Recently
there was a report of an extraordinary example of political interference in
mental health treatment. A
political interference based not on knowledge but as far as I can tell, based
on stigma or perhaps with a bit of so called “law and order” pandering to the
uninformed.
The story unfolds in this way. A person who
is in secure treatment for a murder committed when he was psychotic applied to
have supervised outdoor walks. The mental health treatment team supported that
application and it was permitted by the Criminal Code Review Board who are
charged with the responsibility for such decisions. Without these walks
(remember that they would be supervised – that is, the person who as far as I
know has improved with treatment would be accompanied by two trained mental
health staff during short outings) the person would have to languish indoors
all summer.
Upon hearing about this decision, the
Minister of Justice in Manitoba – Andrew Swan, overturned the board’s decision,
ordering that no supervised walks could be allowed! Why? According to Swan it
was “contrary to the interests of public safety”.
What hogwash. Since when did Minister Swan
get his credentials in mental health? And what possessed him to overturn a duly
constituted and credible evaluative process? Could it be stigma against the
mentally ill? Could it be the lowest form of political pandering to ignorance
and fear? What kind of a message does this send to people living with mental
illness? What message does this send to their families? What message does this
send to society in general?
Shame on Minister Swan. This is something we
could have expected in medieval times, not in 2010 in Canada.
--Stan
No comments:
Post a Comment