INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
A Review Board must have at least one psychiatrist and one other member with mental health training and experience to practice medicine or psychology.
SECTION WORDING
672.39 A Review Board must have at least one member who is entitled under the laws of a province to practise psychiatry and, where only one member is so entitled, at least one other member must have training and experience in the field of mental health, and be entitled under the laws of a province to practise medicine or psychology.
EXPLANATION
Section 672.39 of the Criminal Code of Canada outlines the composition requirements for a Review Board, which is a body responsible for overseeing the treatment and management of individuals found not criminally responsible or unfit to stand trial due to mental illness. According to this section, a Review Board must have at least one member who is a licensed psychiatrist and, if there is only one such member, at least one other member with relevant training and experience in the field of mental health who is licensed to practice medicine or psychology under the laws of a province. This requirement ensures that the Review Board has expertise and knowledge in the assessment, diagnosis, and treatment of mental illness. Given that the Review Board is responsible for making important decisions about the management and release of individuals who have committed crimes but are deemed unable to be held responsible due to mental illness, having qualified mental health professionals on the board is crucial. They play a vital role in reviewing assessments made by forensic psychiatrists and psychologists, as well as making decisions about the suitability of treatment plans. By only allowing licensed professionals to sit on the Review Board, individuals who are being assessed and treated by the Board can rest assured that they are receiving unbiased and expert care. Moreover, the requirement that at least one Review Board member must have training in the field of mental health ensures that the Board is able to assess and understand the complex interplay between mental illness and criminal behavior. Overall, section 672.39 reflects the importance that Canada places on the proper treatment of individuals with mental illness who come into contact with the criminal justice system. It ensures that the expertise of qualified mental health professionals is integrated into the legal process, ultimately resulting in fairer and more effective treatment of all individuals.
COMMENTARY
Section 672.39 of the Criminal Code of Canada is a crucial piece of legislation that outlines the composition of review boards in the country. The section mandates that each review board must have at least one member who is entitled to practice psychiatry under the laws of a province. Furthermore, if only one member is so qualified, then the board must have at least one other member with training and experience in the field of mental health, who can practice medicine or psychology under the laws of a province. This section is significant as it plays an essential role in ensuring that the review boards tasked with conducting assessments of individuals accused or found guilty of criminal offenses that are linked to mental illness and disorders are composed of qualified professionals. The inclusion of at least one psychiatry practitioner ensures that the board has access to the expertise, knowledge, and skills needed to effectively assess the extent of a defendant's mental illness. This expertise is essential as it helps boards make informed decisions on the degree of culpability of the accused and the necessary measures that should be taken to safeguard the interests of both the accused and society as a whole. The section's requirement for additional members with relevant training and experience in mental health is equally important as it enables a more comprehensive assessment of an accused individual's mental health. It ensures that the review board considers not only the medical and psychiatric aspects of an individual's mental illness but also the psychological and social implications of the illness. This provides a more holistic view of an accused individual's mental health, which can help to inform the board's decisions regarding the best course of action for that individual. Furthermore, the inclusion of the requirement that members be entitled under the laws of a province to practice psychiatry, medicine, or psychology is vital as it ensures that the board's members are licensed professionals with the necessary qualifications and training to make informed decisions about an individual's mental health. This requirement provides a degree of quality control that enhances the credibility and reliability of the board's decisions. It also ensures that any recommendations or decisions made by the board are informed by the latest medical and psychological knowledge and research. However, despite the crucial nature of section 672.39, some have criticized its limitation to only one member with a psychiatry qualification, and one other member with training and experience in the field of mental health. Some argue that this limitation does not provide enough representation of the varied perspectives and qualifications required to make accurate assessments on complicated mental health cases. The need for diverse expertise in a group of people all responsible for the same function could be seen to be limited without the reassurance of individual foundational training in that specific area required. In conclusion, section 672.39 of the Criminal Code of Canada is an essential piece of legislation that ensures that each review board is composed of qualified professionals with the necessary expertise and knowledge to make informed decisions regarding an individual's mental health and subsequent activities. It recognizes the importance of approaching mental health in a holistic manner, and the expertise of professionals in both medicine and psychology to ensure a balanced approach. While further extensions to this requirement are worth exploring, this legislation is nonetheless an important step towards ensuring an equitable approach to treating individuals with mental illness in Canada's criminal justice system.
STRATEGY
When it comes to implementing Section 672.39 of the Criminal Code of Canada, there are several strategic considerations that need to be taken into account. This section outlines the requirements for members of a Review Board, which is a body responsible for determining the disposition of a person who has been found not criminally responsible or unfit to stand trial due to a mental disorder. Here are some key strategic considerations: 1. Finding qualified members: One of the most important considerations is finding qualified members who meet the criteria set out in the section. This can be challenging, especially in smaller communities where there may be a limited pool of mental health professionals. It's important to have a proactive approach to recruiting members, seeking out candidates who have the appropriate qualifications and experience. 2. Ensuring diversity: It's important to ensure that the Review Board is diverse, with members who bring a range of perspectives and experiences to the table. This can help to ensure that decisions are made with a broader understanding of mental health issues and the implications of various dispositions. Strategies for promoting diversity include outreach to marginalized communities and encouraging applications from a wide range of backgrounds. 3. Maintaining impartiality: The Review Board must be impartial and unbiased in their decision-making. This can be a challenge, especially in cases where there may be strong emotions or media attention. Strategies for maintaining impartiality include ensuring that members are well-trained in conflict resolution and dispute resolution techniques, and providing ongoing support and guidance. 4. Building public trust: The decisions made by the Review Board can have significant implications for both the individual and the community at large. It's important to build public trust in the process and the decisions that are made. Strategies for building trust include transparency in decision-making, outreach to community groups, and engaging with the media to ensure accurate reporting. Some strategies that could be employed to address these considerations include: 1. Developing a comprehensive recruitment strategy: This might include outreach to professional associations, advertising in relevant publications, and actively seeking out candidates from underrepresented communities. 2. Providing ongoing training and support: The Review Board should receive regular training on topics such as conflict resolution, ethical decision-making, and the legal framework governing their work. They should also have access to support and guidance from mental health professionals and legal experts. 3. Engaging with community groups: The Review Board should seek out opportunities to engage with mental health advocacy groups, victim support groups, and other community organizations. This can help to build trust and ensure that the Board is aware of the concerns and perspectives of various stakeholder groups. 4. Communicating clearly: The Review Board should be transparent in their decision-making and communicate clearly with the media and the public. This can help to ensure that the public understands the rationale for decisions and has confidence in the process. Overall, implementing Section 672.39 of the Criminal Code of Canada requires a strategic and proactive approach, with an emphasis on finding qualified and diverse membership, maintaining impartiality, building public trust, and communicating clearly. By employing these strategies, Review Boards can ensure that they are making informed, ethical decisions that promote mental health and public safety.