5,109
edits
Difference between revisions of "Mental Health Act: Consent to Medical Treatment (14:VI)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Mental Health Act: Consent to Medical Treatment (14:VI) (view source)
Revision as of 00:03, 24 November 2019
, 00:03, 24 November 2019no edit summary
(Changed second to last paragraph) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}} | {{LSLAP Manual TOC|expanded = mentalhealth}} | ||
The following subsections apply only to patients voluntarily admitted to a mental health facility or voluntarily receiving treatment from a health care/psychiatric service provider. Patients admitted involuntarily lose certain rights (see [[Mental Health Act: Involuntarily Admitted Patients (14:VII) | Section VII]]). | The following subsections apply '''only''' to patients voluntarily admitted to a mental health facility or voluntarily receiving treatment from a health care/psychiatric service provider. Patients admitted involuntarily lose certain rights (see [[Mental Health Act: Involuntarily Admitted Patients (14:VII) | Section VII]]). | ||
== A. Adult’s Right to Consent == | == A. Adult’s Right to Consent == | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
A care provider may provide care to an adult without the adult’s consent if the adult is incapable of giving or refusing consent and a personal guardian or representative gives consent (HCCFA, s 11). | A care provider may provide care to an adult without the adult’s consent if the adult is incapable of giving or refusing consent and a personal guardian or representative gives consent (HCCFA, s 11). | ||
If a personal guardian or representative refuses consent, the health care may be provided despite the refusal in an emergency if the person refusing consent | If a personal guardian or representative refuses consent, the health care may be provided despite the refusal in an emergency if the person refusing consent did not comply with their duties under the HCCFA or any other act (HCCFA, s 12.2). | ||
A temporary substitute decision maker (TSDM) can be chosen by the care provider in accordance with HCCFA, s 16. See HCCFA, ss 16-19 for the authority and duties of a TSDM. There is a statutory list of those assigned to be a TSDM, beginning with a spouse, and moving down. More details can be found in Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship. | A temporary substitute decision maker (TSDM) can be chosen by the care provider in accordance with HCCFA, s 16. See HCCFA, ss 16-19 for the authority and duties of a TSDM. There is a statutory list of those assigned to be a TSDM, beginning with a spouse, and moving down. More details can be found in Chapter 15: Adult Guardianship. | ||
| Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
== E. Consent to Treatment Forms == | == E. Consent to Treatment Forms == | ||
When admitted to a mental health facility, voluntary patients (or their committees, parents, | When admitted to a mental health facility, voluntary patients (or their committees, parents, guardians or representatives) may be asked to sign a “consent to treatment” form, which purports to “authorize the following treatment(s)”. There is no basis in law for requiring this form be signed as a prerequisite of a voluntary admission, but the law does not prohibit such a requirement. | ||
Under the HCCFA, consent will be considered to be “informed” only where the patient has been informed of the nature of the risks and benefits of the specific treatment, and of alternative treatments, and has agreed to be subject to the treatment. Signing the form may not be sufficient to indicate informed consent on its own. | |||
=== 1. Refusal to Sign Consent Treatment Form: Possible Consequences === | === 1. Refusal to Sign Consent Treatment Form: Possible Consequences === | ||
| Line 43: | Line 44: | ||
A person who refuses to sign the consent form may be deemed a patient who “could not be cared for or treated appropriately in the facility” under s 18(b) of the MHA. This person runs the risk of being refused admission to the facility or being discharged if already admitted. | A person who refuses to sign the consent form may be deemed a patient who “could not be cared for or treated appropriately in the facility” under s 18(b) of the MHA. This person runs the risk of being refused admission to the facility or being discharged if already admitted. | ||
Under the Patients Property Act (PPA) hospitals could circumvent the issue of consent by seeking a court order, supported by two medical opinions, to have the patient declared incapable of managing his or her person. Minor changes were made to the PPA in September 2011. Under the PPA, a legal guardian or public trustee is appointed as committee to give consent for the patient. It is not sufficient for a family member to give consent for a voluntary informal patient without first obtaining legal guardianship or committeeship, or becoming a substitute decision maker under the HCCFA. | Under the ''Patients Property Act'' (PPA) hospitals could circumvent the issue of consent by seeking a court order, supported by two medical opinions, to have the patient declared incapable of managing his or her person. Minor changes were made to the PPA in September 2011. Under the PPA, a legal guardian or public trustee is appointed as committee to give consent for the patient. It is not sufficient for a family member to give consent for a voluntary informal patient without first obtaining legal guardianship or committeeship, or becoming a substitute decision maker under the HCCFA. | ||
A recent decision in Nova Scotia regarding guardianship found that some of the central provisions of the Incompetent Persons Act, R.S.N.S., 1989, c. 218 are unconstitutional (Webb v. Webb, 2016 NSSC 180). This legislation allows for the appointment of a guardian where a person is found incompetent (similar to the PPA), but it was found that the legislation was overbroad, not allowing a court to tailor a guardianship order so that a person subject to that order can retain the ability to makes decisions in respect of those areas in which they are capable. This may have an impact on the PPA in BC in the future | A recent decision in Nova Scotia regarding guardianship found that some of the central provisions of the Incompetent Persons Act, R.S.N.S., 1989, c. 218 are unconstitutional (Webb v. Webb, 2016 NSSC 180). This legislation allows for the appointment of a guardian where a person is found incompetent (similar to the PPA), but it was found that the legislation was overbroad, not allowing a court to tailor a guardianship order so that a person subject to that order can retain the ability to makes decisions in respect of those areas in which they are capable. This may have an impact on the PPA in BC in the future | ||
| Line 52: | Line 53: | ||
{{REVIEWED LSLAP | date= July 29, 2019}} | |||
{{LSLAP Manual Navbox|type=chapters8-14}} | {{LSLAP Manual Navbox|type=chapters8-14}} | ||