken to a new level: thousands could be killed at one time and their bodies burned within hours.
The Roman Catholic Church, which had not taken a stand on the “Jewish question,” protested the “mercy killing.” Count von Galen, the Bishop of Münster, openly challenged the regime, arguing that it was the duty of Christians to oppose the taking of human life even if this were to cost them their own lives. It seemed to have an effect.
On Aug. 24, 1941, almost two years after the “euthanasia” program was initiated, it appeared to cease. In fact, it had gone underground. The total number of people killed in the Nazi “euthanasia” program is estimated to have been between 200,000 and 250,000. The majority were Germans, but Poles and Soviet citizens of various nationalities were also among the victims.
The killing did not end; mass murder was just beginning. Physicians trained in the medical killing centers went on to grander tasks. Irmfried Eberl, a doctor whose career began in the T-4 program, became the commandant of Treblinka, where killing of a magnitude as yet unimagined would take place.
Again, gassing did not begin with the Jews; it began with Germans who found the presence of fellow Germans of special needs an embarrassment to the myth of the “master race” and an economic hardship. Hitler initiative the process but the participation of German society and even its elite psychiatric community was as widespread as is was essential.

MICHAEL BERENBAUM is a professor of Jewish studies and director of the Sigi Ziering Institute at American Jewish University.

Monday, April 3, 2017

Sunday, April 2, 2017

Carol Anne - Response to Petition

The Petition that VCHA filed on March 3 2017 to set aside the Order of Febuary 24th 2017is saying that Carol Anne is incapable of conducting litigation.  Exactly what VCHA did to Randy.  Make Carol Anne a ward of the court and a non-person with no rights.  And all litigation would be suspended.

In the March 6 2017Affidavit of Ro Ang, the manager of GPC, she attached as an exhibit an incident report of 11 November 2010.  This incident was caused by a  nurse who told me that sleeping was not allowed on the premises.  Without my knowledge VGH had transferred Randy and it would not tell me where he was.  I was traumatized.  Apparently, VGH does not tell anyone where a patient is transferred to as that is confidential information.  By a process of elimination I discovered Randy was transferred to GPC and I went to see him.  This was at 8:00 pm well within the posted visiting hours.

I was under stress and exhausted and I laid my head resting on my arms at the side of Randy's bed.  A nurse told me sleeping was not allowed. The nurse deliberately picked on me and with the okay of the head nurse told the nurse to evict me from the premises for resting my head. So that is what he did.  Followed orders.  Apparently, I was non-verbal hostile towards staff. How can someone be non-verbal hostile towards staff. I ws tired.  There was no concern for me or for Randy. 

Apparently in my exhaustion rather than visit Randy I was taking pictures of staff and making disparaging remarks about GPC.  Not true. I was exhausted. All I wanted to do is rest. I did not even own a camera at that time.

The next day Tanu went on and on about her having the power to make sure that I never see Randy again even on his death bed.  I had a witness with me at that time.  So Tanu cannot deny this. Tanu said that she knew about Randy was going to be transferred to GPC three weeks earlier.  So how is it that VGH could not tell me this. My welcome to GPC...

As far as I can tell the 521 pages the binder which Guild Yule submitted to the court on March 14 2017 most of it cannot be used as it is hearsay and not admissible as evidence.  Guild Yule submitted such garbage knowing full well that a judge would not have time to visit each page of the 521 page binder however the judge did say to Skorah for him to summarize the pleadings. Skorah neglected to tell the judge most if not all of the evidence would not be admissible.

It is nauseating to think that a QC would stoop to submitting evidence that is not proper.

Lawyers especially those of Skorah's calibre should not deceive the courts.


Thursday, March 16, 2017

Kristin and Carol Anne email October 2016

I was reviewing the materials sent to me by the lawyers for VCHA before me applying for a visitation order to visit Carol Anne so we could visit each other.

What has us wanting to visit each other got to do with my husband who died April 13 2014 and the upset VCHA caused to us then.  VCHA believe their snowflake staff was more important than Randy. They 100% banned me so that I could not see Randy for the months prior to his death.

After it became clear to me that the hospital decided that Carol Ann would not be allowed to see me unless I applied for a court order, so I went out and got a court order on February 24, 2017.  As soon as management found out about it, they coerced Carol Anne to say she does not want to see me. What a brilliant move by VCHA. Now any further litigation would be neutralised.

These are words written by Risk Management VCH in an email October 20 2016 when I asked to visit Carol Anne.: 

I'm sorry I can't do that; I'm aware of the history of your restriction.  The restriction will remain in place as long as you continue to harass those on VCH sites about the death of Randy Walker.  VCH has responded to your allegations and will not engage in that discussion.

This is terrible using a few emails (which emails were not attached, so I do know what harassing she was talking about) to prevent Carol Anne and me from visiting each other.  VCHA is constructively imprisoning Carol Anne for something she had no part of.  I have heard that the medical system is broken, but what is happening is beyond broken.  It is contempt of our Constitution.  Carol Anne has the right to visit who she wants if she is in a hospital or not.  At the very least, it is elder abuse.  What VCHA is doing is unlaw and spiteful. VCHA cannot coerce Carol Anne to say that she did not want to see me.

Court Order in hand on February 26th and 28th, I visited Carol Anne both times she welcomed me and my witness.  So why is it as soon as staff showed up on the 28th, she frantically indicated that she did not want to see me.  Coercion. Duress.

Carol Anne is a full quad.  She cannot communicate, and she is not mobile.  On February 26, 2017, when I saw her, she indicated that her family did not visit her.   Her before boy friend would see her and would tell me how she was doing. We would meet at the mall.  Vince died of a heart attack over a year ago.  She now has no one except the good and carrying staff of George Pearson Centre.  Staff who are imprisoning her.

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

Setting Aside Oder to See Carol Anne

I cannot believe what is happening.  I made a simple application to the court to see Carol Anne who is a resident in George Pearson Centre.  She is a quad and for three years and I have been trying to get VCHA to allow us to visit.  Vancouver refuses as I was violent which is not true and I was being disrespectful/disruptive to staff and management of George Pearson Centre.

There was an incident in 2013 wherein I in self-defence had to push back staff who were unlawfully preventing us from living George Pearson Centre.  Because of the toxicity of George Pearson Centre, I attempted to remove my husband from the premises.  GPC had the mistaken belief that they could detain him unlawfully.  I thought the incident was forgotten until January 29 2014 wherein I was told that I was banned 100% from visiting my husband and that the banning would be for 90 days.  Verbally, I was told that the banning was going to last forever.

My husband was dying and they did this to us.  I protested but I could do nothing.  On March 2014 I filed a Petition to Visit my husband.  The next thing I knew the  Public Guardian and Trustee was involved and I did not understand why and she became Randy's committee. VCHA wanted this.  VCHA had him assessed by a doctor, the same doctor, I accused of attempted culpable homicide by him putting an unauthorized DNR on my husband and then refusing to take it off.  The PGT was designated to protect Randy from me.  The decided that my enduring Power of Attorney should be taken away from me and they were going for Committee of Person as well.  In other words they were making Randy a non-person wherein it was the PGT who would decide everything in his life including putting DNRs on Randy.  VCHA, Dr. Dunne and the PGT conspired to do this.

The physician lorded over me saying on November 18 2017 that he would consider taking off the DNR/DNT when I asked him to do on his return from Prince George.  I took the incident to the College of Physicians and Surgeons and they decided that Randy was incapable due to a high fever caused by an infection.  He was not capable of giving informed consent. In the non-medical world, the physician would have been criminally charged with criminal intent.  But nothing happened to him except he was told that he should have been more careful in deciding if Randy was not well enough to agree to a DNR and his handwriting was illegible

It was after January 29 2014 when I was then accused of being bad for Randy.

On January 29 2014 I was banned citing the November 18 2013 incident.   It is so obvious but at that time it was not obvious to me that the real reason was so that I would not be in a position to question whatever was happening to Randy.  I believed prior to that that GPC were bullies and they were acting as such.  GPC was saying that my behavior caused the staff to be afraid of me and interferred with its ability to do their work. VCHA had to create reasons beyond the truth.  They even got the Workers Compensation Board involved because they said I was bullying staff.   VCHA over the years bullied me making me a basket case and then they turned it around and accused  me of  bullying the snowflakes. Can you imagine wasting manpower of the WCB.   I wonder what the report said.

Anyways that goes too far back in history to be part of what was happening now, so I thought.  It has been over three years. However, VCHA is wanting to continue the ridiculous banning for the rest of my life. This banning has discredited me, demoralised me.  My reputation has been damaged.    And they are intent on continuing to do so.  But now they have gone too far.

They have imprisoned Carol Anne and they need to continue to discredit me.  Carol Anne is severely disabled.  Her family abandoned her decades ago.  She is bedridden and cannot talk except with her eyes and nodding her head. She is on a ventilator and trach.  She is in a private room with only a television to distract her. She is totally isolated.  She can't even watch people activity on her ward as she is in a private isolated room. Isolated from others who could ring for assistance in case Carol Anne was in distress.

They might not want me to talk to Carol Anne if there is a remote possibility that I want to become her advocate.  GPC does not want any patients to have advocates unless they are mute.  With Carol Anne she is a non-functioning quad and her quality of life is that she has none

It is beyond me what they are trying to do to me. I only want to visit Carol Anne.  It is so obvious to me those that the decision makers employed by VCHA are idiots.

The question still outstanding is what did I do.  I asked this of David Bell, lawyer for VCHA, and he said I knew what I did.  Well, tell me again. 

Saturday, March 11, 2017

Proposed Injunction dated April 2014.

I was reading from the pleadings in 2014 when VCHA wanted an Order FOR LIFE that I by herself and or by her agents be barred from visiting any VCHA properties. How stupid.

However, I could see Randy on the sidewalk as that would not upset the staff.  That did not last long, I was able to see him two times on the sidewalk and then Ro said that it was too much work for her and she refused to allow me to see Randy ever again. Think about this, I could see Randy under security on the sidewalk but I could not see him on his death bed inside GPC. I wonder what law firm gave VCHA that piece of legal advice. 

Although I asked VCHA to do an investigation it refused to do so.  They controlled the complaint process Star Chamber Court with no due process just one-sided gossipy evidence.  There was no provision for an independent investigation.

Randy was dying in 2014 and I was banned.  I asked friends to check on him and GPC decided that they could not do this any more. In an email from Risk Management (VGH) I was told to stop such COVERT activities that I organized.

 Even though I was banned, GPC would tell me that Randy was fine those that went to visit him (three of which were retired health professionals) would say differently.

 And most hurtful was when I was told he was crying.

The proposed Order also said that if Randy was terminal I would be able to access him at George Pearson Centre.  The reality would be that GPC had no intention of transferring him to Vancouver General Hospital in the event he needed acute care.  They planned on letting him die at George Pearson Centre and I would only be allowed to visit his dead body.

I remember Tanu telling me in 2010 that I was not allowed to talk to anyone unless they talked to me first.  The "majesty" requirement of George Pearson Centre.

I wish I was not having these flashbacks but I must so I can fight for Carolanne so I can visit her.  It would be so easy just to walk away.

Sunday, February 26, 2017

A snowflake defence.

I had a mistaken belief that I had a fiduciary duty to Randy.  I had history, I had a marriage certificate, I had a power of attorney, I had a representation agreement, I had love but the health authority saw it differently. I was accused of being disrespectful/disruptive to management.  It was a snowflake defence.

Saturday, February 25, 2017

Physicians v. Administration at VGH

I have been reflecting back to the morning of 13 April 2014, Randy was dying in the ICU, and I was forced to stand outside in the hallway.

I had a Supreme Court Order in hand to allow me to see Randy but no one would let me inside the ICU until the Order was verified again.  I stood there for two hours.  Security was watching.

Thinking back, I do not know why the doctor at the ICU just did not let me in the ICU.  He was in charge. He did not need permission from administration.

I remember Dr. James Dunne saying that if it was up to him, he would not allow anyone to be banned.  Dr. Dunne's belief was wrong, it was up to him. His duty was to his patients, not to a bureaucracy run by social workers. Social workers are behind every bad decision in a hospital as physicians rely on them to make their decisions rather than personally witnessing the truth.

Risk Managements used the snowflake defence in that I was disrespectful/disruptive to management.  My presence distracted staff so that they could not do their jobs. The snowflakes had contacted PTSD and it necessitated that VCHA call in the WCB to certify that the workplace was unsafe.  I had to be removed.

Richard Singleton, director of VCHA Risk Management, is a social worker with three degrees.  He decided that I should be banned on 30 January 2014 from all VCHA properties for life.

Prior to 30 January 2014 no one suggested that I was bad for Randy and that Randy needed protection from me.

Richard never spoke or met with Randy.  He set restrictions on me as to visitation without explanation.  He said I knew what I did wrong.  No,  I replied in an email, tell me.

Years later I asked the lawyers for VCHA for good reasons for my banning. Nothing.

Hospitals are for patients, not for ultra-delicate snowflakes. 


I asked the Public Guardian and Trustee for the reasons why she revoked Randy's power of attorney on April 4 2014.  VCHA approved of it by signing a Certificate of Incapability. The PGT said the reasons were sent to me.. I asked them to send them to me again. The PGT refused saying that it was under no obligation to repeat its lawful obligation as to do so would distract from doing its other work. The PGT administers $900,000,000 worth of assets and they cannot afford to resend me at the most, I estimate, to be an email of five pages. And to think the PGT is there to protect the public and yet she does not tell the public or a targetted member of the public why her decisions were made.

Sunday, February 19, 2017

Was I banned for life from all VCHA properties because of media? I really do not know.

I can relate to this on a personal level.  In BC a few years ago a nurse also complained of the care of her mother after the mother died to the Sun newspaper in Vancouver. I tried to contact her to offer support. By then she was under a ban order (I suspect).  Later I read that she had PTSD over her mother's death and took early retirement. Really.  Maybe she was also sanctioned by the BC Registered Nurses Association as what is happening to Nurse Strom.

As for Strom (read below) in Regina the punishment reeks of interference that the Hospital Authority would lobby for.  I wonder if the six nurses that complained to the nursing association were ever named. I speculate if they even existed that they were directed to do so. No group of nurses would ever do this.

"In finding her guilty, the SRNA wrote its intent was not to “muzzle”
Strom. …also suggested a $5,000 fine — “to drive home” that SHE SHOULD
NOT PUBLICLY CRITICIZE HER PROFESSION [emphasis mine]— plus $25,000 to
help cover costs of the investigation and hearing..."      Oh, of
course not - how could huge fines and publicly disgracing Nurse Strom
possibly be construed as muzzling her? Saskatchewan Registered Nurses'Association might as well have announced a free pass for any of its members inclined to neglect seniors in health facilities.   - Kate

Ashley Martin, Regina Leader-Post
Saturday, February 18, 2017 4:56:45 EST PM

REGINA, Sask. - Registered nurse Carolyn Strom said if she had known
the outcome two years ago, she would not have taken to social media to
criticize her grandfather’s long-term care.

As her drawn-out disciplinary hearing continued Friday in Regina,
Strom’s lawyer Marcus Davies and the Saskatchewan Registered Nurses’
Association (SRNA) counsel Roger Lepage put forth their submissions on
penalty — Lepage suggesting $30,000 total.

Strom took to Facebook on Feb. 25, 2015, to comment on the care of her
recently deceased grandfather at a long-term care facility in Macklin.
She suggested a lack of compassion and education among staff.

Her disciplinary hearing began Feb. 10, 2016. In October, the SRNA
discipline committee found Strom guilty of professional misconduct, as
her Facebook post was found to “harm the standing of the profession of
nursing,” under the Registered Nurses Act.

As proceedings wrapped up Friday afternoon, discipline committee
chairman Chris Etcheverry gave Strom an opportunity to speak.

“Thanks for asking me to talk,” Strom said. “It’s been a very
stressful couple of years, and it’s just very surreal … having to sit
and listen to your life and yourself being discussed.”

It has been a “very taxing” time, both financially and health-wise.

“Had I known that this would be the outcome, I wouldn’t have said what
I said, and I’ve definitely learned from what’s gone on,” said Strom.

In finding her guilty, the SRNA wrote its intent was not to “muzzle” Strom.

The discipline committee will render its written decision as soon as possible.

Lepage argued Strom’s penalty should include a formal reprimand placed
on the public register, course work, and a review of professional
standards and the Canadian Nurses’ Association code of ethics.

He also suggested a $5,000 fine — “to drive home” that she should not
publicly criticize her profession — plus $25,000 to help cover costs
of the investigation and hearing, which so far tallies almost

Davies disputed this, arguing the SRNA should pay all expenses as it
failed to negotiate an agreement in good faith.

As both parties attempted to resolve the case through a consensual
resolution agreement (CRA) between March 25 and Aug. 20, 2015, Lepage
said Davies and Strom would not co-operate within the required four
months, resulting in the hearing.

Davies said the issue was the SRNA’s “accusatory language” and
“inflammatory” claims, including accusing Strom of “professional
incompetence.” The wording didn’t improve after amendments.

Strom had agreed to the investigation committee’s conditions —
education, and reviewing standards and ethics. She had made “every
effort to try to resolve this without coming here,” said Davies.

“She was being punished for actually trying to reach an agreement by consent.”

Any fine should be “nominal in nature,” $1,000 or less, Davies said,
as “she’s already paid an awful lot” in this process: The
investigation has cost her tens of thousands of dollars in travel
expenses and missed work.

This is the SRNA’s first disciplinary hearing related to social media.

Lepage referenced five cases that could inform the penalty — including
one in which a nursing home employee published derogatory posts and
personal information about residents of the home, and one in which a
teacher blasted his employer for alleged homophobia.

Davies said, aside from the use of Facebook, Strom’s case does not
compare, and a $30,000 penalty would be “way out of line.”

Strom’s Facebook post alleged some staff were not “up to speed” on
end-of-life care and could use a refresher.

Strom, a registered nurse in the Prince Albert Parkland Health Region,
often uses social media as a health advocate, but this post was
written as a grieving granddaughter. The Macklin facility is part of
the Heartland Health Region.

As the hearing began a year ago, six registered nurses who cared for
Strom’s grandfather said they felt her Facebook post had tarnished
their reputations.

Strom generally referenced “staff” and did not criticize nurses in her post.

In its verdict, the discipline committee ruled Strom had breached the
CNA code of ethics, which promotes respect, meaningful communication
and collaboration with other health-care workers.

Wednesday, February 15, 2017

PGTism in BC

After researching BC Public Guardian and Trustee, I  created a new word to describe it and it is "PGTism."

Later I received a phone call from the BCCLA thanking me for my donation.  I asked how much did I donate.  He said $20.00.  I said I made a mistake as I was only going to give it $10.00.  The BCCLA is frustrating as it seldom answers its phone or replies to emails. 

He also wanted some feedback, and so I said, what is the BCCLA going to do about PGTism?

Of course, the young man, who sounded very well education, did not know what PGTism was, neither did he know what a Public Guardian and Trustee was; however, I did leave him to ponder: how could a regulation, not a law, make an adult a "non-person."  Being named a non-person should be under the purview of the Supreme Court.

Making an adult a non-person is not the same thing as regulating how the Liquor Control Board should do its job.  How insulting of British Columbia to subject any one of us to being regulated. Stripping us of our autonomy by use of a regulation.

Statutory Guardianship Act Regulation (2014).

Sunday, February 12, 2017

the Police

Eleanor Murray : the police are allowed to lie, they are allowed to trick you, and if they believe you are guilty they will focus on anything you say to use against you and develop that into a case against you.

I wonder how many other governmental agencies do this as well.

Dr. Kermit Gosnell, the serial abortionist in the US, spoke to the media and said that a physician's licence was a licence to lie.  So much for medical ethics.

Sunday, January 15, 2017

Third leading cause of deaths is medical errors.

According to John Hopkins (2016)\, the third leading cause of death is hospital errors.

This suggests to me that we should not trust doctors when decisions are being made especifically for end-of-life.

The first leading cause of death is heart;
The second leading cause of death is cancer.

Saturday, January 14, 2017

Reasons hospitals use to get rid of visitors .

This was taken from an article written by a doctor in the United States.  These concerns parallel what happened to me over Randy and why I was forbidden from visiting Randy.  These reasons are not good enough.  It says to  me  only says that health care professionals do not do their jobs.

My banning was orchestrated by the hospital so I could not speak to anyone, then and forever.  Yes, I was banned forever from all Vancouver Coastal Health properties. Yellow journalism.

The patient does not follow medical advice. In a health care era focused on patient-centered care, patient engagement, and joint decision-making, could this ever be a valid reason?

The patient has a mental health disorder. Should the presence of one serious chronic disease ever deprive a patient of life-preserving care for another chronic disease?

The patient is violent and is a risk to other patients and staff. In reality, reported incidences of serious violence perpetrated by dialysis patients are rare; most ‘violence’ is verbal, precipitated by personality conflict based on cultural differences, low health literacy, and poor communication. These are addressable issues.

The patient is disruptive. When this reason is explored, it often turns out that the patient has expressed quality-of-care concerns; labeling the patient as disruptive and involuntarily discharging him/her, is a form of retaliation. Patients understand the ability of dialysis centers to do this, and many describe feeling intimidated, captive and vulnerable.

Dr. Robert Bear, January 9 2017.

Monday, January 9, 2017

George Soros

Why we need socialized medicine according to George Soro.

Soros thinks more human deaths are good for the planet, which helps to explain his support for socialized medicine, a public policy that is guaranteed to create pressures for fewer persons to need health care.

Only the vulnerables, those that are sick and/or disabled, who are $rich would live. Only the $rich could afford medical care.

Blog Archive