Vol. 5, No. 4 - Psychiatric Survivor Archives of Toronto

VOTING RIGHTS
RESTORED TO
SOME INMATES
On October 28, 1985, all psychiatric
inmates, and inmates of
correctional facilities not under
sentence, finally won the right to
vote in municipal elections in
Ontario. In December 1984, the
government guaranteed psychiatric
inmates the right to vote in
provincial elections.
Unfortunately, prisoners under
sentence are still denied the
right to vote in city, provincial and
federal elections. (See our
Charter issue, August 1985) .
A few days before this historic
amendment to the Municipal
Election Act was passed, there
was some heated debate in the
Ontario Legislature. On October
24, a number of MPPs expressed
their views on giving psychiatric
inmates the right to vote. Here
are a few samples which were
published in Hansard:
Ido not care how they
(inmates) vote, but are we
being honest in saying
they know how to vote?
Having had some service as
a psychologist in a mental
institution, I have personally
seen the kinds of patients
who are there ... They are
frail in ways that they just
do not fully understand
what the world is all about,
nor do they understand
the responsibility of a
mayor, a trustee or the
services that are provided ...
- (Donald Cousens, Progressive
Conservative
member)
Fortunately, most of the other
provincial politicians did not
share Cousens' patronizing and
biased opinions:
Imyself was unfortunate
enough to spend a long time
as a guest of a previous
government in the Ontario
Hospital in Kingston. My
fellow patients took a lively
interest in the elections, although
they were not aI·
lowed to vote. Clearly,
they had the same range of
political opinion that one
might find among any group
of people. It seems to me
intolerable that we would
deny any citizen the right
to vote by virtue of a disability
... Iam particularly
concerned, knowing that
the member from York
Centre (Mr. Cousens) is a
psychologist. For him to say
that a patient in a mental
hospital might not be able
to form an opinion about
whom to vote for and what
the issues of the day are is
a shocking commentary on
how people who are not
laymen view mental disabilities
...
(David Reville, NDP member
from Riverdale)
Psychiatric inmates' rights got
another boost from Bernard
Grandmattre, the government's
Minister of Municipal Affairs:
My intention ... isto enfranchise
these people with the
right to vote. Thesepeopie
have been disenfranchised
for a number of
years. My intention ... is
not to say that Iam a
better-qualified person than
anyone else ... (who) isa
psychiatric patient. Iwill
let the Lord prescribe this.
We need to respect these
people ... Iwould like to respect
inmates, judges and
psychiatric patients in the
very same way Itreat my
friends in this House.
However, the Government
of Canada itself continues·
to violate this fundamental
Charterright, because its
Canada Elections Act (section
4, 1970) still denies the
right to vote in federal elections
to all psychiatric inmates
and prisoners. So far,
Ontario is the only province
which has extended the
right to vote to psychiatric
inmates and a few others.
It's time that all the other
provinces cleaned up their
Acts and started respecting
the rights ofall Canadians.
AVICTORY
IN QUEBEC
The right to vote has been extended
to more Canadian
inmates. On Nov. 12, psychiatric
inmates in Ontario voted for
the firsttime in a municipal
election; unfortunately, it is not
known how many inmates voted
in the province's psychiatric institutions.
However, in Toronto's
Queen St. Mental Health Centre,
which had its own polling station,
105 inmates voted - about onefifth
of the 580 eligible voters. The
non -inmates in Toronto didn't do
much better - only one-third
voted.
In Quebec, prisoners in the
federal prisons were also finally
allowed to vote in the last provincial
election held on
December 2. This breakthrough
in prisoners' rights was the result
of an historic lawsuit initiated by
prisoner Jean-Louis Levesque.
Levesque claimed that denial of
his right to vote violated Section 3
DAMAGES AWARDED TARDIVE
DYSKINESIA
On January 3, 1985, US Distrist
Court Judge Donald D.
Alsop ordered the US Veterans
Administration to pay 36-yearold
Larry Hedin over two million
dollars for the permanent
damage and suffering he endured
as a result of psychiatric
druggingwhich caused the permanent
neurological condition
known as tardive dyskinesia
(TO). Judge Alsop also awarded
Hedin's ex-wife Susan $30,000
for "loss of consortium" (partnership).
In his ruling against
the St. Cloud VA Medical
Center in Minnesota, Judge
Alsop concluded that VA psychiatrists
were "negligent in
prescribing excessive amounts
of Thorazine to Larry Hedin
over a prolonged period.of time
without properly supervising its
use."
Hedin's problems with
psychiatrists and psychiatric
drugs began in September 1975
when he first voluntarily
entered the VA Hospital in
Dallas, Texas. At that time, he
was seeking help for his
addiction to amphetamines
(such as Dexamil). Two months
later, Hedin was· discharged ,
of The Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms, which
guarantees the right to vote to all
Canadians "without restriction. "
Federal Court Judge Paul
Robineau agreed. As a result, all
federal prisoners in Quebec's
penitentiaries were allowed to
vote last December.
PHOENIX COMMENTS
Phoenix hopes it won't be
long before all prisoners and
psychiatric inmates in
Canada regain theit voting
rights.
VICTIM
and eight months later he again
sought treatment in the St.
Cloud VA Hospital. Dr. W.B.
Hall, Hedin's VA psychiatrist,
treated him with Valium,
Mellaril (a neuroleptic) and
other drugs. When discharged
in September 1976, Hedin was
considered "competent and
employable" but was ordered
to continue taking Mellaril. A
few months later, Dr. Hall prescribed
Thorazine instead of
Mellaril for Hedin. By
December 1976, Hedin was on
a daily dose of 600 milligrams
of Thorazine, and he continued
taking Thorazine for the next
four years.
In October 1980, Dr. Henry
Ransom, another VA
psychiatrist, diagnosed Hedin's
condition as TD and immediately
stopped the
Thorazine. In his ruling, Judge
Alsop described Hedin's TD as
" ... severe, medically irreversible,
and totally disabling." At
the trial in September 1984,
there was a more graphic description
of Hedin's neurological
condition caused by the drugs:
" ... continuous, uncontrollable,
spasmodic-like movements of
his mouth, face, torso, and
limbs that afflict him all his
waking hours. These make his
appearance so bizarre that he is
rejected by most all individuals
who come into contact with
him." (For a fuller discussion of
TD, see "The Tardive
Dyskinesia Epidemic," PR, vol.
3 no. 2, 1982.)