At a time when people could not go to funerals in their own town, Mrs X saw fit to fly from Canada to another continent for a funeral, something that would leave her young child uncared for. So she makes contact with the child's father who lives in a different part of Canada; it appears they are separated.
Instead of telling her she shouldn't go and that collecting the child and taking temporary custody would negatively impact on his work as an essential medical worker in times of pandemic, he agrees.
During the week of May 10th he makes the trip - so that could be any day up to May 16th. There's been no explanation for the lack of exact dates, just the subsequent and initial claim of straight there straight back no stops.
He takes the child to a day care intended for children of essential health workers and goes to work as normal, seeing patients at different settings. No self isolation at all which is a condition of entering his province except for those who live one side of the border and work on the other side as is apparently quite usual for those living close to the border. The exception is not intended for those with personal or career reasons for travel.
Later, it is reported that a child at a day care intended for children of essential health workers tests positive for covid. The parent, a health worker, doesn't understand as they followed all recommended guidance. The parent of the child then also tests positive. This happens around the 21st May and is soon followed by about 40 new cases of covid when there were actually none at the time of the trip.
Later it is announced that "an irresponsible health worker" travelled across the border and was not honest with officials upon returning and did not self isolate as required. I remember thinking that the puzzled health worker must be this doctor.
Somehow the name of the good doctor is revealed and he admits his 'mistake' but felt he had no choice and he was careful, making no stops. But he gets abuse on social media, much of it racist in nature.
Later he has a rethink, suggesting he couldn't have been responsible, that he was told a patient of his had tested positive so he then had his own test. This was apparently a few days after the child at the day care tested positive.
The provincial government has been supplying daily updates and the archive for May 21st shows a new case, that of someone under 19 in that border town.
On May 26th is a second case, someone over 90. Same town. Two active cases.
On May 27th the government site announces a third case. Between 50 and 59 which fits the doctor. The site very clearly says the cases are linked to the health worker who didn't self isolate and who saw patients, including at the hospital. As cases subsequently mounted up, the link was repeated.
So the official provincial health department has stated the first three new cases after a period of no cases at all result from this trip over the border and no self isolation. And it's obviously the child, parent and a patient.
With all the subsequent cases it looks bad for the doctor who has since been suspended and cannot work in the province.
_________
Meanwhile, because of the tight controls in operation on the borders in this part of Canada, with many people claiming it's unconstitutional, the New York Times picks up on it and interviews the good doctor from the point of view of the border controls and the racist abuse.
During the interview he reveals (lets slip?) that he attended a job interview during this trip that went straight there, straight back with no stops.
Subsequently it's also revealed he had a night stopover at his brother's house. And that he met with a couple of colleagues.
Quite ridiculous what we're being asked to believe.
Obviously the racist abuse is wrong. He should be in the stocks having rotten fruit thrown at him.
I imagine that before his case comes up, some deal will be done.
But how the hell did those employing him now, across the border, decide he was a good fit for them after this came out?
No comments:
Post a Comment