August 16, 2006
TO:
Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal
P.O. Box 24005
Saskatoon, SK
S7K 8B4
CC:
(1) Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission
Chief Commissioner
8th Floor, Sturdy Stone Bldg
122 – 3rd Avenue North
Saskatoon, SK S7K 2H6
(2) Donna Malcolm
Room 122 Ellis Hall
Royal University Hospital
103 Hospital Dr
Saskatoon, SK S7N 0W8
FROM:
Sandra Finley
656 Saskatchewan Crescent East
Saskatoon, SK S7N 0L1
306 373 8078
sabest1_AT_sasktel.net Reference: Your file # 85-168
Dear Members of the Tribunal,
Further in my appeal of the decision by the Human Rights Commission to dismiss my case:
As I understand, the SHRC ascertained, under item 27.1 of The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, page 15, (2) (f) “There is no reasonable likelihood that an investigation will reveal evidence of a contravention of this Act “. The dismissal is stated in their letter of July 12th.
You received full documentation of the case in my letter to you, June 6th, following verbal dismissal by the SHRC. For the information of the parties: I used the same documentation as submitted to the College of Physicians and Surgeons. It includes the input from Donna Malcolm and my response.
You will have on file my letter of August 10th, which enclosed a copy of the July 12th letter of dismissal from the SHRC, because I did not receive confirmation from them that they had forwarded their letter to you.
I appeal to you under The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, page 14. There it says
- S-24.1
Duties of commission
25 The commission shall:
(a) forward the principle that every person is free and equal in dignity and rights without regard to . . . disability
(g) forward the principle that cultural diversity is a basic human right and fundamental value.
The doctor, Donna Malcolm, deemed that I was disabled (manic, incapable of making decisions that were in my best interests). She saw only one culture, the drug culture, and imposed that on me. I was forcibly confined from Saturday until Friday – 7 days. Drugs were put into my body forcibly and without my consent. One of the drugs caused complete memory loss of things I was doing and saying, and of things that were being done to me. It was an unjustified violation of my person and my civil rights.
“Disability” is defined by the Act, page 3, item 2 (1), (d.1) as
“ any degree of physical disability, infirmity, …”
It includes:
(ii) (C) “a mental disorder”.
(i.1) defines “mental disorder” as “a disorder of thought, perception, feelings, or behaviour that impairs a person’s:
(i) judgment;
(ii) capacity to recognize reality;
(iii) ability to associate with others;
(iv) ability to meet the ordinary demands of life.
In order to legally drug and lock me up, Donna Malcolm has to show that those 4 conditions were present.
The documentation I submitted makes it clear that I exhibited the 4 traits and was not therefore disabled by a mental disorder.
I do not see anywhere in the Act where it states that medical personnel have an exemption whereby the Act does not apply to them. Hence I challenge the decision of the SHRC to dismiss my case on the basis – “… it is not within the jurisdiction of the Code to interfere with diagnostic and treatment decisions made by medical personnel.”
I understand that the possibility exists that the evolution of common law might have provided this interpretation to the Code. But even then there will be limits.
In my communication of June 6th I explained the difficulty in finding a lawyer who would touch a case that involves questioning of the medical profession, given the costs that would be incurred and the time (years) it would take.
I would familiarize myself with the common law prior to a hearing by the Human Rights Tribunal, in order to know whether it is actually outside the jurisdiction of the Code to deal with matters where abuse by medical personnel is the question.
Thank-you for your consideration.
Yours truly,
Sandra Finley