In the review of the act, however, we had to determine whether to apply the sunset clause or whether that option should be entirely removed. I think it would have been helpful for the expert panel on mental illness to have that discussion. As a result, Quebec cannot proceed. If it did proceed, it would probably have application problems on the ground. We shall see what happens.
According to the Canadian Psychiatric Association, and based on your report, to determine that a person with a mental disorder meets the incurability criterion, three criteria must be considered: the chronic nature of the condition, the scope of previous treatment attempts and thus the effectiveness of treatments, and the person's refusal of treatment. I assume you have to evaluate whether there have been repeated refusals or refusals that have affected the required assessment.
Some people say there are no incurable mental disorders, under any circumstances. Clearly, that is not what you are saying. Nonetheless, all patients have the right to refuse treatment. What role does that right play in your assessment of whether a person meets the incurability criterion? In the case of a patient who has refused or refuses treatment, can one conclude that the person has not done what is necessary to be cared for? In that case, would the patient not be eligible?
In some instances, it is said that a mental disorder is incurable. That also entails some suffering.