Candice Lassiter, Charged In Aubrey Kina-Marie Littlejohn's Death, Pleads Guilty To Forgery
Weiss, M. (2013). Huffington Post.
RCMP investigators are looking into the possibility more victims may be identified after announcing that dozens of sexual assault charges have been laid against Ronald Anthony Sawa, a former employee of the Saskatchewan Boys Centre -- now known as the Paul Dojack Youth Centre.
.
THE LEADER-POST (REGINA)
Sawa, 58, was arrested by the RCMP Friday morning at his Regina home and taken into custody after a four-year investigation resulting in 39 counts of sexual assault involving 18 complainants.
"We have more than 18 victims in this investigation. These individuals have all spread out through Canada from coast to coast," said RCMP spokeswoman Sgt. Carole Raymond.
"(The investigation) involved numerous other jurisdictions and other police forces and other detachments in getting to the possible victims and getting information."
Sawa was employed at the Saskatchewan Boys Centre and the Paul Dojack Youth Centre from 1974 to 1989. The charges relate to alleged incidents spanning his employment at the centre.
The charges laid on Thursday stem from alleged incidents involving boys between the ages of 10 and 17.
The provincial government centre served as a child welfare facility during its time as the Saskatchewan Boys Centre, but changed to a corrections facility when it became the Paul Dojack Youth Centre in 1985. Hundreds would have resided at the facility during Sawa's time there.
*****************************************************************
Video:Ethical and Risk-management issues in Social Work: What Every Practitioner Needs to Know
Child Protection & Adult Guardianship Legislation & Resources
Social Service Foundation blog
Sheppard, G. Notebook on Ethics, Legal Issues, and Standards for Counsellors.
The court set out the following three factors that must be considered when deciding when the concern for public safety could warrant the breaching of lawyer-client privilege. They are:
- Is there a clear risk to an identifiable person or group of persons?
- Is there a risk of serious bodily harm or death?
- Is the danger imminent?
(Smith v. Jones, 1999, SCC.)
Reardon, C. (2010). Social Work Today, Vol. 10 No. 5 P. 22.
*********************************************************
Ruling says hospital can’t force anti-psychotic drug on patient after questionable schizophrenia diagnosis
Brean, J. (2013). National Post.
Nearly four years after staff at Toronto’s Saint Michael’s Hospital started slipping an anti-psychotic drug into a woman’s orange juice while treating her for lupus, Ontario’s highest court has tossed aside the ruling that allowed her to be drugged against her will, in part because the psychiatrist who diagnosed her with schizophrenia admitted he was “making parts of [her symptoms] up.”
In a sharply worded ruling, the Court of Appeal said there was “no evidence” the woman ever agreed to medication, and overturned the Consent and Capacity Board’s “unreasonable” finding that the woman was mentally incapable of doing so.
The judgment clarifies what kind of evidence to prove a person’s incapacity will withstand legal scrutiny, and it reinforces a patient’s right to refuse medication, which the Supreme Court of Canada upheld in 2003.
No comments:
Post a Comment