Capacity to Attend to the Needs of Persons with Dual Diagnoses in the Criminal Justice System: Views of Mental Health and Criminal Justice Professionals

Currently, individuals with intellectual disabilities are overrepresented within the Criminal Justice System (Griffiths, Taillon-Wasmond & Smith, 2002). A primary problem within the Criminal Justice System is the lack of distinction between mental illness and intellectual disabilities within the Criminal Code. Due to this lack of distinction and the overall lack of identification procedures in the Criminal Justice System, individuals with disabilities will often not receive proper accommodations to enable them to play an equitable role in the justice system. There is increasing evidence that persons with intellectual disabilities are more likely than others to have their rights violated, not use court supports and accommodations as much as they should, and be subject to miscarriages of justice (Marinos, 2010). In this study, interviews were conducted with mental health (n=8) and criminal justice professionals (n=8) about how individuals with dual diagnosis are received in the Criminal Justice System. It was found that criminal justice professionals lack significant knowledge about dual diagnosis, including effective identification and therefore appropriate supports and accommodations. Justice professionals in particular were relatively ill-prepared in dealing effectively with this population. One finding to highlight is that there is misunderstanding between mental health professionals and justice professionals about who ought to take responsibility and accountability for this population.

Corporal punishment : understanding the debate in Canada

There has been considerable debate over whether corporal punishment against children should be prohibited in Canada. Various organizations, most notably the Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law, have argued that the Canadian Government should ban the use of corporal punishment by repealing the specific section of the Canadian Criminal Code that provides parents with a legal defence to use corporal punishment against their children; this provision is outlined in Section 43 of the Criminal Code. Recently, the Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law challenged the constitutionality of Section 43 before the Supreme Court of Canada. The organization claimed Section 43 is unconstitutional. It violates children's Charter rights, such as the right to security of a person (Section 7), the right to be protected from cruel and unusual treatment (Section 12), and denies children the same protection adults receive under the law. Both the Canadian government and the Supreme Court of Canada reject the Foundation's arguments. Examining the federal government and the judicial system's rationale for refusing to remove Section 43 of the Canadian Criminal Code discloses how the parent-child relationship is perceived. This thesis examines how the parent-child relationship is perceived by the Canadian government and the issues that arise from such a view. This examination is essential for the comprehension of why Canada's corporal punishment law was enacted and remains in effect today.