Mental Health “Care”

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
Does anyone even know what mental health means? It incarnates as not how it appears ... diffusive and disseminating ... a shocking scattering effect after a large bump! (bump is an activity in deep coal mines ... an upset in the pits?)

This ... given the fact that many do not believe the sole, mind psyche complex exists for it is too complicated for the simple aspect!

Very seedy ... you never know what could erupt from a fresh psyche ... some are claimed to be wormy ... others ... you are just not allowed to describe! At least indefinite and don't know they are and so positioned hard!
 
Last edited:
Mental health is generally badly handled in our society and healthcare system. We still blame the victim. We still see mental health as a "risk" to be contained, not a health issue to be treated. We still allow stigmatization and isolation of those suffering leading people to not seek treatment and keep quiet. And for all those reasons, we fail to prioritize it when discussing changes and improvement to healthcare.

I, for instance, am far more open about my type 2 diabetes than I am about my periodic experiences with depression. No one stigmatizes diabetes anymore (maybe some targetting of people with type 2 due to the diet and lifestyle risk factors but nothing like we see with mental health). Depression? Still stigma and victim blaming. Still a tendency to dismiss patients until a crisis occurs.

So what BC is doing fits the general pattern, which is bad. We need patient-focussed, patient-supporting mental health programs, preferably supported by all levels of government and enshrined in the Canada Health Act, not more legislation to "protect" people from patients.
 
Not only is it bad - it’s much worse if track 2 expansion goes ahead and there’s no accountability for staff decisions on patients’ behalves if a signature from a director will count as patient consent. You get it? We’ve gone so far in the opposite direction of what’s needed it’s appalling and shameful - quite sick. Of course those deemed mentally ill arent allowed to shout about it. And that gives people even more reason to avoid treatment. Poor people will be treated differently under this regime if they lack advocacy support.

Nobody’s doing anything about keeping mentally ill legislators who make cruel laws out of office.
 
Last edited:
"Mental health is generally badly handled in our society" --- Mendalla!

Such bother's can stop Ama'n right up ... when disbelieving a psyche that has been attributed to the devil in a domain that trusts only emotions ... thus a character delinquent on logic because of the belief that only emotions are real ... intellect is thus out there! The overly may emotional say that trees of thought are evil ... Loci trees resembling thorny locusts? A rose in a storm ...
 
We have Community Treatment Orders in Ontario under the Mental Health Act. Consent from the patient or substitute decision maker is required.

If a person breaches a CTO they can be detained in a psychiatric facility. "Being Formed" this is usually called. There are subsequent time periods mandated by subsequent Forms. Patients have the right to appeal these decisions and must be advised of this right.

Sorry I can't be of more help in this discussion. I worked in the mental health field but not in this particular sector.

I remember when the CTO legislation came into effect but I can't tell you which year it was.
 
In Ontario there is a whole hierarchy of Substitute Decision Makers under the SDA Act. A designated Power of Attorney for personal care is at the top. (Note that this is separate from POA for property & finance).

If there is no designated POA the decision making moves to the next of kin. If this person is unable or unwilling to act, there is a structured list of relationships to go through. One's children follow one's spouse, for example.

The Public Trustee and Guardian is the last resort. Not the facility director
 
paradox3 said:
In Ontario there is a whole hierarchy of Substitute Decision Makers under the SDA Act. A designated Power of Attorney for personal care is at the top. (Note that this is separate from POA for property & finance).

If there is no designated POA the decision making moves to the next of kin. If this person is unable or unwilling to act, there is a structured list of relationships to go through. One's children follow one's spouse, for example.

The Public Trustee and Guardian is the last resort. Not the facility director
Click to expand...
This paragraph from the OP article is concerning, as pertains to BC:

The proposed change to the bill would remove the first part of Section 31 of the Mental Health Act, which determined that if a patient is detained under the act, “treatment authorized by the director is deemed to be given with the consent of the patient.”

Then:
A provision would be added to Section 16 to say that workers are not liable if they provide care or other services to a patient that is authorized by a director, if they provide reasonable care in good faith.

The “deemed consent” provision, which presumes consent to psychiatric treatment for anyone detained in involuntary care under the law, is at the centre of a court challengeoriginally filed by the Council of Canadians with Disabilities and other groups in 2016.

Supporters of the challenge say that deemed consent removes safeguards that ensure a patient is being treated humanely, and violates the Charter's rights to life, liberty and security for everyone.
 
Last edited:
Moving the language of section 31 over to section 16 in case the challenge is successful…is what this looks like. Or, even worse if it is not successful. Nevertheless, involuntary mental health patients are in a really precarious position if/ when track 2 expansion goes ahead and I’m sure that has not slipped past legislators’ notice.
 
I feel for her, I really do, but I can see how “pouring urine on the floor” or purposely dropping a meal tray - could be documented as instability. As well as breaking a computer monitor out of frustration. That wouldn’t convince anybody she was okay. Not the best strategy.
 
Bad behaviour or not, I’m concerned about the power staff will have under expanded track 2. Pouring urine and breaking a computer monitor - or any bad behaviour in care by someone who is unstable - shouldn’t potentially be a death sentence. Literally pissing off the wrong people is that much scarier.

It shouldn’t be happening in Canada. Treating people humanely and respecting their human rights - is not this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top