Features
The Dark Side of Albert: Einstein and Marie Winteler, his First Love
By DAVID R. TOPPER As I recall, in the TV series, Genius – which began with a series on Albert Einstein, this one by Ron Howard – the opening sequence showed a middle-aged Albert and his secretary having sex in his office.
I was disappointed, but not surprised. I knew that Albert liked sex and had several partners (in addition to his two wives) over his lifetime. But, for me, it portended the wrong obsession in his life. The true passion throughout Einstein’s life was another “s–word”: namely, science.
But this was TV for a general audience and … well, you can fill in the rest. Plus, what am I being petulant about? After all, here am I, doing the same thing!
We’ll come back to Howard’s portrayal of Einstein’s life at the end; for now I need to put all this in context. For this essay is the second (and last) part of my story of Einstein’s “dark side.”

As shown in the first part, on this website at: The Dark Side of Albert: Einstein and Mileva Marić, his First Wife, which was first published in The Academy of the Heart and Mind, February 7, 2025– Einstein’s loathsome treatment of his first wife often bordered on abuse, or at least very malicious behavior, that diminishes his image as a saintly man; even though many photos of him – especially late in life and with the halo of hair – herald that impression. The other reality, the focus of my first part, was how his maltreatment impacted Mileva and fostered the depression that haunted her all her life. In a sense, and as will be seen here, all this was foreshadowed by Albert’s previous relationship with Marie Winteler, which also had lasting consequences. (As an aside – while I’m in a disagreeable mood about TV portrayals – and since, in part one, I never commented on the TV series: I found Ron Howard’s treatment of Mileva downright offensive. He was obsessed with her orthopedic foot, ever focusing with close-ups of her gait, as she limped into a room. His camera was repeating the shameful behavior of Mileva’s childhood schoolyard chums, who taunted her.)
Now, back to Albert and Marie: we begin with how they met.
In 1895 Albert spent a year enrolled in the cantonal school in the town of Aarau, near Zurich. He had previously taken the rigorous entrance exams for the Polytechnic in Zurich (which Mileva later passed) and had flunked the non-science and non-math parts. But since he did so well with science and math, it was recommended that he do a year of make-up in Aarau; plus, he was applying at age 16, a year early. In Aarau he boarded with the family of Jost Winteler, a teacher at the school (although Albert never took a course from him). Jost and Pauline had three daughters and four sons; the youngest and prettiest daughter was Marie. The family had very progressive social and political views, which Albert admired. They were freethinking, liberal pacifists, and he quickly was comfortable and at ease in this household. Soon he called the parents Papa and Mama.
Marie was two years older than Albert, and was finishing courses toward becoming an elementary school teacher. She was an accomplished pianist, and so she played duets with him on his violin. Albert quickly fell for her, and she for him. We know about this relationship because there are letters exchanged between them when one or the other was out of town, such as Albert visiting his family during a holiday. The relationship eventually was taken seriously by both sets of parents, as seen in a surviving correspondence between the mothers. They gladly anticipated that a marriage was forthcoming. (Incidentally, both mother’s names were Pauline, and so Albert sometimes called them Mama-1 and Mama-2.) While I’m on a tangent here, it will be fitting to mention other connections that later came about. After Albert left Aarau, his sister, Maja, took courses in the city and also boarded with the Winteler family. She fell in love with and married their son, Paul, in 1910. Also Albert’s best friend, Michele Besso, married daughter, Anna, in 1898. In short, these were other ways in which Albert remained linked with the family over his life.
For a glimpse into their relationship, let me quote from letters between Albert and Marie. Listen to the turns of phrase; later I want to contrast this with Albert’s love letters to Mileva. Here are some of his salutations: “My dear little Marie,” “Dearest Sweetheart,” “Sweet Darling,” “Beloved Marie.” Some short phrases: he calls her “my child,” “you delicate little soul,” “you little rascal,” “my comforting angel.” And some sentences. “I love you with all the powers of my beleaguered soul.” “Music has so wonderfully united our souls.” The latter, of course, shows how significant their musical duets were.
Here is a longer piece dated 21 April 1896, where he is replying to a letter from her: “It is so wonderful to be able to press to one’s heart such a bit of paper which [your] two so dear little eyes have lovingly beheld and on which the dainty little hands have charmingly glided back and forth. I was now made to realize to the fullest extent, my little angel, the meaning of homesickness and pining. But love brings much happiness – much more so than pining brings pain. Only now do I realize how indispensable my dear little sunshine has become to my happiness.”
Receiving love letters like this, Marie was smitten by Albert and hence believed that marriage was in the offing. In fact, Albert even corresponded with her mother, saying, for example, “I have thought about you a great deal” and then calling himself her “stepson.” This was in August of 1896, so I’m inclined to believe that he too was thinking of marriage. But inevitably, he was to leave Aarau after passing all his courses, and in October of that year he moved to Zurich to study at the Polytechnic. We know that at the Polytechnic Albert met Mileva, the only woman in his small Physics classes, who was ignored by the other students.
Nonetheless, his correspondence with Marie continued. She was teaching elementary school, writing of her struggles in the classroom, and clearly expecting some talk of marriage. But a hint that something was amiss in their relationship emerges in the opening lines of this letter from Marie, written sometime in November of 1896. To put this into context, you need to know that Albert was sending her his dirty laundry, which she would wash and send back. (Believe me: I’m not making this up.) It goes to show how domestic the relationship was, which reinforces for me Marie’s continued belief in a forthcoming wedding.
She writes: “Beloved sweetheart! Your little basket arrived today and in vain did I strain my eyes looking for a little note, even though the mere sight of your dear handwriting in the address was enough to make me happy.” Nothing but the dirty laundry! Was Albert just taking Marie for granted? We need to keep this in context. We don’t know the extent of his relationship with Mileva this early in the school term. Maybe he still was thinking of marrying Marie. So, at the least it was insensitive. What we do know is that Marie made it clear that this laundry business was no small task; for, later in the letter, she writes. “Last Sunday I was crossing the woods in pouring rain to take your little basket to the post office, did it arrive soon?”
In the same letter she also makes reference to a previous letter from Albert. “My love, I do not quite understand a passage in your letter. You write that you do not want to correspond with me any longer, but why not, sweetheart?” Yes, why not? Perhaps he was involved in some way with Mileva by now and was distancing himself from Marie. She ends the letter with: “I love you for all eternity, sweetheart, and may God preserve and protect you. With deepest love yours, Little Marie.”
Albert wrote to her again. We know this from a letter to him of November 30, 1896 where Marie mentions that she had sent him a gift of a teapot. Apparently he wrote back, calling it “stupid,” which would be downright nasty – but not surprising, since we know how erratic Albert can be. At least, that’s how I interpret this sentence: “My dear sweetheart, the ‘matter’ of my sending you the stupid little teapot does not have to please you as long as you are going to brew some good tea in it.” Quite clearly, Marie doesn’t have it in her to reprimand him for his sometimes nasty behavior.
Later in her letter, Marie talks of her teaching duties, and how much she enjoys the task. Interestingly, she tells him of a “little boy in the first grade who shares with you a facial feature and, imagine that, whose name is also Albert.” She goes on to say how she gives this boy extra help.
Then there is this letter from Albert in March 1897. “Beloved little Marie, I love you with all the powers of my beleaguered soul. … To see you saddened because of me is the greatest pain to me. … How inhuman I must have become for my darling to perceive it as coldness. … What am I to you, what can I offer you! I’m nothing but a schoolboy & have nothing. … And yet you ask whether I love you so much out of pity! … Alas, you so misunderstand the empathy of ideal love.” Remember that phrase “ideal love”; we’ll come back to it at the end.
This brings me to an important letter from Albert to Pauline Winteler, sometime later in 1897, perhaps May. “I am writing you … in order to cut short an inner struggle whose outcome is, in fact, already settled in my mind.” He goes on to speak of the pain he has caused “the dear child through my fault. It fills me with a peculiar kind of satisfaction that now I myself have to taste some of the pain that I brought upon the dear girl through my thoughtlessness and ignorance of her delicate nature. Strenuous intellectual work and looking at God’s Nature are the reconciling, fortifying, yet relentlessly strict angels that shall lead me through all of life’s troubles. If only I were able to give some of this to the good child! … I appear to myself as an ostrich who buries his head in the desert sand so as not to perceive the danger. … But why denigrate oneself, others take care of that when necessary, therefore let’s stop.”
Unmistakably, we know now that, in Albert’s mind, the relationship with Marie is over and he is making a Mea Culpa – of sorts – to her mother. He is repeating what he wrote to Marie, that he is in pain because he has caused her pain – a rather egocentric idea, to say the least. And his excuse? He was too busy with his physics – probing into the mechanism of God’s creation – to deal with the triviality of human interaction. Of course, all this indeed is true, since this is Einstein. But at this stage of his life, it’s really only a young student’s fantasy. More importantly, it exposes what I’ve said above: science was the overriding infatuation in his life. And, God forbid, if someone would try to get in his way.
Indeed, let me repeat this phrase: “if only I were able to give some of this to [Marie].” I read this in light of the fact that in Zurich, Mileva was a fellow student, who knows the physics. It’s now a year into their studies and we know that they were at some stage of a relationship. So, indeed, Mileva could do what Marie could not; namely, converse with Albert about his beloved physics.
This brings me to the first item that proves that Albert and Mileva were in a relationship. It is a letter from Mileva to Albert in 1897, sometime in late October. She is in Germany taking physics courses. The language is formal; like intellectual friends exchanging ideas and experiences. Interestingly, it begins by her thanking him for a four-page-letter to her – which, sadly, we don’t have. But, importantly, she refers to “the joy you provided me through our trip together.” So we know that by now they are a couple. In fact, she mentions that her father gave her some tobacco to give to Albert; so, clearly their relationship is also known to her parents.
It’s also obvious how Mileva has filled in the hole left by Marie’s departure from Albert’s world. Listen to this musing from Mileva. “Man is very capable of imagining infinite happiness, and he should be able to grasp the infinity of space. I think that should be much easier.” Right up Albert’s alley, one might say. And this: “Oh, it was really neat at the lecture … yesterday … on the kinetic theory of heat of gases … [where the professor calculated that the colliding molecules] travel a distance of only 1/100 of a hairbreadth.” Surely, Marie wouldn’t have found this to be “neat” – no, not at all.
Despite Albert and Mileva now being a couple, he was still communicating with the Winteler family, possibly since his sister, Maja, was living with them. Thus, during a visit to his sister, we have this letter from him dated Aarau, 6 September 1899. At the time Marie was no longer living at home. “Dear little Marie, Little Mama relayed to me the friendly greeting that you sent me & the permission to write you. … Until now, the fear of upsetting your delicate heart has always kept me from doing so. … I know, dear girl, what pain I have caused you, and have already experienced grave suffering myself as a result.” Notice how Albert always turns the argument around, excusing himself. It’s like saying: “Oh, I hit you so hard, now my hand hurts. Pity me too.” Pathetic, I say.
He continues: “But if you look forward innocently to communicating with me & are able to replace old unfounded pain with new joy, write to me again.” His phrase “unfounded pain” tells it all. For Marie, the shabby way he treated her, and just dumped her, was real and hurtful. Calling it “unfounded” is an insult. Nonetheless, like Mileva, Marie remained love-struck by the charm of Albert and was ever eager to forgive him.
The story of Albert’s subsequent abusive relationship with Mileva was told in the first Part of the “dark side” of Albert. For now, we need to recall a few milestones in this story, since there is more to tell of Marie – as we follow her through the rest of her life, despite the meagre information we have about this.
Early in 1902 Mileva gave birth to Lieserl, whom she had to give up, after raising her with her Serbian parents for several months. As seen, Albert never saw his only daughter, and Mileva never forgot her. As I argued in part one: giving up Lieserl was probably a major source of the episodically occurring depression throughout her life. In January 1903, Albert and Mileva were married in a small civil ceremony. Neither set of parents attended. Their married life initially went smoothly, settling in Bern, where Albert got a job in the patent office. In his spare time, he was writing landmark papers on physics, while Mileva was the dutiful housewife. Two sons, Hans Albert (1904) and Eduard (1910), were born.
At this point, I sadly need to interject that back in Aarau in 1906, in the Winteler household, their son, Julius – after returning from a trip to America as a cook on a merchant ship – shot and killed his mother along with his sister Rosa’s husband, then himself. I believe this is important for, among other things, the impact it surely had on Marie; although, as far as I know, we have no documented record of this. But we do have the letter that Albert wrote to Jost. Referring to him as “Highly esteemed Professor Winteler,” he offers his “deepest condolences” despite knowing how “feeble words are in the face of such pain.” He also talks of the “kindness” that Pauline bestowed upon him, “while I caused her only sorrow and pain”– clearly referring to his relationship with Marie.
Meanwhile, by around 1909, Einstein was being seen as an important physicist within the European Physics community. In a letter to a close friend, Mileva says that Albert “lives only for his work” and the family is “unimportant to him.” That there was a strain on the marriage is further seen in the fact that Albert sends a letter to “Dearest Marie,” seemingly, of all things, to rekindle their relationship. He tells her that his “life is as wretched as possible regarding the personal aspect. I escape the eternal longing for you only through strenuous work & rumination. My only happiness would be to see you again.”
We don’t have Marie’s immediate reaction to this from Albert, but we can surmise that it would have been quite a shock – or what my late therapist wife would call, using her vernacular, “for crazy making.” Apparently Marie did reply to this letter of September 1909, because we have another letter from Albert in March 1910 in which he speaks of her having “trusted” him last year, but that she regrets it now; and he refers to a meeting between them, naming specific places where they walked in and around Bern. (Marie, at this time, had a teaching job not far from Bern.) And he reiterates: “I think of you with heartfelt love every free minute and am as unhappy as one can be.” Apparently she never replied to this letter, for we have this postcard from him to her on 15 July 1910: “Warm regards to the eternally silent one from your A. E.”
But she did reply to this; we have a letter of 7 August 1910 to her from Albert that begins: “As I was reading your letter, …” However, the message was not what Albert was waiting for, since he continues thusly, “it seemed to me as if I were watching my grave being dug.” I am quite sure I know what is happening here: Marie became engaged around this time, which eventually led to a marriage. So she has obviously told Albert of this, and this letter is his response. He thus goes on: “The little leftover joy that I still had has been destroyed. … However, I thank you … for giving me … the few hours of pure joy … 15 years ago [1895] and last year. Now you are a different person. … Farewell … and think of me [as] the unhappy one, rather than … with hatred and bitterness. … Your, Albert.” Knowing how Marie, like Mileva, was ever-forgiving, she probably harboured no animosity.
On 16 November 1911, Marie married Albert [!] Müller, a watch factory manager, 10 years younger that her. (So, again, another “Albert” has come into her life.) At the time, the Einsteins were in Prague, where Albert accepted an appointment in the German University. Besso told him of the marriage. In his reply, 26 December 1911, Albert writes: “I am sincerely pleased about Marie’s getting married. Thus wanes a dark stain in my life. Now everything is as it should be. Whom is she marrying?” (Incidentally, while mentioning Besso, it’s worthwhile to point out that there is an extensive correspondence between them that continued until Besso died in 1955, just a month before Einstein. For me, one of the riveting highlights of their relationship is the clear resentment of Albert by Besso’s wife, who openly reprimands Einstein for the dreadful way he treated her sister, as well as Mileva – and Anna harps on this, over and over, until she dies in 1944.)
Sometime around the spring of 1912, Besso informs Albert that Marie is pregnant. We know this because in a long letter to Besso of 26 March, near the end, Albert says, “I am happy that you are doing so well, and also that Marie is expecting a little boy (?), to whom I will be a kind of uncle, as a matter of fact.” The reference here is due to the fact that his sister Maja was married to Marie’s brother, Paul. On 8 August 1912 Marie gave birth to a son, they named Paul Albert. She later had a second boy, but I don’t have any further information on this.
While on this topic around Albert and Marie, let me add this. Albert also continued in contact with Marie’s sister Rosa. In a letter to her in January of 1914 he ends it this way (note the sly reference to Marie’s husband, also Albert): “With kindest regards to you and the kids, to Marie and to my namesake and general representative Albert, whose acquaintance I still hope to make one of these days.” As far as I know, Einstein never met Marie’s husband, nor saw Marie ever again.
Her subsequent life, it seems, was not a happy one – although we only have an outline of it, unlike the detailed agonizing life of Mileva that we saw in Part one. Marie and her Albert were divorced in 1927. As seen, she was an elementary school teacher, although records show that she missed a lot of classes due to sickness. She gave piano and organ lessons, possibly to supplement her income; she may have been dismissed from jobs later in life.
We also know that she tried to reach the first Albert in 1940; there exist two letters in June and September to him in Princeton, N.J. (Albert and his second wife, Elsa Löwenthal, had moved to the USA in 1933.) Similar to Mileva pleading for help to get their son Eduard out of Nazi-surrounded Switzerland, Marie wants to immigrate with a son to the USA and is asking for money and help. However, there is no record of him having read these letters. Most probably, his secretary, Helen Dukas – who was known to censor his mail – never showed it to him. But she did save it, along with the rest of the many items she sorted in his daily mailbox.
Marie was often plagued with depression, and in the end she died in a mental institution on 24 September, 1957, over two years after Einstein died. She was 80 years old, having been born on 24 April, 1877.
I will end this story where I began – the TV series by Ron Howard. Not surpassingly, in the episode involving Albert and Marie, he portrays them having an intimate relationship, which I’m quite sure never happened.
My aim here is not about moral values or judgements, but historical accuracy. Somewhere into the third or fourth episodes of Howard’s “Einstein,” I gave up keeping a list of the historical errors – and just sat back and watched it. Nonetheless, it perturbs me how the popular media often play fast and loose with the facts of history. I could harp on and on about how much work and effort goes into the writing of serious history by serious historians – but I’ll leave it there.
Albert and Marie met in the late 19th century, not the late 20th. They were living in a house with two parents and usually six siblings. There was little to no space available for privacy. Recall the salutations of Albert to Marie, and compare them with the following to Mileva: “sweet little witch,” “wild little rascal,” “my little beast,” “my street urchin,” “you wild witch,” “my little brat.” Of course, we know that their relationship eventually was intimate.
To me, the evidence of history suggests that the relationship between Albert and Marie was Platonic. Recall the quote above by Albert about “ideal love” in 1897. Sometime later in her life, Marie succinctly summarized her friendship with Einstein this way:
“Wir haben uns innig geliebt, aber es war eine durchaus ideale Liebe.”
“We loved each other deeply, but it was a completely ideal love.”
* * *
Readings:
The Collected Papers of Albert Einstein, Vol. 1-16 (1879-1927), by multiple editors (Princeton University Press, 1987–2021), a work in progress.
The Life and Letters of Mileva Marić, Einstein’s First Wife, edited by Milan Popovic (The Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003).
A Solitary Smile: A Novel on Einstein, by David R. Topper(Bee Line Press, 2019).
#
David R. Topper writes in Winnipeg, Canada. His work has appeared in Mono, Poetic Sun, Discretionary Love, Poetry Pacific,Academy of theHeart & Mind, Altered Reality Mag., and elsewhere. His poem Seascape with Gulls: My Father’s Last Painting won first prize in the annual poetry contest of CommuterLit Mag. May 12, 2025
Features
Cheap Weed In Canada: A Smart Shopper’s Guide
Since legalisation, cannabis has settled into Canadian life as an ordinary, regulated purchase. And like groceries or gas, the price can vary a surprising amount from one shop to the next once you start comparing.
For a lot of buyers, that has turned the focus to value. Affordable options like cheap weed prove a lower price and a tested, quality product can go together. This guide explains how to shop smart in Canada without cutting corners.
Why Has Affordable Cannabis Become So Popular?
Because the novelty has worn off, and buyers now shop like they do for anything else. In the early days, people paid whatever the new legal stores asked. That has changed.
A few things drove that shift:
- A maturing market, with more retailers competing on price.
- Online sellers, whose lower overhead keeps costs down.
- Savvier buyers, who now compare rather than grab the first option.
- A wider range of formats and budget-friendly bulk sizes.
The result is a real focus on getting value for money. Crowdsourced figures put the early average near $6.85 a gram, and cannabis price data from Statistics Canada shows how legal and illegal prices have differed since 2018.
That gap is exactly why shopping around pays off. A careful buyer can pay noticeably less than a careless one for a comparable product. The sticker price is only where the comparison starts.
How Do Canadians Shop for Cheaper Weed?
With the same care they bring to any regular expense. A handful of habits make the biggest difference. These are the ones worth adopting:
- Compare the per-gram price. It is the only fair way to weigh two options.
- Buy larger formats. Bigger quantities almost always lower the unit cost.
- Skip premium markups. Plain flower beats pricey pre-rolls for value.
- Watch for sales. Online retailers run them often, especially on holidays.
- Match potency to the plan. A stronger product means you use less each time.
None of these involve settling for a worse product. They simply put your money to better use, the same way you would stretch your money on any other purchase. The cheapest sticker is rarely the best value, and the priciest is seldom worth it.
The same logic applies whether you shop in person or online in Canada. Read the label, weigh the cost per gram, and let the numbers guide you rather than the branding.
Is There a Catch With Low-Priced Cannabis?
Not in the legal market, which is the part newcomers miss. In Canada, every legal product is tested and labelled to the same standard, whatever it costs.
That means a budget option from a licensed seller has cleared the same checks as a premium one. It is screened for contaminants, and its potency is verified. Price reflects branding, packaging, and store margins far more than basic safety.
The genuine differences are in the finer points. Premium flower might offer a better aroma or a richer flavour, and some formats simply cost more to make. For everyday use, though, a well-priced choice usually performs just fine.
The real catch is buying outside the legal system. Health Canada’s overview of the Cannabis Act is a sensible read on what legal really means. Buying legal protects you, not buying expensive.
What Makes a Cheap Purchase a Smart One?
A couple of quick checks, mostly. A real bargain holds up to a second look, while a false one does not. The table below shows what to weigh.
| Check | Why It Matters |
| Is the seller licensed? | Only legal retailers guarantee tested product |
| What is the per-gram cost? | The headline price can hide a weak deal |
| Is potency on the label? | Higher strength can stretch your money |
| Are there bulk or sale deals? | These usually beat single-unit pricing |
| What does delivery cost? | Shipping can erase an online saving |
Any shaky answer there is a reason to pause. A licensed seller with clear pricing and labelling is the safe choice, while a suspiciously cheap unlicensed source is not. The legal age applies regardless, at 18 or 19 depending on the province.
Treat cannabis like any other considered purchase. Compare, check the details, and let value rather than habit lead the decision. That is how modest savings add up across a whole year.
Before You Buy
- Cannabis prices vary widely by retailer, format, and store overhead.
- Comparing the per-gram cost is the fairest way to judge value.
- All legal Canadian cannabis is tested, so cheaper is not unsafe.
- Bulk buys, sales, and plain formats keep spending down.
- Always buy from a licensed source, and factor in delivery fees.

Photo by Jakub Zerdzicki on Pexels
Alt text: A shopper comparing prices online at home
Smart Savings, No Compromise
Buying affordable cannabis in Canada is not about chasing the lowest number you can find. It is about understanding what shapes the price and shopping with a little intention. Stick to licensed, tested products, compare the real cost per gram, and lean on bulk deals and online pricing. Do that, and an affordable choice stays a smart one, purchase after purchase.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Cheap Weed Safe to Buy In Canada?
Yes, provided it comes from a licensed retailer. All legal cannabis in Canada is tested for contaminants and labelled for potency, regardless of price. A lower cost usually reflects branding and overhead rather than weaker safety, so a budget option from a legal seller is still a safe one.
How Do I Find the Best Cannabis Deals?
Compare the per-gram price, buy larger formats, and watch for sales from online retailers. Checking potency against price helps too, since a stronger product can mean you use less. The key is shopping deliberately instead of defaulting to the same brand or store each time.
Why Is Cannabis Cheaper Online?
Online sellers usually carry lower overhead than physical stores, and they run sales and bulk deals more often. That lets them price competitively while still selling tested, legal product. Just remember to factor in shipping, which can offset the saving on a small order.
Does Paying More Mean Better Cannabis?
Not necessarily. Price reflects branding, format, and store margins as much as quality, and all legal product meets the same testing standards. Premium options may offer a better aroma or appearance, but a well-priced choice often works just as well day to day.
Features
Author and lifelong nurse Tilda Shalof’s new book a guide not only for young nurses but one that will appeal to a wider readership
By MYRON LOVE Tilda Shalof’s most recent book – “The Handover – a Nurse’s Last Shift” was, in the words of its author, “written for the general public, to understand nursing. Nursing is everyone’s concern, not just nurses. The general public has a stake in the matter,” she observes.
I can guarantee that there are plenty of stories and anecdotes that the author shares from her own experiences that will also be of interest to a wider readership. I certainly enjoyed the book.
The title – “The Handover,” she explains, is the regular exchange between nurses going off their shift and the nurses beginning the next shift, during which the outgoing nurses pass on all relevant information about the patients under their care to the incoming nurses. A recurring thread throughout the book – of close to 400 pages – is the retiring Shalof’s interaction with three student nurses whom she had recently befriended through one of her many speaking engagements. In particular, Shalof gives co-writing credit to one Lisa Mochrie – a nurse who the author acted as mentor to during Mochrie’s last period as a student and continuing through her early nursing career.
There is a tendency for many people to take for granted people I would describe as working in a service capacity such as nursing. One of the reasons that Shalof points out in her book for our ongoing nursing shortages is that young men and women are more likely to be encouraged to pursue a medical career (to be a doctor) than a nurse. This, she points out, despite the fact that hospitals can function without doctors – but not without nurses.
Some other factors, she notes, are the ever increasing demands of documentation – which detract from patient care – and regulations, which have taken much of the satisfaction out of the profession.
In an interview with this writer, she observes that Jewish nurses are few and far between because nursing is not a profession that most Jewish families encourage. (I can only name a handful of Jewish nurses that I have known or have come across.)
She spoke about how she became a nurse early in life to her aged and ailing parents – being the only daughter – (she has three older brothers) and the last of her siblings to leave home. In “The Handover”, she also makes frequent reference to fictional nurse Cherry Ames – the heroine of numerous books written between 1943 and 1968 – as inspiration for Shalof’s choice of career.
For the first 30 years as a nurse, Shalof worked in an intensive care ward at Toronto General Hospital. She subsequently worked for a short time at an HIV clinic and, later a hospital day clinic and a neurosurgery unit. She also spent several summers as a camp nurse at a Jewish camp while her kids were campers there.
“The Handover” is Shalof’s seventh book. Her first book, published in 2004, was “A Nurse’s Story,” chronicling her experiences over 30 years as an ICU nurse. Among her other books are:“Camp Nurse,” recounting anecdotes from her time working summers at her children’ summer camps, and “Opening My Heart” – an account of the profession from the point of view of a patient after she had open heart surgery.
Coincidently, she notes, she began her first book around the time of the SARS outbreak in Toronto in 2003. Shalof says she started writing her latest book at the height of the Covid lockdowns, which she references from time to time in the book. .
The approach Shalof has taken in writing “The Handover” – following a foreword and introduction – is literally an A to Z overview of everything there is to know about nursing – with each chapter focusing on one specific letter of the alphabet. Each chapter relates her thoughts and tells anecdotes from her own nursing experiences over 40 years in the profession, as well as her interactions with Lisa Mochrie and the other two student nurses as they transition from students to professionals.
In her conclusion, she observes that “nursing can be a path to making a difference – having an impact. It can be a front row seat at the theatre of life. Or it can be a job, a way to make a living and help support your family. “
Most importantly, she added, “make sure you try to have some fun. Do everything in your power to enjoy being a nurse”.
Although the now 67-yeear-old author is retired from the practice of nursing, she remains in demand as a speaker and advisor. She continues to get calls from throughout North America seeking her advice.“The Handover” is available from the University of Toronto Press.
Features
Michael Mitchell: His Labour of Love in Law
By GERRY POSNER The Mitchell name in Winnipeg has been around a long time and much of the the name recognition stems from the long connection of the family to a business known as Mitchell Fabrics, a mainstay on Main Street for many years. Established by Mendel Mitchell generations ago and not closed until 2017, many family members, including in-laws, worked there as managers, students and retirees. And yet, the family vocation was not limited to just the business, t it stretched out into the world of law, and more specifically the field of labour Law. One particular Mitchell reached the peak of all aspects of Labour Law. Three Mitchells: Leon, son Grant (a senior management side labour lawyer in Winnipeg), and daughter April Katz (an academic at the University of Victoria Law School), had stellar careers in that field. Yet another Mitchell, Michael, also achieved great acclaim as a labour lawyer. Michael, a product of the south end of Winnipeg, is the son of the late Harry and Gertrude (Sirluck) Mitchell, so he has some impressive genes going for him. But he has added to the story immeasurably.
Perhaps it all began for Michael Mitchell when he graduated from what was the first and only Grade 7 Hebrew school class at Herzlia Academy. He later was Regional Vice-President of AZA in his teenage years. After two years at Joseph Wolinsky Collegiate and two more at Grant Park High School, Mitchell went off to the University of Manitoba for his first year and then on to the University of Toronto, where he obtained a BA in Political Science. Then came law school, also at the University of Toronto, from where he graduated with an LLB in 1975. Along the way, he married the former Lynne Berman ( also from Winnipeg).That union produced three Mitchell daughters, two of whom are physicians – in psychiatry and neurology respectively, while the third is a pioneering pre-school educator. Michael and Lynne also have six grandchildren.
For a large part of his career as a lawyer, Michael Mitchell practiced law in Toronto as a senior partner in the firm of Sack Goldblatt Mitchell – from 1980 through 2014, having joined the firm in 1975 as a student. The firm was committed to the union side practice of Labour and Employment Law. Not so surprisingly, he had to appear at all levels of courts, also administrative tribunals.To his credit, his work and impressive track record was recognized by his peers as he was named a leading labour lawyer in Canadian Lexpert Directory and was frequently recommended in Best Lawyers in Canada. Between 1982- 2006, Mitchell was also the managing partner of the firm, which suggests to me an ability to manage people, not an insignificant skill. During his tenure as the managing partner, the law firm grew from just under ten lawyers to over fifty, with offices in both Toronto and Ottawa. His responsibilities were firm leadership, strategic decision making and financial management.
But, what a career Mitchell has had. For starters, aside from his time as a practicing lawyer in the field of labour law, he has, since his leaving the practice, just changed hats. From 2015 to 2018, he was part time Vice-Chair of the Ontario Labour Relations Board and, from 2018 as of this moment, he has become full time Vice-Chair at the same Ontario Labour Relations Board. Needless to say that, over the course of his administrative work since 2015, Mitchell has been at the centre of some significant decisions and, if you are interested, I can direct you to the selected substantive decisions in which Mitchell has been involved.
Moreover, Mitchell has worked and continues to work in the area of mediation and arbitration of both labour and indeed civil law. This is a large area, to put it mildly. For starters, there is the entire field of grievance arbitration. To be involved in cases of this kind, your name has to be put up by one of the parties and often agreed to by the other party. That means you have credibility with both of the protagonists. Mitchell clearly has that kind of reputation and draws support from both sides of the aisles – as it is referred to in some circles. He has been an arbitrator/ referee in many cases, including the famous 1986-1990 Class Action settlement related to individuals who had contracted Hepatitis C. Further, he has conducted numerous civil mediations related to employment, contracts and human rights matters. Mitchell also mediates and arbitrates collective bargaining disputes.
One of Mitchell’s’ main achievements was that he was invited between 2015-2017 to be a Special Advisor (with capital letters, no less) to the Ontario Minister of Labour with regard to the Changing Workplace Review. This was a landmark review of the Ontario Employment Standards Act and the Labour Relations Act where he, together with Justice John Murray, recommended many legislative changes to protect workers from the negative impacts of precarious employment. The best part of his work was that many of th recommendations were actually adopted. Other recommendations remain for future governments across the country to consider.
If you really want to delve into the Michael Mitchell career, you should know that, over the span of his career there are many publications that he has authored. The main one is his textbook on the Ontario Labour Relations Board, which he co-authored with his early mentor, Jeffrey Sack, and which remains the leading authority on the Ontario Board.
Mitchell comes by his passion for labour law honestly. His uncle, Leon Mitchell, was an iconic force on the union side in his practice of law in Winnipeg and was the inspiration for Michael to enter law to become a labour lawyer in the first place. In fact, it was Leon who introduced Michael to a man in Toronto who recommended Michael to connect with an up and coming labour lawyer in Toronto named Jeffrey Sack K.C. That connection resulted in the Sack Goldblatt Mitchell law firm. As well, Michael was well known to Sid Green during the early years of Sid’s law career, also his early days as a Cabinet Minister in the Schreyer NDP government. Sid was a person who exerted a significant influence on Michael.
With all that on his plate, Mitchell found time to be the president of the Darchei Noam Synagogue in Toronto between 2004-2008. He has also been the president of the Jewish Reconstructionist Federation of North America. During his term, he led the merger negotiations which ultimately resulted in the current structure of that movement ,which is now referred to as Reconstructing Judaism. Its singular aspect is that it consists of a single organization combining congregations plus a Rabbinical School. That was enough to get Mitchell an invitation to attend one of President Obama’s Chanukah parties at the White House during the Obama term. As well, to this day, Mtchell sits as a Director of the New Israel Fund of Canada.
Mitchell has his feet still planted in Winnipeg. His two sisters live there, as well as Lynne’s sister. In fact, he just visited Winnipeg for his sister Ruth Ann’s and Paula’s 85th and 80th birthdays respectively. And to keep up to date, Michael and Lynne Mitchell have long had a subscription to the Jewish Post.
In short, at just under 80, Michael Mitchell is moving like he is eighteen. The longevity of his career may soon rival the longevity of the family business, Mitchell Fabrics.

