AR related to Alcohol

[thinnair]

I am the father of a member who has gone through Administrative Action  for ‘Misuse of Alcohol.’  and is pending release at the end of Novemeber. I not completed  a lot of research yet but may I have found that this member’s C&P was not properly administered as per CFAO 19-31 (Misuse of Alcohol) and, CANFORGEN 092/02 (Clarification of CFAO 19-31).

In short, the mandatory Medical Referral (as required by the above references) was not conducted for the C&P.  The member is now looking at a ‘Recommendation for Release’ based on a violation of C&P.  The required Medical Referals were conducted for the IC, RW and Recomendation for Release but not the C&P (the medical referral for the final incident was requested by the member)

Not sure about other errors at this time but will continue to work through it with him

My questions is; was the C&P valid and if it is not what is the consequences for the Release?

I have looked into the CFAOs, DAODs and QR&O.  As well as the ‘Grievance Board Decisions’ but I can find no precedent.  Does someone with more TI than me have any experience to share?

As well....how does one ensure that the assisting member/officer is competent and able to review, request the correct records etc etc, extract the medical officers recommendations if there was a referral etc

This is strictly an administrative query.

 

[thinnair]

Sorry...I believe I misspoke....the member was off C&P at the time of the last incident

 

[DAA]

Have a look at the DGMC Website under AR's.  I believe there is a section there for Misuse of Alcohol.

Nevertheless, I believe that if the CO is recommending release for violation of C&P (any type of C&P), the circumstances will be forwarded to DMCA for review and they are the ones who make the final decision.

I don't believe that 19-31 is even valid any more.  This is what you want to look at ---->  http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/dao-doa/5000/5019-7-eng.asp

And also Remedial Measures --->  http://www.admfincs-smafinsm.forces.gc.ca/dao-doa/5000/5019-4-eng.asp

Keep in mind, these are Internet links, so there may be more information via a DWAN link.

 

[thinnair]

The issue was already forwarded to DMCA and release was set for end November.
- I am assuming he can redress still?
- he was not on C&P at the time as the 6 months had lapsed
Can you forward me to the redress process to use in this case?
- should he be going through the ombudsman as well?
- Does the release proceed even if the redress has been submitted?

 

[George Wallace]

Sorry...I believe I misspoke....the member was off C&P at the time of the last incident

Being off C&P is irrelevant.

What is relevant is that the person was on C&P in the past for an infraction and has reoffended once again with the same infraction.  C&P is not removed from one's Pers File.  It remains on the Pers File indefinitely, and any future charges under which the C&P was originally administered will be administered more severely. 

In my opinion, if the member feels that there were improprieties or a mishandling of his C&P originally, that should be Redressed.

 

[DAA]

The issue was already forwarded to DMCA and release was set for end November.
- I am assuming he can redress still?
- he was not on C&P at the time as the 6 months had lapsed
Can you forward me to the redress process to use in this case?
- should he be going through the ombudsman as well?
- Does the release proceed even if the redress has been submitted?

If the Release decision came from DMCA, then there is really nothing more that can be done.

He can redress the decision but at the end of the day, it is once again DMCA who will decide and his only option would be to have it go to the CDS and we know how long those take.  Can't see the ombudsman touching it.  And yes, the release will still proceed even if a redress has been registered.

By your own account, he was issued with an IC, then an RW and then C&P, all for the same thing.  So 3 chances have passed him bye not to mention what ever transpired between him and the Medical people which generally cannot be disclosed.

 

[thinnair]

Thanks for the info, very much appreciated.

The one known reason for the redress (more to follow likely) will be the fact that there is nothing to disclose from the medical persons as there was no referral to medical as is required for alcohol related infractions. Had this been followed then it is more likely that binge drinking would have been understood as an alcohol/mental disorder and treat may have been sought at IC, RW, or C&P stages

 

[Eye In The Sky]

If the Release decision came from DMCA, then there is really nothing more that can be done.

He can redress the decision but at the end of the day, it is once again DMCA who will decide and his only option would be to have it go to the CDS and we know how long those take.  Can't see the ombudsman touching it.  And yes, the release will still proceed even if a redress has been registered.

By your own account, he was issued with an IC, then an RW and then C&P, all for the same thing.  So 3 chances have passed him bye not to mention what ever transpired between him and the Medical people which generally cannot be disclosed.

You picked up on this as well.  Additionally, after the C & P the mbr still got into trouble with alcohol.

I'll also add, the AR Analyst would have had the entire file to review;  Pers File, CO recommendation, medical doc's avail IAW whatever Privacy Act restrictions, Conduct Sheet, etc.  From all of this the synopsis would have been derived, reviewed, disclosed and then presented to the Approving Authority.

There is a Internet and Intranet site for grievances; DGCFGA.

I'll throw in some of my own  :2c:, and am by no means a SME. 

- As the mbr has not yet engaged CF review processes, the Ombudsmen will not likely touch this.  In fact, I believe if you look DAOD 5047-1, and read the Failure to Comply section and Existing Mechanism's Para 13, you will see why that may not be a good idea.  The cards are already stacked against the member.

- the best the mbr could do is submit a redress of grievance.  It would have to be assigned to the Military Grievances External Review Committee
(formerly the Canadian Forces Grievance Board) IAW QR & O, Vol 1, Ch 7, Art 7.12(1)(a).  Timeline;  it would take X amount of days for a grievance to be drafted.  After submission to the CO, the CO has 10 days to get it to CFGA for intake.  Once the ERC receives, they have no timeline they are held to.  After they review and provide disclosure, the grievor has 21 days for reply.  Etc.  You can see that even a grievance will easily go past the Nov release date.

For me,  based on what has been presented here (a snippet of the facts/file IMO), I don't believe  a grievance would be successful (unless there were some rather serious breaches in procedural fairness). 

A review of how procedural fairness applies to the CAF, how breaches of it are cured (proceeding De Novo), etc are found in the CF Military Admin Law Manual, avail on the JAG site.

I would suggest though, that being as the member is still in NOW, he/she might consider visiting the local Mental Health/Addictions Dept at the Base Hospital to help them cope with this release, etc and to perhaps set them up on a path to success after Nov, and without them looking into the bottom of a bottle for solutions to coming problems.

If they haven't been encouraged to do that, I would call that the first step here; get them to see the Medical pro's as this release is going to make things worse not better.  Call it "first aid" or whatever...but if alcohol has been the issue in the past it will likely become a crutch in the near future. 

I wish this person all the best and hopes for recovery and sobriety. 

As well....how does one ensure that the assisting member/officer is competent and able to review, request the correct records etc etc, extract the medical officers recommendations if there was a referral etc

Just wanted to add;  this is not the mandate/TORs for an Assisting Member as it pertains to a grievance.  You'll be hard pressed to find an AM who will have the time or abilty to do all of this, as I believe the restrictions in place WRT Privacy and Access to Information would not permit.  DAODs on Privacy Act/Access to Information requests are also avail on the Internet.

 

[Towards_the_gap]

For me,  based on what has been presented here (a snippet of the facts/file IMO), I don't believe  a grievance would be successful (unless there were some rather serious breeches in procedural fairness). 

A review of how procedural fairness applies to the CAF, how breeches of it are cured (proceeding De Novo), etc are found in the CF Military Admin Law Manual, avail on the JAG site.

Hi, late to the conversation, but quick question. What do his pants have to do with it?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

oops 

 

[cupper]

Hi, late to the conversation, but quick question. What do his pants have to do with it?

Wouldn't that be "Britches"?

 

[captloadie]

Wrt not seeking a medical referral for C&P, this in itself will not prompt a successful grievance, nor make the C&P null and void. If the member had, on at least two previous occasions, been referred to medical help with no positive results, then sending them for a third time wasn't going to accomplish anything. The CO may have contacted the medical staff who said they had done everything they could and no further medical assessment was necessary.

From my experience, there is a difference between someone who is a true alcoholic (probably not the new PC term) and can't cope without their daily fix, and a binge drinker, who may have an issue with self control, but who isn't dependant on alcohol to get by. Don't get me wrong, both are serious substance abuse problems, but they will be treated quite differently.

To be honest, some alcohilcs can function quite well, and be successful or at least stay out of trouble, for much of their career. Binge drinkers (and drinking) on the other hand, is usualy what lands people in trouble quick.

Just my  :2c:

 

[thinnair]

Thanks for the replies....if the member had not been referred to medical on the first 2 occasions and had then asked for the referral on the third, went to treatment and has been sober since....would this be grounds for redress

 

[Lightguns]

It all been said. There is likely no grounds for redress. You are best to assist your kid to transition to a life without a uniform.  As a parent who tried the helicopter parenting for a kid in the military, you are not helping by providing false hope or trying to guide him in his interactions with his employer.