In the immediate aftermath of Chaoulli vs. Quebec (Attorney General), it seemed that this decision would constitute a turning point in the way public health care is delivered in Canada. However, the lack of change in the following years has left this theory largely suspect. This thesis sets out to establish how two separate, yet equally powerful reactions to this case, proliferated in the wake of this decision. It aims to validate an original hypothesis that suggests that the treatment of the case from academia and from the print media (Canadian daily newspapers) constituted the most dominant discourses in the wake of the Chaoulli case. Furthermore it examines whether these two sectors were predominantly homogenous in their views of the case. However, this thesis concludes that, while these were two of the most dominant reactions to the Chaoulli case, the boundaries of these discourses and their respective supporters were not relegated exclusively to any given sector.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:uottawa.ca/oai:ruor.uottawa.ca:10393/28788 |
| Date | January 2010 |
| Creators | Swanson, Drew J |
| Publisher | University of Ottawa (Canada) |
| Source Sets | Université d’Ottawa |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
| Format | 140 p. |
Page generated in 0.0016 seconds