2006-06-06 Complaint to Human Rights Tribunal, Donna Malcolm, forced psychotropic drugs, amnesia, locked up.

June 6, 2006 

TO:    Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal

P.O. Box 24005

Saskatoon, SK

S7K 8B4

FROM:

Sandra Finley

656 Saskatchewan Crescent East

Saskatoon, SK S7N 0L1

306  373  8078

sabest1_AT _sasktel.net

 Dear Members of the Tribunal, 

I wish to appeal a decision by the Human Rights Commission NOT to hear my case.

 Documentation of the case, mostly in the form of my submissions to the College of Physicians and Surgeons and the response of the doctor involved, is enclosed. 

I appeal to you under The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, page 14.  There it says

1. 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 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.

 Thank-you for your consideration. 

Yours truly,

 Sandra Finley

BRIEF HISTORY OF ACTIONS TO DATE

1. I hired a lawyer, Julian Bodnar.  He talked with Mr. Van Olst, lawyer for the Saskatoon Health District who, as I am told, looked at my Hospital file and said that the doctor was acting within the regulations arising out of the Mental Health Services Act.  The cost to find this out was more than $400.  Julian suggested I file a complaint with the College of Physicians and Surgeons.
2. Different people told me that it is almost impossible to get a human rights complaint such as this addressed, and it will take years.  It is best to get a lawyer with experience.  I called Terry Zakreski; he knew of one lawyer that might have a bit of experience, Lucille Lamb.  I happen to know Lucille and talked with her.  She was sympathetic but felt that she doesn’t have a lot of experience and reinforced the view that it would take years in the justice system. 
3. I telephoned the Human Rights Commission (Saskatoon, 933-5952) on two different occasions and asked to set up an appointment.  I was effectively interviewed by the person who answered the phone.  I was asked the question whether this was on-going abuse.  The answer is “no”.  On that basis I was told that the HRC could not take my case.   End of discussion.   On both occasions I had the impression, rightly or wrongly, that the HRC has more work than it can manage and that there was a couple of minutes in which to hear the complaint:  the first screen to pass through is whether the complaint is systemic.  I am middle-class, white and not on welfare.  Therefore there has not been a serious violation of human rights.  I can understand that the Commission’s efforts are best applied to cases that address systemic issues.  (My case is actually representative of what is happening to other people, but that is for another day!)
4. On April 7, 2006 I filed a Complaint with the College of Physicians and Surgeons, copy attached.  I delivered a copy of the Complaint to the lawyer for the Health District, Mr. Van Olst. 
5. On April 18 the College wrote to say that a review of my concerns is underway.    (Question 8 on the “Complaint Reporting Form” reads:  “What is your expectation from the review of this complaint?”)      The College also wrote, regarding:   a.      (My expectation) The College of Physicians and Surgeons will actively seek legislative changes to the Mental Health Act.    (Response) “It is not our mandate to lobby the government for changes.  You could speak with your MLA …”      b.      (My expectation) There will be an investigation into the operation of the Psych Ward at RUH.    (Response) “The College … also does not have jurisdiction over non-physician medical staff nor does it have any control over how the Psychiatric Unit is operated.  You need to raise those concerns with the Saskatoon Health Region, and that can be done through …” 
6. On May 19^th I received a letter from the College with the response from the doctor to my complaint against her.  (Attached)
7. On June 1^st I submitted my response to the College.  It includes the documentation for  Unresolved Concerns, Ones for which Objectivity Exists. 
8. The situation is that my submission will be discussed at the “next meeting” at the end of June.   As I understand, a written response will then be prepared.  There is summer recess.   And the written response then has to be reviewed by the “next” meeting which won’t be until September  –  no problem.  
9. The Complaint Reporting Form from the College of Physicians and Surgeons underscores that The purpose of the Complaints Resolution Process is educational in order to reduce the risk of occurrence.”   It is important that the education be done.   But there has been a very serious abuse of human rights.  I am not the only one to be a recipient of such actions. 
10. And so I am approaching you, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal.    Will you hear my case?  I think that is the question to be asked at this point.