You are here

"Notes" #21


You presently receive "Notes" and I hope you are enjoying the offerings. I know a number of you take the opportunity to give feedback and to express your own opinions on the various topics. That is much appreciated. Perhaps you would care to share "Notes" with a select few on your email list? If so, I have prepared a short note that you could send them to introduce "Notes" to them. (Use all or parts of the note.)

Hello (their name here).

I presently receive a blurb called "Notes" written by Dr. Dan Rosin, a local psychologist and author, and I thoroughly enjoy it. It only shows up once a week and includes a variety of topics. Topics include: why people stay in a bad relationship; the effects a new baby can have on a relationship; the impact of COVID on our lives; a variety of marriage issues; wellness and workplace balance; communication; and more.

 I recommend "Notes" and, if you wish, this is where you can sign up to be included in the free distribution:



(sign off)


Here is Dr. Dan's latest offering-"Notes" 21

You Owe Me!

Just a minute! What's this? "Every province except Alberta has so called Filial Duty laws requiring adult children to support a parent who may be dependent due to age, illness or financial straits.  These laws owe their existence to English "Poor Laws", and date back to the depression-before the creation of the modern welfare state."

I wasn't aware of these laws, and don't we have the Canada Pension Plan and Old Age Security to look after the elderly? These "Poor Laws" haven't been taken off the books and apparently not only are the seniors taking notice of them, but so are the businesses that seniors owe money to. A number of claims, (six in BC) have been filed and more are expected as the creditors get wind of this new/old responsibility.

I certainly believe we need to be responsible and take care of our elderly (me), and I thought we were - the Pensions (Canada (2), company), seniors' homes, home care, transportation assistance, free education, and reduction at the till. I believe it is our moral responsibility to look after our parents. However, I am not impressed with the spirit of these "Old Laws", as it seems they hold one person responsible for another person's behaviour - in this case the kids are responsible for their parents' behaviour. I don't think this is at all fair!

On the other side of the argument, I suppose it would force some of those deadbeat kids into getting more involved with their parents. "Involved", I like, but I don't like "Financially responsible for". Some deadbeat parents could saddle their kids with their bad decisions and all but eliminate their kids' future.