I found this I don’t know if this i s what you meant. The ruling said that people under the age of 30 are entitled to fewer benefits, because the government provides employment programs that they can participate in. That is not quite the same as saying the government is not responsible for their well being.

@LostInParadise Thanks. That is it. Welfare is not a right. Exactly what I was looking for. GA!

It does not say welfare is not a right. If that were the case, you would be living out on the street. All it says is that people under 30 are entitled to less government pay because there are employment and education programs that they can participate in.

@LostInParadise It is in bold on the top of the link that you gave me.
Welfare not a right, Supreme Court rules
By KIRK MAKIN, Globe and Mail, March 6, 2003

You have to look at the details.

This is what one judge wrote:“The government’s long-term purpose was to provide young welfare recipients with precisely the kind of remedial education and skills training they lacked and needed in order to integrate into the workforce and become self-sufficient,” Chief Justice McLachlin wrote.

In your case, the government decided that your disability hinders you from finding employment, so they send you a check every month and pay for your treatment.

@RedDeerGuy1 Don’t rely on the media’s headline. Stick with what the court said. Pay attention!