Thank you.
Earlier, I said that the recommendations in the report were guidelines of sorts. In fact, in each of the recommendations, they use the verb “should”. If it were considered as such, it could solve a number of problems.
Let's take recommendation 10. Even in the psychiatric expert community, there is resistance. The Association des psychiatres du Québec says we should go ahead, while psychiatrists have told us the opposite. This has led to Quebec deciding not to move forward on mental health cases.
In this recommendation, it is stated that it is imperative that the competent assessor, who is a psychiatrist, be “independent from the treating team/provider”.
Is this realistic, given the resources available, especially in the regions? Shouldn't this be more flexible? If it were more flexible, would it diminish the legitimacy or rigour of the assessment exercise?