More Detail on the LCO Symposium & New Consultation Paper

I’ve been asked for more information about the LCO Symposium in May, so I thought I’d provide it here. We will be posting on the LCO website soon. The format is a series of conversations that are intended to encourage dialogue among panellists and audience (in the various configurations). I’m trying to avoid a “talking at” environment. The conversations are “What are We Talking About, Anyway?” when we’re talking about law reform;”How do We do It?”; and “What Challenges does Law Reform Face?”. Michael Tilbury of the New South Wales Law Reform Commission will give a free public lecture on the evening of May 12th. Panellists on May 13th will be Raj Anand, Harry Arthurs, Michele Leering, Kim Murray (“What are We Talking About, Anyway?”) and David Lepofsky, Avvy Go, Rod Macdonald and our own John Gregory (“How do We do It?”). The “challenges” conversation will be a free for all (well, a facilitated free for all). Attendance limited to 75 people to enhance participation (not too many, I’ve found, with the “right” mix of people who are familiar with the area), registration fee $125, including lunch, and on-line registration.

We’ve recently released two new discussion papers on our website, in both official languages. One is in the older adults project, the other sets out two options for a possible family law project. I’ll talk about the older adults paper today.

“Moving the Project Forward”, the Consultation Report on Responses to our Pre-Study sets out the principles we’ve developed to guide our thinking as we progress on the older adults project. These are broad principles or values that we believe should inform legislation and policy that affect older adults (whatever that means – more to come on that, too): independence (autonomy), participation, security, dignity and respect for the diversity of older adults. We’ve asked people to think about these values and how they play out (or not) currently and how they should play out, by using five questions:

* What would an anti-ageist approach to the law look like?
* When is it appropriate or effective to use age as a legal category?
* What principles and approaches best promote access to the law for older adults?
* How can the law appropriately recognize and support the relationships of older adults?
* How can a principled framework for the law as it affects older adults be applied to ensure secure and dignified living environments for older persons?

We have also selected contract researchers to prepare background papers in particular areas for us and may retain others as we proceed.