Ontario Ombudsman misrepresents Brown's position, refuses to act on complaint or by using good offices.; 1991.
The Ombudsman had been approached by Brown as a consumer rep because misconceptions and deceit on the part of Ministry of Health officials were resulting in the failure to properly assess any psychiatric patients to see if their central nervous system dysfunction was caused or exacerbated by environmental sensitivities. Meanwhile, with a prevalence of 15%, probably at least one of Canada's then ten daily suicides was someone with CNS reactions who was being ploughed under by officially identified, "clearly untenable" attitudes in health care. (At the same time, Health Canada was working to protect such persons.) Who communicated the "advice" to the Ombudsman's office that "I am advised that subsequent to mailing this letter you did in fact meet with certain Ministry staff and feel positive enough following this meeting to close out your file with us. Therefore, based on this information, I have done so." The above statement is bizarre when, in fact, Brown's concern with the Ontario Ministry of Health continued, as reflected in a second letter, also attached. The Ombudsman's office apparently took the word of people at the Ministry of Health, dismissed Brown's complaint, while portraying the Ministry as dealing responsibly with the issues without properly investigating the concern, even though they were cc'd the second attachment, below, which clearly indicates that Brown was not at all satisfied with the conduct of the Ontario Ministry of Health. While children and other vulnerable persons were being abused or killed, the Ombudsman dismissed a complaint on the basis of hearsay, while also refusing to use its good offices to address the issues.