p1, Dec 4 2009, Health Science Association of BC, concerning Van Sun editorial about emerge deaths and surgery wait times
Dave Jenkins
3107 Tanglewood Way
Nanaimo, BC, V9T 5A5
Dec 04, 2009
Reid Johnson
President
Health Sciences Association of BC
300-5118 Joyce St.,
Vancouver, BC, V5R 4H1
Re; The Editorial Page, Nov 28, 2009. “Surgery when you need it”, Norman Taggart, Coquitlam.
Dear Reid Johnson;
I did not read the article Taggart responded to but you need to read this or have some read it for you and make a presentation to you.
I have type 2 diabetes, since 1999. I do not agree with the anti-diabetic drivers policy and in 2002 asked the Office of the Superintendent for the research and documentation that was used to justify the policy. The demands of Section 1 of the Charter, Sec 8 of the Human Rights Code, and Sec 25, 29, 92 of the Motor Vehicle Act, (cited by the OSMV, which they some how conveniently forgot to mention the most important words in order to deceive the reader concerning the powers of the OSMV), force the government to fulfill these demands if it is to intervene into our lives.
The response was that in its “view” it is ok to do and if I really thought I was being discriminated against I was free to lodge a Human Rights discrimination complaint. I did and the HRT accepted my complaint as something worthwhile to listen to, 2004-2006. The H R complaint forced the gov't to respond to my inquiry where they asked to settle out of court. I agreed as I wanted change and they offered change. The first change changed who pays for the disabled Drivers Medical Examination; not only type 2 diabetic drivers, but type 1 as well, but all disabled drivers. Our taxes now pay for the disabled drivers DME, since July 2006. Imagine the corruption and harm that I exposed for the OSMV to change policy.
Also, a Draft of Change to the diabetic policy was promised; for my Review if I wanted to participate. The Draft is so full of prejudice, misinformation, misleading information, bias, ignorance, fear and loathing, and just outright contempt I decided to deconstruct the Draft. What is interesting is the Draft is not something based upon an existing document, the public is only lead to believe this. It is still hard to believe this is true, that the OSMV has mislead the public for so long knowing this and the horrific consequences of their actions. So, the policy is illegal and therefore the consequences not justified. Knowing the policy harms the public is not acceptable anyway it is presented. (If there are no documents for diabetes why should we believe the other 100 medical conditions that are supposedly managed by the OSMV have been legally proved as needed and with proved Good.)
The consequences change the medical system, GP wait times, ambulatory care, emerge care for the emerge cases, as well as for people that need just care, hospital admittance, and now with my spinal surgery last May I have come to realize the need for surgery. (I believe this is what your letter is about so read on and the lack of funding, discrimination, and corruption will be explained. You have walked into a nightmare come true. The consequences are worse than the Pig Farm Killing and it is gov't sanctioned and covered up, all based upon some civil servants “view”of diabetes, not law.)
Reader, the enclosed letters are a mail out offered in response to the OSMV presentation of 174 scientific research articles that were presented in my third HRT discrimination complaint. I did not know if I was to survive the operation or be left incapacitated therefore the public and the owners of the research needed to know what is really going on with diabetes and driving and our medical services. The articles were presented to justify the policy, within a early Dismiss application, where the public would not know of the act. The documents did not have Permission Forms for Copyright, Intellectual Property Rights, and Intent of Use; what Journal would give Permission knowing the horrific consequences. This means the documents were stolen. I confronted the OSMV about this in my Response to their presentation. When caught they then lied about their actions, done as damage control, and I caught them in that lie also.
So, the OSMV has now stolen research documents and when caught lied to protect itself. What is next?
This should inform you of the wall of corruption you are confronting. You know there is something wrong but you do not have diabetes or back problems or worked through the responses to my letters of inquiry and complaint.
Regards,
Dave Jenkins
3107 Tanglewood Way
Nanaimo, BC, V9T 5A5
Dec 04, 2009
Reid Johnson
President
Health Sciences Association of BC
300-5118 Joyce St.,
Vancouver, BC, V5R 4H1
Re; The Editorial Page, Nov 28, 2009. “Surgery when you need it”, Norman Taggart, Coquitlam.
Dear Reid Johnson;
I did not read the article Taggart responded to but you need to read this or have some read it for you and make a presentation to you.
I have type 2 diabetes, since 1999. I do not agree with the anti-diabetic drivers policy and in 2002 asked the Office of the Superintendent for the research and documentation that was used to justify the policy. The demands of Section 1 of the Charter, Sec 8 of the Human Rights Code, and Sec 25, 29, 92 of the Motor Vehicle Act, (cited by the OSMV, which they some how conveniently forgot to mention the most important words in order to deceive the reader concerning the powers of the OSMV), force the government to fulfill these demands if it is to intervene into our lives.
The response was that in its “view” it is ok to do and if I really thought I was being discriminated against I was free to lodge a Human Rights discrimination complaint. I did and the HRT accepted my complaint as something worthwhile to listen to, 2004-2006. The H R complaint forced the gov't to respond to my inquiry where they asked to settle out of court. I agreed as I wanted change and they offered change. The first change changed who pays for the disabled Drivers Medical Examination; not only type 2 diabetic drivers, but type 1 as well, but all disabled drivers. Our taxes now pay for the disabled drivers DME, since July 2006. Imagine the corruption and harm that I exposed for the OSMV to change policy.
Also, a Draft of Change to the diabetic policy was promised; for my Review if I wanted to participate. The Draft is so full of prejudice, misinformation, misleading information, bias, ignorance, fear and loathing, and just outright contempt I decided to deconstruct the Draft. What is interesting is the Draft is not something based upon an existing document, the public is only lead to believe this. It is still hard to believe this is true, that the OSMV has mislead the public for so long knowing this and the horrific consequences of their actions. So, the policy is illegal and therefore the consequences not justified. Knowing the policy harms the public is not acceptable anyway it is presented. (If there are no documents for diabetes why should we believe the other 100 medical conditions that are supposedly managed by the OSMV have been legally proved as needed and with proved Good.)
The consequences change the medical system, GP wait times, ambulatory care, emerge care for the emerge cases, as well as for people that need just care, hospital admittance, and now with my spinal surgery last May I have come to realize the need for surgery. (I believe this is what your letter is about so read on and the lack of funding, discrimination, and corruption will be explained. You have walked into a nightmare come true. The consequences are worse than the Pig Farm Killing and it is gov't sanctioned and covered up, all based upon some civil servants “view”of diabetes, not law.)
Reader, the enclosed letters are a mail out offered in response to the OSMV presentation of 174 scientific research articles that were presented in my third HRT discrimination complaint. I did not know if I was to survive the operation or be left incapacitated therefore the public and the owners of the research needed to know what is really going on with diabetes and driving and our medical services. The articles were presented to justify the policy, within a early Dismiss application, where the public would not know of the act. The documents did not have Permission Forms for Copyright, Intellectual Property Rights, and Intent of Use; what Journal would give Permission knowing the horrific consequences. This means the documents were stolen. I confronted the OSMV about this in my Response to their presentation. When caught they then lied about their actions, done as damage control, and I caught them in that lie also.
So, the OSMV has now stolen research documents and when caught lied to protect itself. What is next?
This should inform you of the wall of corruption you are confronting. You know there is something wrong but you do not have diabetes or back problems or worked through the responses to my letters of inquiry and complaint.
Regards,
Dave Jenkins
Labels: consequences of policy, review letters human rights letters
posted by type 2 at
2:43 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home