9:15 - 11:50 B Block Human Geography
12:30 - 3:05 C Block Legal Studies
B Block Human Geography - Today we'll look at the Key Question: Where Is the World’s Population Distributed? Human beings are not distributed uniformly across Earth’s surface. We can understand how population is distributed by examining two basic properties - concentration and density. Today we'll examine where populations are concentrated looking at the concept of ecumene. Lastly we'll look at density in terms of arithmetic, physiological and agricultural forms. You've got three questions to answer for me today:
The national agricultural ecumene includes all dissemination areas with 'significant' agricultural activity. BTW...B.C.'s population passes 5 million, thanks to high international migration numbers
This map from National Geographic Everglades Threatened by City to the East, Salt Water From the West can help with yesterday's question on sustainability
- Why isn’t North America one of the four major population clusters?
- On the map in the week 2 package...use the maps on page 47 to prepare a sketch map that shows non-ecumene and very sparsely inhabited lands (remember map basics!)
- In terms of food supply, which combination of measures of density is most important when considering whether a country’s population is too large? Why?
This map from National Geographic Everglades Threatened by City to the East, Salt Water From the West can help with yesterday's question on sustainability
C Block Legal Studies - Today to start the class, we'll go through sections 7 - 14 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (legal rights section). We'll look at two cases: Rodriguez v British Columbia (Attorney General), 1993 - which deals with Section 7 of the Charter (life, liberty and security of the person) and R. v. Tessling, 2004 - which deals with Section 8 of the Charter (search and seizure). For more information on the fight in Canada for the right to die on one's own terms look at the CBC In Depth site on the Sue Rodriguez case. In 2011, Gloria Taylor from Kelowna filed a case in B.C. Supreme Court to grant her the right to a doctor-assisted suicide. More info on this case can be found here.
In February 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in Carter v. Canada that parts of the Criminal Code would need to change to satisfy the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The parts that prohibited medical assistance in dying would no longer be valid. So in June 2016, the Parliament of Canada passed federal legislation that allows eligible Canadian adults to request medical assistance in dying. HOWEVER a Quebec court ruling struck down the existing legislation on medically assisted death on the grounds that it was too restrictive. The court gave the government until Dec. 18 (2020) to implement a new regime. Bill C-7, (the proposed new MAID law which is currently "in committee" in the Senate, as of Dec. 17, 2020) expands the categories of those eligible for the procedure, opening it up to people whose deaths aren't reasonably foreseeable, but imposes strict guidelines for people seeking assisted death as part of that category, including a 90-day waiting period.
In February 2015, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in Carter v. Canada that parts of the Criminal Code would need to change to satisfy the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The parts that prohibited medical assistance in dying would no longer be valid. So in June 2016, the Parliament of Canada passed federal legislation that allows eligible Canadian adults to request medical assistance in dying. HOWEVER a Quebec court ruling struck down the existing legislation on medically assisted death on the grounds that it was too restrictive. The court gave the government until Dec. 18 (2020) to implement a new regime. Bill C-7, (the proposed new MAID law which is currently "in committee" in the Senate, as of Dec. 17, 2020) expands the categories of those eligible for the procedure, opening it up to people whose deaths aren't reasonably foreseeable, but imposes strict guidelines for people seeking assisted death as part of that category, including a 90-day waiting period.
From the government of Canada's site on the proposed MAID law...
Section 7 protects the rights to life, liberty and security of the person and prohibits government interference with these interests unless done in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. These include the principles against arbitrariness, overbreadth and gross disproportionality. An arbitrary law is one that impacts section 7 rights in a way that is not rationally connected to the law’s purpose. An overbroad law is one that impacts section 7 rights in a way that, while generally rational, goes too far by capturing some conduct that bears no relation to the law’s purpose. A grossly disproportionate law is one whose effects on section 7 rights are so severe as to be “completely out of sync” with the law’s purpose.Section 15(1) of the Charter protects equality rights. It provides that every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination, including on the basis of mental or physical disability.
In Carter v. Canada (2015), the Supreme Court of Canada held that a competent adult’s response to a grievous and irremediable medical condition is a matter critical to their dignity and autonomy. A criminal prohibition on MAID for a person in this situation – whom the law would permit to request palliative sedation, refuse artificial nutrition and hydration or request the removal of life-sustaining medical equipment – impacts liberty and security of the person. This is because the criminal prohibition interferes with the ability to make decisions concerning bodily integrity and leads to serious suffering. Broadening the law to permit MAID for persons whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable would promote the liberty and security of the person interests of individuals who seek MAID as a response to a grievous and irremediable illness.
To end the class, we're going to watch an episode of Law and Order from season 9 called True North. From tv.com...The double murder of a wealthy man and his daughter leads the detectives to the wife and stepmother of the deceased. However, Canada's objection to the death penalty hampers McCoy and Carmichael in seeking crucial evidence for obtaining a conviction. Hmmm...death penalty and Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms 7 - 14 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms I wonder if those two are incompatible? From the legal analysis of our Charter
Where individuals are affected by a Canadian or foreign government action that took place outside Canada, the extent to which they may rely upon section 7 will depend on the circumstances, and may require the claimant to establish Canadian government “participation in activities of a foreign state or its agents that are contrary to Canada’s international obligations or fundamental human rights norms”
In extradition and deportation cases, where the government’s participation is a necessary precondition for the deprivation of the rights to life, liberty or security of the person by another state, and the deprivation is an entirely foreseeable consequence of the participation, deportations or extraditions must accord with the principles of fundamental justice (United States v. Burns, 2001)
No comments:
Post a Comment