This Is Why Canada Is One Of The Worst Human Rights Violators Of Our Time

[gatomontes99]

And just like that, Canada sentenced an innocent child to death for the crime of being expensive.

The good news is, she can pay for the treatments in America. The bad news is, Canada has probably taxed her so much that she can't afford it. 

 

 

 

[LinkSoul60]

8 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

And just like that, Canada sentenced an innocent child to death for the crime of being expensive.

The good news is, she can pay for the treatments in America. The bad news is, Canada has probably taxed her so much that she can't afford it. 

 

 

 

Congrats, you win the award for most nonsensical and idi0tic post of the day....so far.  

The title is a joke.  Canada is ranked #5 globally in human rights - Placing 5th out of 208 jurisdictions evaluated by Freedom House, Canada received nearly top marks on political rights (39/40) and civil liberties (58/60) for a total score of 97/100 on the Freedom in the World 2025 report.

Secondly, the BC government denied funding...NOT Canada.  The BC government determined Pollock's condition had deteriorated to the point where she met "discontinuation criteria".   Agree or disagree with the BC gov's decision.....it's heartbreaking for the family.

[gatomontes99]

5 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

Congrats, you win the award for most nonsensical and idi0tic post of the day....so far.  

The title is a joke.  Canada is ranked #5 globally in human rights - Placing 5th out of 208 jurisdictions evaluated by Freedom House, Canada received nearly top marks on political rights (39/40) and civil liberties (58/60) for a total score of 97/100 on the Freedom in the World 2025 report.

Secondly, the BC government denied funding...NOT Canada.  The BC government determined Pollock's condition had deteriorated to the point where she met "discontinuation criteria".   Agree or disagree with the BC gov's decision.....it's heartbreaking for the family.

#5 eh? Wow that's pretty good. So, if #5 sentences children to death for being expensive, how bad is #6? What do they do that is worse? 

[Moonlight Graham]

Did bush_Cheney die of covid or something?

[LinkSoul60]

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

#5 eh? Wow that's pretty good. So, if #5 sentences children to death for being expensive, how bad is #6? What do they do that is worse? 

You don't understand the difference between a province and a country do you.  The provincial government (BC) denied the funding.....NOT the federal government (Canada) government.  Google what a province is....

Not sure how bad #6 is, but the US is ranked #59 so maybe you have some insight into how pitiful that is ....  U.S. Added to Global Human Rights Watchlist Over Declining Civil Liberties  https://time.com/7266334/us-human-rights-watchlist-civil-liberties/

[gatomontes99]

23 minutes ago, LinkSoul60 said:

You don't understand the difference between a province and a country do you.  The provincial government (BC) denied the funding.....NOT the federal government (Canada) government.  Google what a province is....

Not sure how bad #6 is, but the US is ranked #59 so maybe you have some insight into how pitiful that is ....  U.S. Added to Global Human Rights Watchlist Over Declining Civil Liberties  https://time.com/7266334/us-human-rights-watchlist-civil-liberties/

If you get fired from a job do you care if it was your supervisor, their supervisor or the CEO?

The government killed her child through denial of service in a program that she was "guaranteed." It was a lie. They violated this child's right to live. They didnt give them a choice. It is a MAJOR civil rights violation. And what is worse? They get people to actually believe they are better off being selectively eliminated by the government. 

But, yeah, the US is 59th on a list that considers the countries that will kill you to lower their costs some of the top free countries.

 

Edited Saturday at 07:40 PM by gatomontes99

[Aristides]

So what would be the chances of her getting this drug in the US without insurance that would cover it and who would provide that insurance?

[CdnFox]

14 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

And just like that, Canada sentenced an innocent child to death for the crime of being expensive.

The good news is, she can pay for the treatments in America. The bad news is, Canada has probably taxed her so much that she can't afford it. 

 

 

 

No, read it again. the child is going to die anyway.  the drug won't help her, it just controls her seizures and they can do that with other drugs which are less expensive. This drug cost a million a year and won't do her any more good. 

Drug coverage to be discontinued for Langford girl - Victoria Times Colonist

 Yeash dude, i've got some serious issues with our medical system but i think you'll have a hard time selling this as a human rights violation   

[Michael Hardner]

There was a tag added 

 

"Context needed: While tragic, the child's condition has always been terminal, and has progressed beyond the stage where the drug is considered useful. The only remaining benefit is seizure control, which can be managed by less expensive ($1mil/yr) medications."

[LinkSoul60]

19 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

If you get fired from a job do you care if it was your supervisor, their supervisor or the CEO?

The government killed her child through denial of service in a program that she was "guaranteed." It was a lie. They violated this child's right to live. They didnt give them a choice. It is a MAJOR civil rights violation. And what is worse? They get people to actually believe they are better off being selectively eliminated by the government. 

But, yeah, the US is 59th on a list that considers the countries that will kill you to lower their costs some of the top free countries.

 

Shitty all the way around for this child and family, but the government hasn't killed the child.  The drug is considered no longer effective for her current situation.  To blame this on the BC government as a disregard for human rights is only reading headlines, and disregarding the unfortunate facts.

[herbie]

On 6/21/2025 at 9:13 PM, Aristides said:

So what would be the chances of her getting this drug in the US without insurance that would cover it and who would provide that insurance?

You mean what would be the chance of getting ANY insurance that would cover that drug even a few times?
Just like a good old boy in the USA they're free to come up with millions of dollars out of their own pocket.
Or simply deal with the approved and tested treatment method covered for free. Or even make noise like they did and see the govt back down and shell out from public pressure.

Much better than having to blow off the Insurance CEO's head and become a semi-hero over it.

[I am Groot]

On 6/21/2025 at 1:13 PM, gatomontes99 said:

And just like that, Canada sentenced an innocent child to death for the crime of being expensive.

The good news is, she can pay for the treatments in America. The bad news is, Canada has probably taxed her so much that she can't afford it. 

You're a loony, you are.

[WestCanMan]

On 6/21/2025 at 10:36 AM, gatomontes99 said:

#5 eh? Wow that's pretty good. So, if #5 sentences children to death for being expensive, how bad is #6? What do they do that is worse? 

To be honest Gato, Drs make decisions like that all the time. They can't just do everything in their power, every time: they have to pick their spots to help the highest number of people they can with the amount of resources they have.

The amount of time, energy and money that they will invest in keeping someone alive is based on availability of several different resources (medicine, Drs, nurses, beds, general funding, etc), odds of success, prognosis, other urgent needs at the same time, etc, etc, etc.  

If you're Bill Gates, you'll pay for what you need yourself, but hospitals won't pump $3M worth of resources into keeping a 79-yr-old car accident victim alive when they could just die of a heart attack the next day. 

Sure, maybe a specific amount of medicine will extend one person's life a few weeks, but the key here is that person's condition was still deteriorating even with that medicine. Maybe that same amount of medicine could go ten times further with 5 other children, or even give 2 kids a shot at a full recovery. And it sucks to be the person who has to make that determination, and then live with it. But Drs do it all the time. All the time. 

[gatomontes99]

6 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

To be honest Gato, Drs make decisions like that all the time. They can't just do everything in their power, every time: they have to pick their spots to help the highest number of people they can with the amount of resources they have.

Doctors in the US do it and parents pursue other avenues. When doctors in Canada do that, they do it woth the force of government behind them. Options are so limited as to not exist. 

[WestCanMan]

3 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Doctors in the US do it and parents pursue other avenues. When doctors in Canada do that, they do it woth the force of government behind them. Options are so limited as to not exist. 

We actually do have two-tiered health care here, we just pretend that we don't.

If you need an MRI you can wait 6 months to get it for free, or pay $500 to get it done at a clinic in a few weeks, or even pay a few grand for same-day service. 

Drugs aren't free either. Canadian parents have faced bankruptcy paying for their children's medicine. 

You hear slogans from politicians here about what kind of medicare we should have here, and from US politicians saying "Look what they have there. I will give that to you!!!", but nothing is ever "as advertised". 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

Doctors in the US do it and parents pursue other avenues. When doctors in Canada do that, they do it woth the force of government behind them. Options are so limited as to not exist. 

that's just not true big guy. Like I said there's plenty of room for argument about the problems with Canadian Healthcare delivery and there are many many we can talk about if you want to say something negative about how Canada does  medicine, But this just isn't one.

This is a medication, the parents absolutely have the right in Canada to walk into the drugstore and buy it themselves. In some cases they may even have medical insurance through their work or other avenues that will pay for it or a portion of it, but they absolutely have choices above and beyond having the government pay for it.

You are 100% wrong because you do not understand how our system works and I get that but you are just so off base with this one that it's time to pack up and go home. This was a complete swing and a mess