Subscribe to our Newsletter

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Laurie in Debate

Bill 31: Mental Health Amendment Act, 2007

Bill 31: Mental Health Amendment Act, 2007 Third Reading debate in the 26th Legislature of Alberta, 3rd Session by Ms. Laurie Blakeman, MLA Edmonton-Centre

Alberta Hansard – December 04, 2007

Ms Blakeman: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I don’t have the Blues, so I can’t get the exact wording of what the member started out by saying, but as I listened, my reaction was: no, it doesn’t. This is a difficult bill, certainly for me and for a number of my colleagues in this House. It may well be that no one else in here has a struggle with it.

I had hoped that by the end of the process I would see enough change that I would be able to support the bill, but I’m not. When I listen to the sponsoring member do his recap, again what comes into my brain is: no, we are not actually offering additional supports or help to people with mental illness with this bill. What we are offering is a process by which they can be apprehended, assessed, incarcerated, which some may view as assistance or help, but I would argue many would not, and put under a medication order in which they must take their medication.

This bill is not getting us any more community assistance for people with mental illness. It is not getting us any more emergency treatment beds. It’s not getting us any more community treatment beds. It’s not getting us any more transitional housing for people coming out of treatment. It’s not giving us any specialized housing for people with mental illness. It’s not giving us any more day programming or respite care. It’s not giving families any more direct assistance in trying to help a loved one that is struggling with a mental illness in Alberta.

This is a process tool. Community treatment orders are a process tool that is available, essentially, to take someone off the streets and either get them to agree to a certain treatment program or make them take a certain treatment program. This bill goes against my belief in personal autonomy. It goes against an increasing movement towards the right to refuse medical treatment. It takes away choice and, I would argue, in some cases dignity and autonomy for individuals who have a mental illness.

I think that the committee worked very hard, and in no way do I wish to diminish their genuine concern for people, for their own constituents, for other people’s constituents. I think everyone went in there with a pure heart and really, really tried to do the best they could. But for most people struggling with mental health issues, this bill is not going to improve their lives in any meaningful way, I would argue. It’s not going to give them a place to stay or food to eat or a better way of managing their money or access to a shower or other ways to improve their personal hygiene. None of that is in this bill.

Of all of the studies that were looked at, that the committee looked at, that I read the Hansard about, none of them could prove conclusively that community treatment orders were it, that they were the panacea, that they would solve the problem. The best results we could find was when community treatment orders were absolutely partnered with, coupled with, Velcroed to community-based treatment, sometimes called assertive community treatment. That is not happening with this bill. This is not the community treatment order and assertive community supports bill. That’s not what this bill is. This is an amendment to the mental health bill that puts in place a process so families or individuals can apply for a community treatment order, which is an apprehension order in most cases. The other thing I want to acknowledge is that the committee did work hard to try and recognize that there is a lack of mental health professionals outside of the metropolitan areas. The committee really tried hard to find ways to assist people, especially for psychiatric assessment, that were outside of the metropolitan areas. I think it could be said that there were misunderstandings or maybe mistakes were made in the amendments that were brought forward from the committee that redefined the people able to make assess-ments as health professionals. That’s now been addressed in the amendments that were brought forward by the government, and I appreciate that.

We agreed in the Official Opposition caucus that this would be a free vote for our caucus, and we have maintained that. This is a free vote. I’ll put that on the record. I will not be supporting this bill. I will be supporting the wishes of my constituents on this. I received probably 10 to 1 visits, phone calls, letters, documents from constituents saying, “Please don’t support this bill,” for the number that I did receive saying, “ Support it.” So I will be supporting my constituents on this bill.

I really think what we really need and what the families need that are trying so desperately to look after their family members and their friends and co-workers and colleagues and everybody that gets concerned with this issue is a commitment to supplying and underwriting those community supports that allow people to stay in their homes, to be connected to communities, to have meaning in their life, to be able to volunteer or work or be engaged with their community, to have a safe place to live, to have some kind of economic security, to get assistance, if they need it, with their finances but to have essential control and dignity and meaning in their life. I don’t think this bill gives us that.

I know that there are a number of other people that wish to get on the record with this bill, and it’s getting very late. Maybe we’ll see in a budget that the government brings forward that there is a real commitment to enhancing mental health services in the province.

The minister has said that he allocated some money to Canadian Mental Health to study the effects of this bill, if I heard him correctly.

I think we have failed this community. We continue to fail this community. This community is us. It’s acknowledged that 1 in 5 will deal with a mental health issue in their life. If you’re actually working closer with the mental health professionals, they will tell you that it’s closer to 1 in 3 Canadians who will deal with a mental health issue at some point in their life. So this issue is us. How we look after ourselves, how we look after our colleagues, our loved ones is very important, and I don’t think we have achieved a level of service that is really acceptable. I don’t think any one of us in this House would want to find themselves in that situation. I think that’s not good enough.

I continue to press for leadership. I continue to press for support, real leadership and funding support, for people that are dealing with a mental illness and support services for those people that work in the sector and for their families and friends.

Thank you very much.