Toward the full and proper implementation of Jordan's Principle: An elusive goal to date
Abstract First Nations children experience service delays, disruptions and denials due to jurisdictional payment disputes within and between federal and provincial/territorial governments. The House of Commons sought to ensure First Nations children could access government services on the same terms...
| Published in: | Paediatrics & Child Health |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Oxford University Press (OUP)
2016
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pch/21.5.245 https://academic.oup.com/pch/article-pdf/21/5/245/49453026/pch_21_5_245.pdf |
| Summary: | Abstract First Nations children experience service delays, disruptions and denials due to jurisdictional payment disputes within and between federal and provincial/territorial governments. The House of Commons sought to ensure First Nations children could access government services on the same terms as other children when it unanimously passed a private members motion in support of Jordan's Principle in 2007. Jordan's Principle states that when a jurisdictional dispute arises regarding public services for a First Nations child that are otherwise available to other children, the government of first contact pays for the service and addresses payment disputes later. Unfortunately, the federal government adopted a definition of Jordan's Principle that was so narrow (complex medical needs with multiple service providers) that no child ever qualified. This narrow definition has been found to be unlawful by the Federal Court of Canada and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. The present commentary describes Jordan's Principle, the legal cases that have considered it and the implications of those decisions for health care providers. |
|---|