Settlement approved in class-action lawsuit by former Alberta foster children

Settlement approved in class-action lawsuit by former Alberta foster children

An application for a settlement was granted Friday in a class-action lawsuit by former foster children who were victims of child abuse and other crimes.

Note: My dear dear friend Velvet Martin doesn't think this is a good idea.  Below is her response...

Opposition to Class Action Proposal:

Primarily, terms do not reflect the original intent of the Class Action that victims engaged in at the outset. Common, relevant issues are lost and remain unsolved. Whether the Department had a duty to adhere to its own Policy and seek to secure compensation from its employees (foster parents) on behalf of children remains unanswered. Under proposed conditions, the Department seeks to absolve itself from responding to questions of liability. Focus is now narrowly keyed towards failure of authorities to help children apply for Victims of Crime Compensation.

I am deeply concerned that personal rights will become void under proposed settlement agreement. Clarification about freedom of speech and ability to sue for damages other than outlined, continues to be vague. If the settlement intends to muzzle victims from publicly disclosing personal stories, it is contrary to ethics. Victims must not be further repressed by having their stories taken away too. Speech is largely what identifies us as individuals and provides generational healing; dismissing the right is beneficial to the whole of Society. We need only look to dark history of Residential Schools and sterilization practices to realize that history must be told to prevent recurrence.

The Notice which was issued and hearing happened rapidly and most individuals affected were only alerted word-of-mouth. There are many victims who may yet be unaware that the settlement was at a hearing stage. I'm told a notification was issued in a newspaper, I personally was unable to locate an ad. The Notice fails to consider victims who lack reading skills or access to a computer. More time was required to alert potential members and to have conditions adequately explained.

How does the current proposal benefit victims? It seems that the settlement requires plaintiffs to agree to many conditions, but offers little compensation in return to most. In fact, the figure of compensation is unknown. How can anybody possibly agree or disagree to terms that are completely vague? Victims, have waited years for resolution and suddenly are expected to agree to conditions that most do not understand because key pieces of information are missing.

 Apparently members are entitled to seek crimes compensation without needing to be part of a class action so how does the suit benefit victims? Why is counsel charging a 10% fee for a service that is already available to the public?

CANLII 2013 ABCA 211 indicates 4000 applicants may potentially come forward. A span of 42 years to contend with, victims from 1996-2008. The number of persons wronged may be astronomical, yet personal recovery is narrowly limited.