 |
 |
In re: K's case. Brian Symonds sets out, with clarity and balance, the issues of freedom and responsibility that surround those of us with Parkinson's who wish to continue to drive. Few of us would disagree with his arguments. However, let us consider K's predicament in another way. K is accused, convicted and punished before being informed of the offence. Upon enquiry, he is met with silence. Upon further enquiry, he is told that they (the SAAQ) would reconsider their decision "in the light of new facts" but will not tell him what the "old facts" are. Protesting this (to a minor functionary), he is subjected to interrogation, abused, and accused further. K hires a lawyer (thereby impoverishing himself, to a degree) and asks that the decision in his case be reviewed. There are further delays and further silences. Finally, he is told he must demonstrate to them (with the road test) what was true in the first place. K lives, not in another country, but close to you and me. Kafka's tale was imagined; K's was not. Allan W <[log in to unmask]>