Upon her arrival at the hospital, she was found to be in a deteriorated mental state and
unfit to stand trial. However, within days, her thinking, concentration and speech
improved significantly leading her psychiatrist to report to the Court that Jane's
experience of being segregated had caused deterioration in her mental state over time.
It was the view of the hospital Forensic Science team that the change in environment
was probably the key element in the improvement in Jane's mental state. While in the
hospital, Jane had the opportunity to interact with her family and other people including
the patients who shared her room.
As Jane prepared to return to prison, her hospital psychiatrist issued strong warnings
regarding the inevitable deleterious effects of a treatment plan based on segregation.
Moreover, The Forensic Science team described prison as an anti-therapeutic
environment for Jane. Despite these warnings, the prison psychiatric staff continued
with their decision to return Jane to segregation causing her to regress and effectively
delayed her therapeutic and correctional progress.
A. Equating "Mental Disability" with Risk
Section 30 of the
CCRA requires CSC to assign each inmate to a classification
of maximum, medium, or minimum security, in accordance with the Regulations
made under the Act. In determining the appropriate security
classification to be assigned to a prisoner, s. 17 of the Regulations
requires CSC to take a number of factors into account. A review of these
factors discloses blatant discrimination towards persons with mental
disabilities. Mental disability is a factor which must be considered
by CSC when determining an appropriate security classification.
17. The Services shall take the following factors into consideration in determining the security
classification to be assigned to an inmate pursuant to section 30 of the Act;
...
(e) any physical or mental illness or disorder suffered by the inmate.
By equating "mental
disability" with a security risk, corrections legislation perpetuates
negative stereotypes and assumptions which characterize mental disability
as dangerous. Section 17(e) of the Regulations is by all accounts
discriminatory, and a Court challenge would very likely find it to be
in violation of the equality guarantee contained in the Charter.
For all prisoners, including those with disabilities, it is their conduct
which should be taken into account in determining the level of institutional
supervision and control which should be provided and that criteria is
already included in s. 17(c) of the Regulations: (c) the inmate's
performance and behaviour while under sentence."56
In addition to the legislative requirements, CSC also uses a variety of risk and needs assessment
scales to determine the appropriate security classification for a prisoner. Several factors are taken
into account including the prisoner's desire to obtain employment, accept marital/family support,
associate with non-criminal associates, live without relying on alcohol or drugs, possess
necessary knowledge and skills for daily living, exercise control over one's life and live in law
abiding ways.57 Many of these factors are problematic for FSW with mental disabilities as unemployment, estrangement from family, homelessness and substance abuse may all represent
symptoms congruent with having a mental disability.
|