Thank you to our subject matter experts here. I appreciate what you said. I hope I don't paraphrase incorrectly, but what I took you to say is that the legal test requires the outcome—it's the intent to do this or it's reasonable that this is going to follow—as in the wording in the act, that a person would fear.... Again, I'm paraphrasing.
My concern, though, is this. Obviously, that's when we get to the point of conviction. At that point you're before the judge or jury, as the case may be. When we're looking at things like controlling physical appearance or access to health services or medication, my concern is that perhaps we are muddying the waters about what this entails. Obviously, none of us want to see coercive behaviour and any behaviour that's isolating.
Like Ms. Gladu, I have some issues, especially on the medication end or when a person expresses spiritual beliefs. This is something couples are often going to discuss. At what threshold or point does that bleed into criminal behaviour? I understand the test that you've enunciated, but that line is less clear for me. I'm not looking for an answer from the experts. I'm just intervening with some concerns.