JUST as words can hurt, so too can they heal, and there are few phrases that soothe bruised feelings more quickly than the words "I'm sorry."
In a litigious culture, institutions that have hurt individuals frequently refuse to make this simple statement. Too often, this reluctance doesn't stem from callousness, but from fear.
In British Columbia, until recently, an apology could be taken as an admission of guilt. Simply saying you were sorry could open you to potentially ruinous legal action, meaning lawyers frequently advised clients not to do it.
The North Vancouver school district hasn't said why it refuses to apologize to Robin Tomlin for the slur that was printed in his high school annual back in 1970 (see story, page 3), but given the careful wording of its correspondence, it seems not unlikely that legal considerations weighed heavily in the decision.
If that's the case, it would be strange, given that British Columbia adopted the Apology Act - effectively stripping the liability from the word "sorry" - back in 2006, in theory at least freeing individuals and institutions to give victims of past wrongs the one thing they most often seek. Allowing apologies without fear was intended to head off lawsuits, patch up rifts and, most importantly, help a great number of people heal. The law was designed precisely for cases such as this.
Given that it is free and, ostensibly, legally protected, it is puzzling that it has not happened.
