2,041
edits
Changes
Changed third paragraph
Such a challenge occurred in Ontario, in P.S. v. Ontario, 2014 ONCA 900, where the constitutionality of the provisions of the Mental Health Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M.7 providing for involuntary committal as they apply to long-term detainees, was challenged and found to violate s.7 of the Charter. The judgement stated that the patient must be provided meaningful procedural avenues to seek the accommodation and treatment they need to be rehabilitated, while being involuntarily detained, and the province cannot wield the power to detain mental health patients indefinitely where such procedural protections are absent. This will likely change the role patients themselves play in determining the course and nature of their treatment in Ontario; however it is unclear as of now what effect this may have in British Columbia.
The Mental Health Law Program (MHLP) at CLAS assists involuntarily admitted patients at review panel hearings. Access Pro Bono (APB) is also starting a Mental Health Program Since 2017, the Attorney General has agreed to fund representation for clients who have been all involuntarily detained under the MHA and patients who are unable to obtain legal representation through CLAS. All referrals will first be made through the MHLP/CLAScannot afford counsel at their Review Panel hearings. If CLAS is unavailableto make these representations, they will refer the patient to APBhave a roster of contracted lawyers who may provide counsel as well. APB will then attempt to find volunteer lawyers Access Pro Bono also provides telephone assistance for people who are facing involuntary detention and law students want to legally represent know their rights under the patient at his or her scheduled Mental Health Review Board Hearing (see [[Governing Legislation and Resources for Mental Health (14:II) | Resources section]] of this Chapter or [[General Legal Help Resources (22:I) | Chapter 22: Referrals]])MHA.
Section 22 of the MHA provides that a person may be admitted involuntarily and detained for up to 48 hours. The person must first be examined by a doctor and the doctor must provide a medical certificate stating that he or she is of the opinion that the person has a mental disorder and requires treatment to prevent "the substantial mental or physical deterioration" of the person or to protect that person or others. A second doctor must provide a second certificate for the person to be detained longer than the initial 48 hours. ''Mullins v Levy'' 2009 BCCA 6, the leading case in this area, applied a broad definition of “examination” and stated that the MHA does not require a personal interview of the patient in every instance. However, a patient is entitled to request a review hearing according to certain prescribed periods that depend on the length of time the patient has been detained or that his or her detention has been renewed.