FEATURE
College analysis of Bill 87’ s implications photo: claudia hung
Bill 87 contains amendments to strengthen the legislative provisions relating to sexual abuse and transparency, as well as changes to enhance the complaints, investigation and discipline processes.
Council voiced general support for the intent and the overall objectives contained in Bill 87, noting that several legislative proposals advanced by the College to strengthen the provisions to protect patients from sexual abuse are incorporated in the Bill. The provisions relating to transparency are generally consistent with action the College has already taken. The Bill also contains significant ministerial powers via new regulation-making authority. In some instances, however, the College believes that different methods should be used to better achieve the College and government’ s shared goal of improved patient protection. Council has identified some substantive issues as well as a number of other issues which could be addressed through“ housekeeping” amendments as the Bill makes its way through the legislature. The College will
Bill 87
recommend changes in its submission to government. All of the recommendations are designed to ensure that the amendments contained in the Bill will achieve the desired outcome and avoid unintended negative consequences.
The following are some of Council’ s substantive issues:
Patient Relations Program The proposed amendments significantly amend( yet restrict) the criteria to access the Patient Relations Program’ s fund for therapy and counselling for patients who have been sexually abused by health-care professionals. In fact, they appear to have a paradoxical impact. In one sense, it expands eligibility beyond the current approach, essentially granting automatic access to funding to any individual who is named in a complaint or mandatory report regarding sexual abuse, even those who are not pursuing therapy. Conversely, the language is restrictive and would prevent those individuals who have been sexually abused by a physician but who have not made complaints or who have
Issue 1, 2017 Dialogue 11