Ethical Issues In Canada

Introduction

As it stands in the Canadian Criminal Code, there is no duty imposed upon citizens to rescue a stranger whose life is in danger due to an outside predicament and therefore, it is up to the discretion of the person encountering the danger to decide if they would like to offer aid to another. However, Quebec’s Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms (R.S.Q., c. C-12), states that “every person whose life is in peril has a right to assistance. Every person must come to the aid of anyone whose life is in peril, either personally or calling for aid, by giving him the necessary and immediate physical assistance, unless it involves danger to himself or a third person, or he has another valid reason.” (1982). At face value, this obligation

As previously mentioned above, there is currently no legislation directing the remaining citizens of Canada to act against one’s own volition. However, the regulation still remains in effect for individuals who reside in Quebec and other places around the world such as “…Northern Australia, and five American states (Vermont, Rhode Island, Hawaii, Wisconsin, and Minnesota)..” (Linden, 2016). So which is the most ethical choice for Canadians?

This could sum up to be a very sensitive topic if brought into debate for Charter reform for many because on one hand, “..innocent bystanders are not ordinarily required to take on a great deal of cost – sacrificing limbs, their homes, their retirement savings – to assist strangers when they become of their extreme need” (Barry & Overland, 2014, p.571). On the other hand, a person is entitled to their own values, beliefs and risk assessment outlook and it would be best not to place those opinions in the hands of the government to make the choice for them.

It should not be for our government to make a collective decision, on our behalf, that one form of thinking is obsolete and should trump all other opinions regarding the matter. This is highly evident in looking at two examples of contrasting points of view from individuals within our society; such as a communitarianism and

If, as the province of Quebec embodies within their Charter, the country of Canada were to impose a similar, discriminative role regarding an individual in assisting a stranger, it would lead to a series of complications regarding all of those involved. These may include the media going so far as making an individual a public spectacle if it was found that they chose to not assist another, legal implications against the individual who instead would be seen as a perpetrator, and the family of the victim could seek out physical or legal means in retribution.

As many of us already realize, the media can be a frenzy of stories that are repeated on a day-to-day basis that are more often than not, blown out of proportion and “if the non-rescuers can be identified, they will be held up to public scorn” (Hyman, 2006, p.655). A prime example of this comes from the television show, What Would You Do?, in which performers act out situations in a public environment to test how regular citizens will react. Most often, the television show will capture people who have no regard for the situation at hand and will ignore it entirely. This series may not simulate a rescue-type situation, but it serves to show the lengths that media, and even the entertainment industry, will go to publicly shame people of behaviour that does not meet what society deems as ‘normal’. So imagine what the media might propose to create or how they would portray those who fail to meet the