LIKE OUR WORK?
A concerned Canadian citizen, hit with a record breaking 1.75 million dollar defamation judgment, the largest in the nation’s history, has been unfairly targeted for criticizing taxpayer funded nonprofits that produce and distribute explicit sexual health materials, which have repeatedly ended up in K 12 schools. His use of the term groomer applied to the actual material in question “specifically described the A to Z of Sex cards”, a set of 26 graphic flashcards created around 2010 for adult audiences, detailing sexual acts with harm reduction advice, intended for outreach in settings like bars and clinics. These materials, co branded by two major nonprofits focused on HIV prevention and sexual health, along with other resources like the Safer Sex Guide and safer snorting kits, were never meant for children. Yet, over nearly a decade, they have surfaced in schools across British Columbia and Saskatchewan, exposing minors to content far beyond age appropriate boundaries. The citizen’s public criticism, expressed online, aimed to spotlight this reckless pattern and the misuse of millions in public grants, not to attack individuals, making the defamation suit against him appear as a tactic to silence legitimate concerns.
The evidence paints a damning picture of systemic failure. In 2015, the A to Z cards were handed out to Grade 8 and 9 students in Kelowna, British Columbia, during a health class, sparking parental fury and a half hearted apology from the external presenter for the mistake. In 2019, a public health nurse in Creston, British Columbia, distributed the Safer Sex Guide, an illustrated booklet with explicit sexual content, to Grade 6 and 7 students, triggering more apologies but no lasting fixes. In March 2023, the same cards and related explicit booklets appeared in a Fort Nelson, British Columbia, school, alongside materials on adult sexual practices. In June 2023, a Saskatchewan high school in Lumsden saw these cards laid out for Grade 9 students by an external sexual health presenter, prompting a province wide ban on the group and an RCMP investigation into potential distribution of obscene material to minors, which fizzled without charges. In May 2023, safer snorting kits, tied to harm reduction efforts by related organizations, were left with secondary students in Cowichan Valley, British Columbia, after a drug awareness talk. These five incidents, spanning two provinces, reveal a consistent inability to keep adult oriented materials out of classrooms, despite the nonprofits’ claims of unintentional errors.
These organizations, collectively receiving over 17 million dollars annually in taxpayer grants from federal and provincial sources, operate within a tightly knit network that includes a national sexual health advocacy group formed in 2014 from the merger of entities, including the former national Planned Parenthood body. Their mission, fueled by public funds, prioritizes comprehensive sexuality education and harm reduction, producing materials that freely circulate among partners, including regional sexual health groups that engage with schools. Financial records from one organization show 258837 dollars spent on program materials and 36166 dollars on printing in 2024, yet no line items address tracking or restricting distribution to prevent access by minors. Board minutes and annual reports, which detail governance, funding, and outreach goals, are silent on these school incidents, offering no evidence of audits, corrective policies, or discussions to address the public backlash. This absence suggests either willful ignorance or a lack of priority on safeguarding children, despite the organizations’ reliance on taxpayer money and their expansive reach, delivering programs to over 66000 youth in 2024 through domestic and international initiatives, including school like settings.
The citizen’s criticism, rooted in these documented failures, highlighted the misuse of public funds to produce and distribute materials that repeatedly reach children. His use of the term groomer referred to the A to Z cards’ explicit content and their inappropriate presence in schools, not to individuals, reflecting a reasonable concern about exposing minors to graphic material under the guise of education. This perspective aligns with parental outrage and provincial responses, such as Saskatchewan’s 2023 suspension of the involved presenter, Alberta’s 2025 mandate for pre screening educational materials, and British Columbia’s proposed 2025 legislation to curb external presenters in schools. The defamation lawsuit, led by legal counsel with a history of defending these organizations, secured its massive award partly through a default judgment, with claims of improper service adding to the citizen’s inability to defend himself. The suit mischaracterized his statements as personal attacks, ignoring their basis in a verifiable pattern of mismanagement spanning years and provinces.
Further investigation reveals deeper oversight gaps. The nonprofits’ partnership agreements, formalized through networks like a Toronto based HIV community planning initiative, facilitate resource sharing without documented protocols for age verification or distribution controls. One organization’s 2024 annual report boasts reaching 1.2 million people with educational resources, yet no metrics address preventing access by minors. Another’s 2020 emergency board meeting focused on canceling a fundraiser due to the pandemic, but no records show similar urgency for addressing school incidents. The citizen’s warnings, far from defamatory, echo public demands for accountability, as seen in social media discussions and policy shifts. His freedom of expression, protected under Canadian law for public interest matters, was unjustly penalized, as his comments were factual critiques of institutional failures, not slanderous attacks. The 1.75 million dollar judgment appears as a desperate attempt to deflect from the nonprofits’ inability to address their own shortcomings, making their legal pursuit look baseless and their leadership laughably detached from the consequences of their actions. The ongoing scrutiny of their funding and practices, including potential audits by federal grant bodies or provincial regulators, underscores the validity of the citizen’s concerns, positioning him as a whistleblower wrongly punished for exposing a scandalous misuse of public trust.
LIKE OUR WORK?