Age discrimination
In the summer of 1992 I was targeted for peer review on the basis of my age. It was my opinion that the real reason that I was targeted was because I had been critical of the College for their mismanagement of sexual abuse complaints against Dr James Tyhurst. They had already put a letter of admonishment on my file for expressing my views on this matter. I was, and am, sure they were simply using my age as an excuse to harass me with peer review.
In the summer of 1992 I was targeted for peer review on the basis of my age. It was my opinion that the real reason that I was targeted was because I had been critical of the College for their mismanagement of sexual abuse complaints against Dr James Tyhurst. They had already put a letter of admonishment on my file for expressing my views on this matter. I was, and am, sure they were simply using my age as an excuse to harass me with peer review.
Further it was and is my opinion that it is age discrimination to target a doctor for peer review because he is over 65. For these reasons I refused peer review.
Though I had been BC’s most productive child psychiatrist for many years (three child rearing books and 50 professional papers) the College suspended me from practice and I have been suspended ever since.
I filed a complaint of age discrimination with the BC Human Rights Council who refused to accept my complaint because “the Act does not prohibit discrimination on the basis of age against people who are over 65.”
Since then I have been repeatedly advised that legislation to change this provision is in the works. Recently, 30 July 2001, I attempted to reopen the matter and was again refused a hearing. The letter from Laurie Taylor, complaints analyst, offers this explanation: “…the BC Human Rights Code (enacted in January 1997) has not been amended to include age as a ground covered under section 8 of the Code, nor in changing the definition of age as it related to section 13, employment discrimination. Age is defined as ‘meaning an age of 19 years or more and less than 65.’”
The College, it seems, is entitled, by law, to discriminate against older doctors on the basis of their age. While there is general agreement that this is inequitable and promises to change the law have been floating around these last 9 years, nothing has happened.
It seems to me the BC Medical Association has an obligation to its senior members to do everything it can to protect them from this abuse; I put it to them it is past time they did something.
—Thomas P. Millar, MD
Vancouver