Use of force to administer psychiatric treatment requires transparency and full debate at a minimum
Text in graphic blocks along the left that reads “What you need to know about Bill 16. Use of force to administer psychiatric treatment requires transparency and full debate at a minimum.” To the right of the text is an image of two people, looking at their phones while outside, facing away.
On April 1, the BC government introduced a bill amending the Correction Act that, if passed, will have serious impacts on the rights of people who experience mental health and substance use issues while incarcerated in provincial correctional facilities. Despite the significance of these impacts, the amendments are in Bill 16: 2026 Miscellaneous Statues Amendment Act as part of a collection of statutory changes to various provincial laws on unrelated issues like:
electric vehicles
fuel price transparency
waiver of development costs
The impacts and appropriateness of statutory amendments are typically tested through the transparency and accountability that comes from robust legislative debate. However, that is unlikely to happen because these amendments have been placed in this “miscellaneous” bill.
Bill 16 expands when provincial corrections officers are authorized to use physical force
Currently, physical force is only authorized to:
prevent injury or death
prevent property damage
prevent an inmate escape
maintain custody and control of an inmate
In a few short clauses, Bill 16 expands the use of force to an entirely new context. It expressly authorizes corrections officers to use forceto assist health care providers to administer involuntary treatment under the Mental Health Act.
Bill 16 is the first provincial legislation that expressly names and authorizes use of physical force in relation to involuntary treatment.
The Mental Health Act does not mention “use of force” or expressly authorize its use. Bill 16 appears to blur the lines between carceral punishment and health care.
A shift of this magnitude requires deep transparency and accountability in a democratic society
It is deeply concerning that the BC government has chosen to lump these amendments into a miscellaneous amendment bill alongside changes to 11 other completely unrelated statutes. These kinds of bills are typically debated and voted on as a whole, with limited time to carefully examine each amendment.
BC has a well-documented problem with transparency and accountability when it comes to involuntary treatment related to mental health and substance use. If the province is intent on pursuing these amendments, then they deserve full transparency in a standalone bill with robust time for information gathering, research, and debate in the legislature. This lack of oversight, especially in the continued absence of a comprehensive, independent review of mental health legislation in BC, is unacceptable.
The changes considered in this Bill require more than ensuring transparent and accountable processes for changing laws in BC. It has immense potential impacts on the lives and health of people detained in provincial corrections facilities. We will be sharing more research and engagement on those impacts in the coming weeks.
Did you find this interesting? Share this post!