Tell us about an apology that you wish you would have received.

[CBC News]

It will soon be easier to say you're sorry in Ontario.
The government plans to adopt an act that will allow everyone to apologize without having to worry about being sued.
The bill would allow doctors, nurses and police to apologize for their errors without worrying about whether their statements will be used against them in civil court.
Full story
Tell us about an apology that you wish you would have received.


More...

 

[Praxius]

That's Bullsh*t.... Oh... sorry we amputated your penis during your heart operation.... *phew* now I can't be sued.

Sorry, but apologies only go so far, and I've heard plenty of empty ones in the past..... and I bet I'll hear even more if this goes through.

But it sounds like it's taken straight out of the Youth Justice Act's play book...... burn a house down, murder your family, steal millions from your workers........

...... Oh..... Sorry, I didn't mean it..... Sorry, I didn't know any better.......

There there.... all is forgiven, no need to cry, we can forget this whole thing ever happened.

BS..... if this goes through, expect more people to take the law into their own hands to seek the justice they feel they should have for their suffering.... regardless if it puts them in jail.....

Oh wait.... all they have to say is sorry and all will be forgotten, how silly of me.

No, wait a minute.... only the Police, Doctors and Nurses to get away with bloody murder..... us typical civilians just suck it up.

Great plan......

If any of those groups or otherwise screwed me or my family over in some fashion that warrented a law suit.... Sorry isn't going to cut it..... I'd demand an apology right before I sue their sorry asses back to the stone age.

Just one more step towards a society that doesn't have to face the consequences of their actions and avoiding any and all responsibility.

Makes me sick.

 

[Praxius]

.....Sources say Attorney General Chris Bentley and Health Minister David Caplan will on Tuesday announce the adoption of the Apology Act, initially introduced by Liberal backbencher David Orazietti.

You can thank the Liberals on this one.

I'd rather sue their asses and punish them then to just simply accept an apology, or have that apology stricken from the records so they can't be used in court..... what a farce.

 

[TenPenny]

Kinda like going to confession, I guess.

The ONLY reason for this is to make the 'apologizer' feel better; it does nothing to help the victim. What a stupid concept.

 

[lone wolf]

I'd rather keep them out of my thoughts lest they make me bitter enough to go back into battle....

 

[tracy]

Praxius, take a deep breath. This doesn't take away your right to sue for medical errors. All it means is if your doctor or nurse says "Sorry", you can't use that apology as evidence of malpractice when you sue them.

I don't see the problem with this. Some people need to hear an apology to move on. My dad was almost killed due to a doctor's error and my mom accepted the doctor's apology. It was important for her and I think it's a shame that someone would lack that because of litigation fears.

 

[tracy]

Kinda like going to confession, I guess.

The ONLY reason for this is to make the 'apologizer' feel better; it does nothing to help the victim. What a stupid concept.

That's simply untrue. We aren't all the same. Some of us benefit from a sincere apology. It was our family doctor who prescribed my dad a med he shouldn't have based on my dad's allergy list. It was a clear mistake on his part (and on the pharmacist who filled the prescription btw). But, you know in a 40+ year career in medicine it's pretty unrealistic to expect him to never make a mistake. He's human. My mom didn't feel the need to sue him back to the stone age based on one honest error. She was content in knowing he regretted his mistake and would certainly never make it again. It may have been different had my dad not survived, but he did so there ya go.

I've seen it happen at work too. People who honestly believe health care workers are doing their best will often be content with an apology if the health care worker made an error. On the other end, people who don't like or trust the health care workers will sue even if there is no clear error. Our ability to forgive someone depends on many variables.

 

[TenPenny]

That's simply untrue. We aren't all the same. Some of us benefit from a sincere apology. It was our family doctor who prescribed my dad a med he shouldn't have based on my dad's allergy list. It was a clear mistake on his part (and on the pharmacist who filled the prescription btw). But, you know in a 40+ year career in medicine it's pretty unrealistic to expect him to never make a mistake. He's human. My mom didn't feel the need to sue him back to the stone age based on one honest error. She was content in knowing he regretted his mistake and would certainly never make it again. It may have been different had my dad not survived, but he did so there ya go.

I've seen it happen at work too. People who honestly believe health care workers are doing their best will often be content with an apology if the health care worker made an error. On the other end, people who don't like or trust the health care workers will sue even if there is no clear error. Our ability to forgive someone depends on many variables.

So you're saying that people who would normally make a 'sincere' apology would be more likely to do so under this law? In my opinion, people willing to make a sincere apology will do so, with or without a law to give them immunity.

 

[tracy]

So you're saying that people who would normally make a 'sincere' apology would be more likely to do so under this law?

Yes I do. I work with these people. There are really good people who are too afraid to say sorry. They don't want to lose their homes because they apologized to someone looking to cash in on any error- whether it's real or not. I do live in a much more litigious society, but it's becoming truer in Canada as well.

People don't seem to realize that you can say sorry without it being an admission of medical negligence. I've often said it to families, but it generally means "I'm sorry your baby couldn't be saved" rather than "I'm sorry we screwed up and killed the baby". Some people seem unwilling to accept that bad outcomes aren't always the result of negligence and this bill would protect health care workers from them (and there are A LOT of them out there unfortunately). It won't protect anyone who is actually negligent from being sued so I don't see the harm for patients.

 

[Praxius]

Praxius, take a deep breath. This doesn't take away your right to sue for medical errors. All it means is if your doctor or nurse says "Sorry", you can't use that apology as evidence of malpractice when you sue them.

I don't see the problem with this. Some people need to hear an apology to move on. My dad was almost killed due to a doctor's error and my mom accepted the doctor's apology. It was important for her and I think it's a shame that someone would lack that because of litigation fears.

If someone is simply willing to accept an apology then fine, fill your boots, but I don't see any logic in someone saying they're sorry, only to avoid having that thrown against them if/when they get sued..... it's a contradiction.

The only time someone should be saying sorry or giving an apology is when they are accepting responsibility for a situation they were directly involved in and are actually feeling guilty for their involvement.

To turn around and then say that that apology AKA: acknowledgement of responsibility, doesn't actually count and didn't really mean anything, then that is rediculous.

It is simply summed up to bullsh*tting the victim.... that's it. When someone says they're sorry, accepts their guilt/responsibility for their actions in a certain situation and understands that they very well could face legal action for saying they're sorry..... but still says they're sorry anyways..... that's character.... that's being honest and that's showing a person who isn't afraid of accepting responsibility for their actions.

And why should doctors, nurses and police officers get off scott free in this sort of situation?

Say I get hauled in for a murder and they keep pressuring me and making me feel guilty..... I then admit my wrongs and say I'm sorry...... guess what? That still gets used in the court against me........ so why the hell should they get a green light from their actions..... to say and admit their guilt, but the legal system becomes a totally seperate action where they can fight that they are not guilty?

The simple answer is they shouldn't.

My main frustration on this isn't just on the above I have mentioned, but what this whole thing can lead up to.... this opens the door for those in these positions of authority to be void of a lot of responsibility for their positions and actions.

Your son get's tasered to death?

Sorry we screwed up.... but you can't use this against us now that we admitted our guilt.

Does anybody else see just how screwed up this is?

You can not seperate the two..... you can't publically admit your guilt and say your sorry to your victims, only to deny your involvement/guilt in the court of law and fight to the bitter end.... all the while your previous admintion to guilt can not be used against you.

This is special treatment is what it is..... it's unfair, unjust and it opens one big slippery slope for the country to slide down where those in these positions can become immune to most legal action.

Tracy, your situation where your mom accepted their apology is certainly different. She accepted his apology, and he apologized prior to this sort of bill was thought up. He risked his own future in apologizing to your mother and that shows respect and character on his behalf...... he didn't need this bill to cover his butt. He accepted his responsibilities.

All this does is allow people to give fake ass apologies to people to get them off their backs and at the same time avoid it being used against them if and when they decide to fight a court case against them.

This is also why most tell you when you're in a car accident to not accept guilt and say your sorry if you feel it was your fault, because that can be used against you in the courts.

Why the hell should these people get away with this sort of thing?

 

[Praxius]

That's simply untrue. We aren't all the same. Some of us benefit from a sincere apology. It was our family doctor who prescribed my dad a med he shouldn't have based on my dad's allergy list. It was a clear mistake on his part (and on the pharmacist who filled the prescription btw). But, you know in a 40+ year career in medicine it's pretty unrealistic to expect him to never make a mistake. He's human. My mom didn't feel the need to sue him back to the stone age based on one honest error. She was content in knowing he regretted his mistake and would certainly never make it again. It may have been different had my dad not survived, but he did so there ya go.

I've seen it happen at work too. People who honestly believe health care workers are doing their best will often be content with an apology if the health care worker made an error. On the other end, people who don't like or trust the health care workers will sue even if there is no clear error. Our ability to forgive someone depends on many variables.

Indeed it does depend on many variables..... but there shouldn't be a bill to cover their arses.... if someone wants to sue them, then they should be allowed to sue them. If someone doesn't realize a doctor, nurse or police officer was at fault until they say they're sorry to them and that triggers them to feel they were wronged in a very big manner, they should be able to not accept that apology and use it against them to seek proper justice.

Peope put their trust in many of these organizations and usually do not have the abilities or resources to know when they are being screwed over until it's too late...... now they will have nothing to help their problems.

What if someone loses out on months of work and pay due to an injury or botched operation? They may feel it was all part of the procedure or that it was their own fault until someone apologizes to them...... if they are truly angry, want to seek proper justice for what they did, and they want to make sure this doesn't happen to other people in the future, they should have every right to use that apology against them in the court of law as an expression of guilt.

If us typical civilians can have our own guilts and apologies used against us, they should too and their positions shouldn't be an excuse from this.

 

[tracy]

Prax, that's just bs. People say sorry even when something isn't their fault. I've done it, you've probably done it too. Sorry can mean "I'm sorry this happened to you", "I'm sorry you're suffering", "I'm sorry bad things are sometimes unavoidable", etc. It's the most common response to grieving people but if you say "I'm sorry" to grandma when grandpa dies, it doesn't mean you killed him. None of those sorries are an admission that you caused the bad thing to happen, but you know some lawyer will try to twist it that way and that's what this bill stops.

Plus, no one is getting off scott free for anything!!! If there is negligence, you don't need a doctor's sorry to sue or get money. All you need is a lawyer and an expert who agrees there was an error. So how exactly does this harm potential victims of malpractice? All it does is prevent them from twisting sorries like the kind I mentionned to try to prove malpractice that doesn't exist.

I think that car thing is bs too. If you hit someone and cause them pain, you won't say sorry because some insurance company tells you not to thanks to their litigation fears? Is that really what we've come to? I had a fender bender on the freeway here and said I was sorry. Fortunately I didn't hit someone who was dishonest enough to fake a neck injury and try to sue me for everything I own. It's a shame that should even have to be a consideration.

 

[tracy]

Indeed it does depend on many variables..... but there shouldn't be a bill to cover their arses.... if someone wants to sue them, then they should be allowed to sue them. If someone doesn't realize a doctor, nurse or police officer was at fault until they say they're sorry to them and that triggers them to feel they were wronged in a very big manner, they should be able to not accept that apology and use it against them to seek proper justice.

Peope put their trust in many of these organizations and usually do not have the abilities or resources to know when they are being screwed over until it's too late...... now they will have nothing to help their problems.

What if someone loses out on months of work and pay due to an injury or botched operation? They may feel it was all part of the procedure or that it was their own fault until someone apologizes to them...... if they are truly angry, want to seek proper justice for what they did, and they want to make sure this doesn't happen to other people in the future, they should have every right to use that apology against them in the court of law as an expression of guilt.

If us typical civilians can have our own guilts and apologies used against us, they should too and their positions shouldn't be an excuse from this.

This is the problem with your premise: "I'm sorry" doesn't prove malpractice, just as not saying "I'm sorry" isn't evidence of good care.

Malpractice is negligence that causes harm to a patient. Proving negligence is easy to do by finding an expert and asking their opinion. If harm resulted, you have grounds for a lawsuit. This bill doesn't stop anyone from suing for malpractice at any time. Maybe that should be repeated since you seem to be under the impression that it does. THIS BILL DOESN"T TAKE AWAY ANYONE'S RIGHT TO SUE FOR MALPRACTICE AT ANY TIME. It just keeps the focus on what mattered: Did the person's negligence cause harm to the patient? Everything else is irrelevant.

 

[Praxius]

Yes I do. I work with these people. There are really good people who are too afraid to say sorry. They don't want to lose their homes because they apologized to someone looking to cash in on any error- whether it's real or not. I do live in a much more litigious society, but it's becoming truer in Canada as well.

People don't seem to realize that you can say sorry without it being an admission of medical negligence. I've often said it to families, but it generally means "I'm sorry your baby couldn't be saved" rather than "I'm sorry we screwed up and killed the baby". Some people seem unwilling to accept that bad outcomes aren't always the result of negligence and this bill would protect health care workers from them (and there are A LOT of them out there unfortunately). It won't protect anyone who is actually negligent from being sued so I don't see the harm for patients.

And what about police officers?

Quite simply, I see this being abused all to hell in the favor of those it protects.... and it doesn't help the victims.

Granted there are two different types of sorry, but the majority of people who say Sorry in regards to a lost child in an operation with ligit complications any operation might face etc.... is a given response..... as I see the report, it's not talking about those types of situations.... it could be, but I don't see it that way.

I see this as when someone really screws up in a way that shouldn't have occured, they can avoid admitting their guilt in a court of law, even though they admitted it earlier to the victim's face.

I see no justification for this being created to cover their asses.

Some people are out to get money anyways they can..... some will accept an apology and move on.... and then there are those who have been screwed over and really hurt in a manner that they truly don't want to happen to anybody else and an apology simply won't cut it.

And since doctors, hospitals and the police have a lot more to cover their asses against your typical citizen and usually have far more better lawyers and defence backing them compared to the small guy with their one lawyer..... anything they could use can be quite valuable in their cause to seek proper justice..... all this does is remove one more thing at the public's disposal and gives even less acountability to those responsible for a situation based on their positions in society.

It's not right, it's not fair, it's not equal and it divides the law and the people of this nation into two more groups. Those where all the laws apply to and those where only a select few laws apply.

 

[tracy]

I don't work as a police officer so if I were to say what the legal requirements are for them to get sued or what this bill means for them I'd be talking out of my a$$.

When it comes to hospital workers, I've got about 10 years of experience in Canada and the US. I can tell you without hesitation that negligence is provable without an apology from the person who committed negligence. All this bill does is protect people who say sorry from having a lawyer try to twist it into an admission of guilt when it isn't one. I've seen people try.

You talk about our special lawyers and extra defences the little guy doesn't have. That's the balance to the extra risk and responsibilities we have. I'd argue nurses don't have too many of those defences anyways. If I get sued, I either have to pony up my own lawyer or use the hospital's lawyer (who definitely doesn't care as much about my best interests as he does the hospital's!). If I am negligent and cause harm to someone, I can lose everything I own and my license to ever practice nursing regarless of whether I apologize or not.

The reality I live with is that I'm human and make errors. Anyone who has worked in healthcare for more than a few years and says they've never made a mistake is a liar. I just have to hope and pray I never hurt someone because of it because my practice is safe. You can't expect people to put themselves on the line every day to help others and then allow their words to be twisted in court. That's not fair. If they committed malpractice, then the sorry isn't needed to prove it. If they didn't commit malpractice, then a sorry shouldn't be twisted to prove they did.

 

[tracy]

Tracy, your situation where your mom accepted their apology is certainly different. She accepted his apology, and he apologized prior to this sort of bill was thought up. He risked his own future in apologizing to your mother and that shows respect and character on his behalf...... he didn't need this bill to cover his butt. He accepted his responsibilities.

Well, that's not exactly how it happened. He didn't actually apologize until my mom confronted him. It was my neighbour, a nurse, who told her that with my dad's allergy he shouldn't have been prescribed that med. I don't know that he would have apologized otherwise or if he even knew about his error until my mom informed him of what my neighbour told her. It's entirely possible he knew and didn't bring it up out of fear though. My parents were both aware that was a distint possibility, but even that human failing was forgiveable for them. They believed he was truly sorry and wouldn't do it again so that was enough. At the time I thought they were being a bit stupid (we could've been SOOOOOOO rich between suing the doc and Shopper's Drug Mart). Now, I'm grateful for their example.

 

[Praxius]

I don't work as a police officer so if I were to say what the legal requirements are for them to get sued or what this bill means for them I'd be talking out of my a$$.

When it comes to hospital workers, I've got about 10 years of experience in Canada and the US. I can tell you without hesitation that negligence is provable without an apology from the person who committed negligence. All this bill does is protect people who say sorry from having a lawyer try to twist it into an admission of guilt when it isn't one. I've seen people try.

You talk about our special lawyers and extra defences the little guy doesn't have. That's the balance to the extra risk and responsibilities we have. I'd argue nurses don't have too many of those defences anyways. If I get sued, I either have to pony up my own lawyer or use the hospital's lawyer (who definitely doesn't care as much about my best interests as he does the hospital's!). If I am negligent and cause harm to someone, I can lose everything I own and my license to ever practice nursing regarless of whether I apologize or not.

The reality I live with is that I'm human and make errors. Anyone who has worked in healthcare for more than a few years and says they've never made a mistake is a liar. I just have to hope and pray I never hurt someone because of it because my practice is safe. You can't expect people to put themselves on the line every day to help others and then allow their words to be twisted in court. That's not fair. If they committed malpractice, then the sorry isn't needed to prove it. If they didn't commit malpractice, then a sorry shouldn't be twisted to prove they did.

I'm fully aware of the given risks in the medical profession.... I've got plenty of people in my family who work in the industry including my mother and soon my sister.

My concerns are of general principle in regards to what one regular person in society can be held accountable by what they say as opposed to someone in these professions.

Police can hold you in a little room and put the pressure on you until you break, can't take it anymore and say anything they want you to like apologizing for something you may or may not have done... and they'll hold you to that and bring it up every chance they can in the courts..... and in someway, they use that as a sign of guilt, even if all the other evidence shows otherwise.

Now as you said, based on given evidence they will determine the case and the person's guilt accordingly if there is proof there is guilt to lead up to a court case...... you've seen many times in the past where someone's lawyer will try to twist an apology around to show a sign of guilt..... which is exactly what I was saying as well (only the other way around) now you think it is a good idea to have this in place so that doctors and nurses can avoid this from happening to them in the future......... but what about the rest of society?

There are many other jobs out there that can pose great risk to both the worker and those around them such as construction, a power plant, waste disposal, etc. all of whom can easily lose their jobs in the very same manner in which you speak..... or even in my other examples of car accidents or a crime...... many people in those cases will feel sorry for a situation and apologize.... perhaps under mental distress they will at the time feel they are partially or completely responsible for a situation and say sorry...... and in many cases, they are held to what they said and it can and will be used in the court against them.

All I am saying is if one group is exempt from this, all should be.

And during a time where our health care system is shot to hell, people are over worked, and many mistakes and accidents seem to be happening..... and during a time where police officers are tasering people to death, should be no excuse to throw this into the cycle to cover their asses.

It doesn't solve the main issues, it just covers their asses and extends the concept that there isn't anything really wrong.

You are correct that if people are gonna sue, they're gonna sue..... but there is a two way system in place if this passes where someone's apology in one industry or simply in everyday life can be used against them, while another group is exempt from this stigma.

Either it covers everybody, dentists, construction workers, sign companies, waste disposal, power companies, food banks, hospitals, police and so on...... or it covers nobody.

That's just how I see it anyways.

 

[Praxius]

Well, that's not exactly how it happened. He didn't actually apologize until my mom confronted him. It was my neighbour, a nurse, who told her that with my dad's allergy he shouldn't have been prescribed that med. I don't know that he would have apologized otherwise or if he even knew about his error until my mom informed him of what my neighbour told her. It's entirely possible he knew and didn't bring it up out of fear though. My parents were both aware that was a distint possibility, but even that human failing was forgiveable for them. They believed he was truly sorry and wouldn't do it again so that was enough. At the time I thought they were being a bit stupid (we could've been SOOOOOOO rich between suing the doc and Shopper's Drug Mart). Now, I'm grateful for their example.

I understand your explination, and I am one who will just leave something at an apology and move on as well.... even when I got jumped by those 5 punks a couple of years ago, a simple apology would have ended the whole thing, rather then dragging their asses into the courts...... but they didn't.... and due to technicalities in the justice system, they of course got off. If they ever cross my path again, the won't get off so easily that's for sure..... and that's not a threat, that's a promise.

But my point is, while your parents, yourself and I are the type of people who can just live with an apology and move on..... not everybody is like that and many get hurt in different ways, and many seek justice in different ways.

One person's point of view or perspective shouldn't be absolute for all to follow..... even if I agree or disagree with it.

 

[tracy]

All I am saying is if one group is exempt from this, all should be.
.

That's what I'd suggest. Rather than complaining docs and nurses and cops get special treatment, I'd advocate everyone else get the same treatment.

BTW, it may be interesting for you to know some occupations here get HUGE leeway when they make mistakes. I live in one of the biggest port cities in the US and longshoremen can basically do anything negligent and get off scott free if they injure someone. It's a no fault area apparently. The company they're employed for avoids punishment too. A friend's husband was seriously injured a couple of years ago while working at the port and no one will ever pay for the negligence that caused his accident.

 

[tracy]

One person's point of view or perspective shouldn't be absolute for all to follow..... even if I agree or disagree with it.

And that's what this bill allows. It says that just because you believe an apology was an admission of guilt doesn't mean it is. You should have to prove negligence based on what happened, not what someone said later which can be interpreted in more than one way.