Obesity-as-disability in Canada: “Marise Myrand said her condo association discriminated against her by denying her a parking spot closer to her building entrance.” She’s now won a favorable ruling from the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal and a $10,000 settlement. [The Globe and Mail, h/t reader Vicky G.]
6 Comments
My grandmother was overweight and suffered backaches. Smart-ass me saw that her extended belly put a forward stain on her spine. She just had to control her weight better. Over the years I have come to an understanding of the difficulty of weight control. Almost everybody’s weight rebounds from diets. It comes back with interest.
I wonder if the lack of empathy for Ms. Myrand was based on a belief that her excessive weight was do to moral deficiency on her part. I am sorry for having that belief regarding my grandmother. She was a wonderful person, and I did not deserve her kindness.
I still wish Ms. Myrand had not sued.
“When you live in condo co-ownership, you live in a micro-society. You have obligations,” said Pierre-Yves Bourdeau, a lawyer with the Quebec Human Rights Commission, who represented Ms. Myrand. “You’re obliged to help people with physical disabilities.”
This is a frightening quote. In essence, it says that kindness, sympathy, empathy and the desire to help a friend or neighbor is under the domain of the government and not a personnel choice.
A farther parking space would benefit her. Seems like she could use a little more walking.
This is a very interesting quote from the article:
“He said that Ms. Nolet [who originally had the parking spot in dispute], is in her 60s and has a dislocated shoulder, so the tribunal was setting up a hierarchy of handicaps by favouring Ms. Myrand.”
Why does one person’s handicap trump another?
And could a smoker or an alcoholic also claim “handicap” status?
This case illustrates why these sorts of laws always end up being essentially arbitrary and whimsical in their enforcement. There is no way that the law can spell out what the hierarchy of entitlements are, so the case ends up getting decided on arbitrary factors and on the personal biases of those deciding the case. It becomes impossible for anyone to guide their actions by the law because no one knows what the law requires of them until the judgment is already passed. It seems grossly unjust that there are financial penalties attached to these decisions when no one could have foreseen that the law would require this of them.
This story fails in several ways.
I wonder what the ruling would have been if the condo owners had not hurt her feelings. I have less sympathy since her condition is probably caused by lifestyle.
Who really owns handicapped spots? If a 450-pounder shows up will she be pushed a spot away?
What about the other condo owners who did not hurt her feelings? They must be happy to be chipping in $60 each. This story does not make me want a morbidly obese person as a neighbor..