• Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m not sure if you are implying M. Jatzen killed himself through overdose or not.

    Regardless, the issue in this case hase nothing to do with the mechanism of death. The two insurers where aware of the drug use and continued coverage.

    “The Court of Appeal ruled that “the insurers properly denied coverage because Mr. Jantzen died as a result of committing the crime of possession of the cocaine that he consumed.””

    Presumably this implies that insurance payouts are not required in any case where a claimant was committing a crime.

    Die while jaywalking? No payout. Die while torrenting a movie? No payout. Die while turn right on Montréal Island? No payout. Spill blood on your cash when you die? That’s defacing currency. No payout.

    • TemporaryBoyfriend@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      In the medical field, they’re starting to refer to deaths due to adulterated drugs as ‘poisoning’, rather than ‘overdose’. The implication is that people are merely trying to get high, but because of a lack of safe supply, their drugs may contain powerful narcotics like fentanyl, it’s effectively unintentional, not a deliberate attempt to consume too much.