Joseph Mackinnon
A governing body for psychologists in Canada ordered Dr. Jordan Peterson to undergo re-education training after complete strangers took issue with views he had expressed online.
He fought back, but a Canadian
court just upheld the regulator's order.
What's the background?
Peterson was previously in
good standing with the College of Psychologists of Ontario and had no public
record of any complaints. However, he made the mistake of angering strangers
online with opinions at odds with leftist speech codes and dogmas.
TheBlaze previously reported that individuals whom
Peterson indicated were neither clients nor familiar with his
clients complained to the CPO, which then launched an investigation into the
cultural commentator.
The CPO's inquiries, complaints, and reports committee concluded in November 2022 that the doctor's comments were "degrading, demeaning and unprofessional," adding that his conduct "poses moderate risks to the public" and runs the risk of "undermining public trust in the profession of psychology, and trust in the college's ability to regulate the profession in the public interest."
Peterson's offending speech
included:
·
criticism of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and
Trudeau's former chief of staff, Gerald Butts, who resigned amid the liberal
leader's disgraceful and damning SNC Lavalin scandal;
·
a suggestion that the doctor who cut off actress
Elliot Page's healthy breasts was a "criminal physician"; and
· a retweet of a comment made by the leader of Canada's official opposition party regarding the unnecessary severity of COVID lockdowns.
Peterson refused to undergo
the regulatory board's equivalent of a Maoist struggle session or admit fault
over his lawful speech.
Not long after being presented
with the order from the CPO committee, Peterson penned an article in the National Post, stating, "I’m not
complying. I’m not submitting to re-education. I am not admitting that my
viewpoints — many of which have, by the way, been entirely justified by the
facts that have emerged since the complaints were levied — were either wrong or
unprofessional."
"I have done nothing to
compromise those in my care; quite the contrary — I have served all my clients
and the millions of people I am communicating with to the best of my ability
and in good faith, and that’s that," he added.
Instead of bending the knee, he
took the CPO to court, stressing that its order ran afoul of the Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Free only to say the right
things
The Ontario Divisional Court
ruled against Peterson Wednesday, concluding the CPO committee's ruling
"is not disciplinary and does not prevent Dr. Peterson from expressing
himself on controversial topics; it has a minimal impact on his right to
freedom of expression."
The suggestion that the ruling
has a "minimal impact" on Peterson's right to speak his mind appears to
gloss over the fact that he now stands to lose his hard-earned license to
practice clinical psychology unless he caves to the ideological parameters set
by regulators.
Although he hasn't practiced
in recent years, Peterson stressed earlier this year, "I deserve [my
license]. I earned it. I haven't done anything to justify suspending it, and I
don't want to give the hyenas their bones."
Per the ruling obtained by Canadian state media, Peterson must also
pay his censors $25,000.
The panel of superior court
judges — Paul Schabas, Nancy Backhouse, and John Krawchenko — appeared to agree
both that Peterson's free speech was subordinate to the sensitivities of the
CPO committee and those strangers filing complaints from afar and that the CPO
committee had "reasonably" concluded that "Dr. Peterson's
behavior raised a moderate risk of harm to the public."
Schabas simultaneously held
that Peterson and other professionals "do not lose their Charter right to
freedom of expression" upon joining a regulated profession, yet noted they
"take on obligations and must abide by the rules of their regulatory body
that may limit their freedom of expression."
The judge further claimed that
it didn't matter whether "Dr. Peterson's comments were supported by facts
or were his honest opinion, as the concern arises from the nature of the
language used, not the validity of his opinions."
According to the court, facts
lawfully stated by Canadian professionals in a manner undesirable to the powers
that be may therefore be grounds for disenfranchisement.
The ruling also indicates that
Peterson's tweets don't count as "personal comments" but are
"public statements," meaning they fall under the CPO's purview; the
suggestion being that only private, undocumented conversations are beyond the
committee's regulation.
Peterson responded to the
ruling on Twitter, writing, "If you think that you have a right to free
speech in Canada you're delusional. I will make every aspect of this public [.]
... Bring it."
So the Ontario Court of Appral ruled that @CPOntario can pursue their prosecution
— Dr Jordan B Peterson (@jordanbpeterson) August 23, 2023
If you think that you have a right to free speech in Canada
You're delusional
I will make every aspect of this public
And we will see what happens when utter transparency is the rule
Bring it…
He noted earlier in the week,
"I stand by what I have said and done and wish them luck in their
continued prosecution. They're going to need it. I tweeted and otherwise
expressed my opposition to trans surgery butchery, Justin Trudeau and his
minions, and the lying climate apocalypse-mongers. All that's looking pretty
good from my end. And if I can't express such opinions in Canada, I will let
the world know."
Fallout
Jonah Arnold of the Association of Aggrieved Regulated
Professionals of Ontario, a non-profit advocacy group that represents
health care workers and other professionals who have experienced mistreatment
by their regulators, told TheBlaze last month that this outcome would
"affect the fundamental rights of about 400,000 professionals from all 29
regulated health professions in Ontario" and "could even affect other
professionals including teachers, accountants, and lawyers."
Arnold made clear in advance
that were this decision ultimately made, regulators in Ontario and across
Canada would be emboldened "to expand and overstep their regulatory
authority and intrude into their registrants' personal lives."
The chilling effect would be
such that those entering professions in the province "will have no choice
but to stay silent, contrary to their Charter rights," said Arnold.
Extra to damning professionals
to a muted existence, the precedent set by Schabas, Backhouse, and Krawchenko,
allowing for the policing of a health care professionals' opinions unrelated to
their practice, might also preclude people from entering the field.
This would be especially
troubling, suggested Arnold, in light of the health care worker shortage already affecting Ontario and the rest of the country.
Joseph Mackinnon, The Blaze Media, August 23, 2023
[Livros & Leituras] Além da Ordem: mais 12 regras para a vida Hierarquias (As 12 regras para a vida)
Jordan B. Peterson: “12 regras para a vida”. Sim, é muito bom!
Jordan B. Peterson: “12 regras para a vida”
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário
Não publicamos comentários de anônimos/desconhecidos.
Por favor, se optar por "Anônimo", escreva o seu nome no final do comentário.
Não use CAIXA ALTA, (Não grite!), isto é, não escreva tudo em maiúsculas, escreva normalmente. Obrigado pela sua participação!
Volte sempre!
Abraços./-