https://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_%2814%3AIII%29Mental Health Theory and Approach (14:III) - Revision history2026-05-15T04:28:53ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.43.3https://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_(14:III)&diff=61645&oldid=prevLSLAP at 02:55, 1 October 20252025-10-01T02:55:00Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 02:55, 1 October 2025</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l4">Line 4:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 4:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact a person’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. However, most mental health legislation is over-inclusive and impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common law tests for capacity can be found in [[Introduction to Adult Guardianship and Substitute Decision-Making (15:I)|Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship]]. </div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact a person’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. However, most mental health legislation is over-inclusive and impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common law tests for capacity can be found in [[Introduction to Adult Guardianship and Substitute Decision-Making (15:I)|Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship]]. </div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the Canadian ''Charter'' of Rights and Freedoms [''Charter''] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the “deemed consent provisions” of the MHA'', and the “substitute decision making” provisions of the ''HCCFA'' and ''Representation Agreement Act'' [''RAA''] , have been challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?resultIndex=1 <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''</del>MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">]</del>). The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''</del>Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">]</del>). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC), which heard the appeal on January 13, 2022. On June 23, 2022. The SCC held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see ''[https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities]'', 2022 SCC 27). However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the Canadian ''Charter'' of Rights and Freedoms [''Charter''] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the “deemed consent provisions” of the MHA'', and the “substitute decision making” provisions of the ''HCCFA'' and ''Representation Agreement Act'' [''RAA''] , have been challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''</ins>[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?resultIndex=1 MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">]</ins>'', 2018 BCSC 1753). The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''</ins>[https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">]</ins>'', 2020 BCCA 241). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC), which heard the appeal on January 13, 2022. On June 23, 2022. The SCC held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see ''[https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities]'', 2022 SCC 27). However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>All ''Charter'' challenges have been directed towards either the ''MHA'', the ''HCCFA'', or the ''Criminal Code''. The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) may be able to assist with serious ''Charter'' challenges, including test litigation.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>All ''Charter'' challenges have been directed towards either the ''MHA'', the ''HCCFA'', or the ''Criminal Code''. The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) may be able to assist with serious ''Charter'' challenges, including test litigation.</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual Navbox|type=chapters8-14}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual Navbox|type=chapters8-14}}</div></td></tr>
</table>LSLAPhttps://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_(14:III)&diff=61086&oldid=prevLSLAP at 07:22, 22 September 20252025-09-22T07:22:41Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 07:22, 22 September 2025</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l4">Line 4:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 4:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact a person’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. However, most mental health legislation is over-inclusive and impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common law tests for capacity can be found in [[Introduction to Adult Guardianship and Substitute Decision-Making (15:I)|Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship]]. </div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact a person’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. However, most mental health legislation is over-inclusive and impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common law tests for capacity can be found in [[Introduction to Adult Guardianship and Substitute Decision-Making (15:I)|Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship]]. </div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the Canadian ''Charter'' of Rights and Freedoms [''Charter''] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the “deemed consent provisions” of the MHA'', and the “substitute decision making” provisions of the ''HCCFA'' and ''Representation Agreement Act'' [''RAA''] , have been challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?resultIndex=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html ''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC), which heard the appeal on January 13, 2022. On June 23, 2022. The SCC held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''</del>British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27). However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the Canadian ''Charter'' of Rights and Freedoms [''Charter''] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the “deemed consent provisions” of the MHA'', and the “substitute decision making” provisions of the ''HCCFA'' and ''Representation Agreement Act'' [''RAA''] , have been challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?resultIndex=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html ''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC), which heard the appeal on January 13, 2022. On June 23, 2022. The SCC held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''[</ins>https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">]</ins>'', 2022 SCC 27). However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>All ''Charter'' challenges have been directed towards either the ''MHA'', the ''HCCFA'', or the ''Criminal Code''. The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) may be able to assist with serious ''Charter'' challenges, including test litigation.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>All ''Charter'' challenges have been directed towards either the ''MHA'', the ''HCCFA'', or the ''Criminal Code''. The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) may be able to assist with serious ''Charter'' challenges, including test litigation.</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual Navbox|type=chapters8-14}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual Navbox|type=chapters8-14}}</div></td></tr>
</table>LSLAPhttps://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_(14:III)&diff=60619&oldid=prevLSLAP at 17:56, 19 August 20252025-08-19T17:56:47Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 17:56, 19 August 2025</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l1">Line 1:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 1:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{REVIEWED LSLAP | date= August <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">14</del>, <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">2024</del>}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{REVIEWED LSLAP | date= August <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">20</ins>, <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">2025</ins>}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
</table>LSLAPhttps://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_(14:III)&diff=60598&oldid=prevLSLAP at 00:55, 19 August 20252025-08-19T00:55:49Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 00:55, 19 August 2025</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l4">Line 4:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 4:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact a person’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. However, most mental health legislation is over-inclusive and impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common law tests for capacity can be found in [[Introduction to Adult Guardianship and Substitute Decision-Making (15:I)|Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship]]. </div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact a person’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. However, most mental health legislation is over-inclusive and impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common law tests for capacity can be found in [[Introduction to Adult Guardianship and Substitute Decision-Making (15:I)|Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship]]. </div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the Canadian <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘Charter’’ </del>of Rights and Freedoms [<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘Charter’’</del>] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the “deemed consent provisions” of the <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘MHA’’</del>, and the “substitute decision making” provisions of the <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘HCCFA’’ </del>and <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘Representation </del>Agreement <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Act’’ </del>[<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘RAA’’</del>] , have been challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?resultIndex=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html ''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC), which heard the appeal on January 13, 2022. On June 23, 2022. The SCC held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker ''British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27). However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the Canadian <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''Charter'' </ins>of Rights and Freedoms [<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''Charter''</ins>] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the “deemed consent provisions” of the <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">MHA''</ins>, and the “substitute decision making” provisions of the <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''HCCFA'' </ins>and <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''Representation </ins>Agreement <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Act'' </ins>[<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''RAA''</ins>] , have been challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?resultIndex=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html ''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC), which heard the appeal on January 13, 2022. On June 23, 2022. The SCC held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker ''British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27). However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>All <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘Charter’’ </del>challenges have been directed towards either the <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘MHA’’</del>, the <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘HCCFA’’</del>, or the <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘Criminal Code’’</del>. The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) may be able to assist with serious <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘Charter’’ </del>challenges, including test litigation.</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>All <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''Charter'' </ins>challenges have been directed towards either the <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''MHA''</ins>, the <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''HCCFA''</ins>, or the <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''Criminal Code''</ins>. The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) may be able to assist with serious <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''Charter'' </ins>challenges, including test litigation.</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual Navbox|type=chapters8-14}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual Navbox|type=chapters8-14}}</div></td></tr>
</table>LSLAPhttps://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_(14:III)&diff=60597&oldid=prevLSLAP at 00:54, 19 August 20252025-08-19T00:54:42Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 00:54, 19 August 2025</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l2">Line 2:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 2:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">an individual’s </del>ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Most </del>mental health legislation<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">, however, </del>is over-inclusive<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">, </del>and <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">therefore </del>impairs the rights <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"> </del>of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">-</del>law tests for capacity can be found in [<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">https://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Introduction_to_Adult_Guardianship_and_Substitute_Decision</del>-<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Making_</del>(15:I) <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">'''</del>Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">'''</del>].</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">a person’s </ins>ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">However, most </ins>mental health legislation is over-inclusive and impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common law tests for capacity can be found in [<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">[Introduction to Adult Guardianship and Substitute Decision</ins>-<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Making </ins>(15:I)<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">|</ins>Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">]</ins>]. </div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''</del>Canadian <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Charter </del>of Rights and Freedoms<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">'' </del>[<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''Charter''</del>] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''MHA'' "deemed </del>consent provisions<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">" and </del>the <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''HCCFA'' </del>and <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">''Representation </del>Agreement <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Act'' "substitute decision making" provisions</del>, <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">was </del>challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">autocompleteStr=maclaren%20v%20british&autocompletePos</del>=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753])<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">. This litigation isn’t expected to be resolved for quite some time, however</del>. The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"> </del>This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://canlii.<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">ca</del>/<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">t</del>/<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">j9c0x </del>''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;"> </del>The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">and the Supreme Court of Canada </del>heard the appeal January 13, 2022. <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision on </del>June 23, 2022. The SCC <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">has </del>held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">[</del>https://scc-csc.<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">lexum.com</del>/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">. </del>''British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27)<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">]</del>. However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">.</del></div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the Canadian <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘Charter’’ </ins>of Rights and Freedoms [<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘Charter’’</ins>] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">“deemed </ins>consent <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">provisions” of the ‘‘MHA’’, and the “substitute decision making” </ins>provisions <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">of </ins>the <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘HCCFA’’ </ins>and <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">‘‘Representation </ins>Agreement <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">Act’’ [‘‘RAA’’] </ins>, <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">have been </ins>challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">resultIndex</ins>=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">www.</ins>canlii.<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020</ins>/<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">2020bcca241</ins>/<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">2020bcca241.html </ins>''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">(SCC)</ins>, <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">which </ins>heard the appeal <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">on </ins>January 13, 2022. <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">On </ins>June 23, 2022. The SCC held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see https://<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">decisions.</ins>scc-csc.<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">ca</ins>/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker ''British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27). However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div> </div></td><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-added"></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">All ''Charter'' challenges have been directed towards either the ''MHA'', the ''HCCFA'', or the ''Criminal Code''. The Community Legal Assistance Society may be able to assist with serious ''Charter'' challenges, including test litigation</del>.</div></td><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-added"></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-side-deleted"></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div><ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">All ‘‘Charter’’ challenges have been directed towards either the ‘‘MHA’’, the ‘‘HCCFA’’, or the ‘‘Criminal Code’’. The Community Legal Assistance Society (CLAS) may be able to assist with serious ‘‘Charter’’ challenges, including test litigation.</ins></div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual Navbox|type=chapters8-14}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual Navbox|type=chapters8-14}}</div></td></tr>
</table>LSLAPhttps://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_(14:III)&diff=58982&oldid=prevLSLAP at 21:04, 21 August 20242024-08-21T21:04:54Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 21:04, 21 August 2024</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l1">Line 1:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 1:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{REVIEWED LSLAP | date= August <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">10</del>, <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">2023</del>}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{REVIEWED LSLAP | date= August <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">14</ins>, <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">2024</ins>}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
</table>LSLAPhttps://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_(14:III)&diff=56167&oldid=prevLSLAP at 01:39, 11 August 20232023-08-11T01:39:15Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 01:39, 11 August 2023</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l1">Line 1:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 1:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{REVIEWED LSLAP | date= <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">July 22</del>, <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">2022</del>}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{REVIEWED LSLAP | date= <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">August 10</ins>, <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">2023</ins>}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact an individual’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. Most mental health legislation, however, is over-inclusive, and therefore impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common-law tests for capacity can be found in [https://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Introduction_to_Adult_Guardianship_and_Substitute_Decision-Making_(15:I) Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship].</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact an individual’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. Most mental health legislation, however, is over-inclusive, and therefore impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common-law tests for capacity can be found in [https://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Introduction_to_Adult_Guardianship_and_Substitute_Decision-Making_(15:I) <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">'''</ins>Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">'''</ins>].</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' [''Charter''] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the ''MHA'' "deemed consent provisions" and the ''HCCFA'' and ''Representation Agreement Act'' "substitute decision making" provisions, was challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?autocompleteStr=maclaren%20v%20british&autocompletePos=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). This litigation isn’t expected to be resolved for quite some time, however. The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">www.</del>canlii.<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">org/en/bc</del>/<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">bcca</del>/<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html?autocompleteStr=council%20of%20canadians%20with%20disabilities&autocompletePos=2 </del>''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal January 13, 2022. The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision on June 23, 2022. The SCC has held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see [https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker. ''British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27)]. However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' [''Charter''] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the ''MHA'' "deemed consent provisions" and the ''HCCFA'' and ''Representation Agreement Act'' "substitute decision making" provisions, was challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?autocompleteStr=maclaren%20v%20british&autocompletePos=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). This litigation isn’t expected to be resolved for quite some time, however. The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://canlii.<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">ca</ins>/<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">t</ins>/<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">j9c0x </ins>''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal January 13, 2022. The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision on June 23, 2022. The SCC has held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see [https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker. ''British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27)]. However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>All ''Charter'' challenges have been directed towards either the ''MHA'', the ''HCCFA'', or the ''Criminal Code''. The Community Legal Assistance Society may be able to assist with serious ''Charter'' challenges, including test litigation.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>All ''Charter'' challenges have been directed towards either the ''MHA'', the ''HCCFA'', or the ''Criminal Code''. The Community Legal Assistance Society may be able to assist with serious ''Charter'' challenges, including test litigation.</div></td></tr>
</table>LSLAPhttps://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_(14:III)&diff=54023&oldid=prevClicklaw Editor at 21:18, 10 October 20222022-10-10T21:18:26Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 21:18, 10 October 2022</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l2">Line 2:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 2:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact an individual’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. Most mental health legislation, however, is over-inclusive, and therefore impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common-law tests for capacity can be found in [<del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">http</del>://Introduction_to_Adult_Guardianship_and_Substitute_Decision-Making_(15:I) Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship].</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact an individual’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. Most mental health legislation, however, is over-inclusive, and therefore impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common-law tests for capacity can be found in [<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">https</ins>://<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=</ins>Introduction_to_Adult_Guardianship_and_Substitute_Decision-Making_(15:I) Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship].</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' [''Charter''] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the ''MHA'' "deemed consent provisions" and the ''HCCFA'' and ''Representation Agreement Act'' "substitute decision making" provisions, was challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?autocompleteStr=maclaren%20v%20british&autocompletePos=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). This litigation isn’t expected to be resolved for quite some time, however. The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html?autocompleteStr=council%20of%20canadians%20with%20disabilities&autocompletePos=2 ''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal January 13, 2022. The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision on June 23, 2022. The SCC has held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see [https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker. ''British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27)]. However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' [''Charter''] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the ''MHA'' "deemed consent provisions" and the ''HCCFA'' and ''Representation Agreement Act'' "substitute decision making" provisions, was challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?autocompleteStr=maclaren%20v%20british&autocompletePos=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). This litigation isn’t expected to be resolved for quite some time, however. The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html?autocompleteStr=council%20of%20canadians%20with%20disabilities&autocompletePos=2 ''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal January 13, 2022. The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision on June 23, 2022. The SCC has held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see [https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker. ''British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27)]. However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td></tr>
</table>Clicklaw Editorhttps://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_(14:III)&diff=54022&oldid=prevClicklaw Editor at 21:17, 10 October 20222022-10-10T21:17:13Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 21:17, 10 October 2022</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l2">Line 2:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 2:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact an individual’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. Most mental health legislation, however, is over-inclusive, and therefore impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common-law tests for capacity can be found in Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship.</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Admission to a mental health facility can significantly impact an individual’s ability to exercise their rights. Textbooks have advocated for a functional approach to mental health law, encouraging courts to consider solely how the disability may relate to the specific issue brought before them. Incapacity in one area does not necessarily mean incapacity in all areas. Most mental health legislation, however, is over-inclusive, and therefore impairs the rights of mentally ill persons in areas where they might have the mental capacity to act for themselves. The common-law tests for capacity can be found in <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">[http://Introduction_to_Adult_Guardianship_and_Substitute_Decision-Making_(15:I) </ins>Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship<ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">]</ins>.</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' [''Charter''] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the ''MHA'' "deemed consent provisions" and the ''HCCFA'' and ''Representation Agreement Act'' "substitute decision making" provisions, was challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?autocompleteStr=maclaren%20v%20british&autocompletePos=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). This litigation isn’t expected to be resolved for quite some time, however. The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html?autocompleteStr=council%20of%20canadians%20with%20disabilities&autocompletePos=2 ''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal January 13, 2022. The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision on June 23, 2022. The SCC has held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see [https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker. ''British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27)]. However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>Section 15(1) of the ''Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms'' [''Charter''] has made it easier to preserve the rights of those affected by mental health law. While most discriminatory legislation in BC remains unchallenged, the ''MHA'' "deemed consent provisions" and the ''HCCFA'' and ''Representation Agreement Act'' "substitute decision making" provisions, was challenged as unconstitutional at the BC Supreme Court (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcsc/doc/2018/2018bcsc1753/2018bcsc1753.html?autocompleteStr=maclaren%20v%20british&autocompletePos=1 ''MacLaren v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2018 BCSC 1753]). This litigation isn’t expected to be resolved for quite some time, however. The Attorney General of BC raised the issue of public interest standing in the above case which resulted in the case being dismissed. This decision was appealed to the BC Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed on the issue of public interest standing in favour of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities (see [https://www.canlii.org/en/bc/bcca/doc/2020/2020bcca241/2020bcca241.html?autocompleteStr=council%20of%20canadians%20with%20disabilities&autocompletePos=2 ''Council of Canadians with Disabilities v British Columbia (Attorney General)'', 2020 BCCA 241]). The Attorney General of BC applied for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, and the Supreme Court of Canada heard the appeal January 13, 2022. The Supreme Court of Canada released its decision on June 23, 2022. The SCC has held that the Council of Canadians with Disabilities has the standing to challenge the constitutionality of the legislation (see [https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/19424/index.do#:~:text=The%20claim%20asserts%20that%20the,of%20a%20substitute%20decision%E2%80%91maker. ''British Columbia (Attorney General) v Council of Canadians with Disabilities'', 2022 SCC 27)]. However, this litigation is still ongoing and will take time to resolve.</div></td></tr>
</table>Clicklaw Editorhttps://wiki.clicklaw.bc.ca/index.php?title=Mental_Health_Theory_and_Approach_(14:III)&diff=53989&oldid=prevClicklaw Editor at 20:19, 10 October 20222022-10-10T20:19:31Z<p></p>
<table style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122;" data-mw="interface">
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<col class="diff-marker" />
<col class="diff-content" />
<tr class="diff-title" lang="en">
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan="2" style="background-color: #fff; color: #202122; text-align: center;">Revision as of 20:19, 10 October 2022</td>
</tr><tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno" id="mw-diff-left-l1">Line 1:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 1:</td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="−"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #ffe49c; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{REVIEWED LSLAP | date= <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">August 18</del>, <del style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">2021</del>}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker" data-marker="+"></td><td style="color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #a3d3ff; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{REVIEWED LSLAP | date= <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">July 22</ins>, <ins style="font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">2022</ins>}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><div>{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}}</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td><td class="diff-marker"></td><td style="background-color: #f8f9fa; color: #202122; font-size: 88%; border-style: solid; border-width: 1px 1px 1px 4px; border-radius: 0.33em; border-color: #eaecf0; vertical-align: top; white-space: pre-wrap;"><br></td></tr>
</table>Clicklaw Editor