On 2004-12-11 05:42:00, BigJoshuaP wrote:
"Jess, I have looked at the legal issues around that...if their parents signed them in, thats the law...they should go and sue their parents.. Or sue the judge who court ordered them there for treatment...or perhaps sue themselves for signing themselves in?... But do your homework, because your crack lawyer versus the aarc legal team will need it. They have covered their bases... thats why there is a legal team in the first place..
On 2004-10-31 11:05:00, velvet2000 wrote:
"I hate to break it to you, but if Hamilton was chasing ambulances he would have cought one by now. Not exactly a shortage on people who think AARC should and can be sued.
[ This Message was edited by: BigJoshuaP on 2004-12-11 05:48 ]"
Now that's an interesting discussion -- let's take it point by point:
"if their parents signed them in, thats the law..."
true enough, Of course, the parents have the right to do anything they like to ensure the child's best interests. BUT, if by signing them in to something that is psychologically and emotionally abusive, it could conceivably be said that they have placed the children in "need of protective services" And if the child, on coming out of the program can be demonstrated to be suffering from PTSD or any other psychological disorder then certainly AARC could be held responsible. Of course, the parents might have a defense if they are able to say "well we had no idea," of the harm that would befall their child. It would probably be easy for them in such circumstances
You say "Or sue the judge who court ordered them there for treatment."
Now on this you are confused. A few years ago a couple of judges did try to do that, but the Crown appealed (note- the government, not the parent) The Alberta Court of Appeal has said that Judges do not have the jurisdiction to order what facility a person should go to, even if they are in the custody of Child Welfare or the Youth Justice system. A court can recommend, but cannot compel.
You said:
"or perhaps sue themselves for signing themselves in"
Well although what you say is an absurd proposition, it may not be so bad to suggest that if the child is being asked to sign a consent to treatment and consents without being fully cognisant of all the ramifications, or is being told he must, he may still have an action against the facility if he can demonstrate that his consent was obtained by fraud or duress. There's more than one way to skin a cat/
You say
"But do your homework, because your crack lawyer versus the aarc legal team will need it. They have covered their bases... thats why there is a legal team in the first place.."
Well, even the best laid legal schemes can go askew.
And we now have AARC with full government backing because they have been "accredited". But really that does not mean they cannot be sued.... Think of all the residential schools and the abuse that they heaped upon natives. The orphanages? AARC might think that accreditation brings in more clients. It certainly brings in more government $$$$$$$$$'s. But they will have to be careful with that because it also enables the Children's Advocate to investigate .... although he may be a bit of a toothless dragon he should not, however be underestimated.
One last thing, if the child is in care of Children's services and finds himself in AARC and not liking it he can ask for an administrative review, failing which he can go to the Child Welfare Appeal Panel. And if that doesn't work he may be able to take action for breach of his Charter Rights.
[ This Message was edited by: Hamiltonf on 2004-12-11 15:21 ][ This Message was edited by: Hamiltonf on 2004-12-11 15:29 ][ This Message was edited by: Hamiltonf on 2004-12-11 15:31 ][ This Message was edited by: Hamiltonf on 2004-12-11 15:33 ]