CHRC Stuart Beaty on reverse onus issue

For the life of me, I do not understand why CHRC officials did not understand that it is wrong to subject persons to a reverse onus about their experience of repeatable, controllable circumstances. However, they did understand that people were being hurt, and being blamed for their own predicament, and so they were helpful. Still, it would have been good if more human rights officials had understood the reverse onus concern, instead of forwarding a position that said, in effect, that physicians should also subject people to the same reverse onus, contrary to the ethics of clinical practise. In fact, we were coming to the CHRC because many physicians were subjecting people to a reverse onus. To have to explain to human rights officials that that was wrong was too often repeated. It was a point that was explained to me by Catherine Frazee when she was Chief Commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission, and which was easily understood by Panos Patrides when he was EA to the OHRC Chief Commissioner, but it was not understood by many with human rights responsibilities.