OCdt Sage Fanstone, Suicide and Investigation

[Petard]

I'm sure the Unit was made aware that the Member was transported to the hospital and left in their care however the Unit has no idea how long the Member is going to be there or when they could be released.  They could be held 24 hours, 72 hours or even much longer if the Doctors deem it necessary and they seek the appropriate court orders.  The Unit can have all of its support system ready to go but since the hospital cannot divulge any personal info on the Member, including when he/she is released, there is not much that can be done if the Member is determined to do harm to themselves.

You're making a number of broad assumptions here, the biggest one being that the MP's informed the unit.
Once a unit is informed though there is nothing preventing them from contacting the health care facility to confirm that the individual is still there, and what time could they be expected to be released. Nothing in there is requesting information on the why, just the "where are they" and "when might they be seen"
All these things, though, will most likely be within the terms of reference for the BOI

 

[RCDtpr]

You're making a number of broad assumptions here, the biggest one being that the MP's informed the unit.
Once a unit is informed though there is nothing preventing them from contacting the health care facility to confirm that the individual is still there, and what time could they be expected to be released. Nothing in there is requesting information on the why, just the "where are they" and "when might they be seen"
All these things, though, will most likely be within the terms of reference for the BOI

A hospital isn't going to give ANY form of info on when the member might get released to anyone without his consent.  You'll be hard pressed to even have them verify the member is a patient.

This BOI can point out the unit didn't get info from the hospital all it wants...it won't change anything.  The military, at times, needs to comprehend that the civvie world doesn't operate like them.  The hospital doesn't care what regulations the military may have.  Unit can call 100 times...without a warrant or production order they will get no info whatsoever.

 

[Blackadder1916]

You're making a number of broad assumptions here, the biggest one being that the MP's informed the unit.
Once a unit is informed though there is nothing preventing them from contacting the health care facility to confirm that the individual is still there, and what time could they be expected to be released. Nothing in there is requesting information on the why, just the "where are they" and "when might they be seen"
All these things, though, will most likely be within the terms of reference for the BOI

Actually, even confirming that an individual has been admitted to, or even seen at, a health care facility is not permitted without the express permission of the individual.

Though I'm not familiar with the policies and procedures of the hospital in this case, my assumption is they are not much different than any that I've had dealings with.  As an example - a number of years ago when I was managing a large civilian medical practice group in Calgary, a young corporal (alone, on leave from an air base down east, travelling through) presented at our clinic and was seen by a doctor who immediately sent her to the closest emergency dept with the expectation that she would be quickly admitted and possibly have surgery.  I was made aware because the reception staff were unsure of the billing procedure and since they knew I was ex-CF asked my advice.  I spoke briefly with her before she departed for the hospital and let her know, that with her permission, I would inform the CF locally that she was going to the hospital.  Partly to confirm that we would get paid (DND were one of the worst late payers) and partly to ensure that the young corporal was not forgotten in the hospital I called the civilian (ex-Reg 6B) medic at the ASU to provide him with the details (we had known each other since when we were privates).  He called me back later in the day to make sure that I had given him correct information  because the hospital wouldn't even confirm that she had been admitted.  I called the hospital "on behalf of the referring doctor/clinic" (which was a legitimate nexus) and they confirmed that she had been admitted and was now in the post-op recovery room.

 

[Petard]

So the MP's had no responsibility to report to the unit's duty officer that they'd transported a member of their unit to a hospital?

What about the fact that they'd been called at all?
Something must've caused them to become involved

As for terms of reference for a BOI, I've been involved with the sad process for 3 suicides in the military, 2 of which were investigated by civilian police as they occurred off duty and off base.
Although the terms of ref for the latter 2 included contacting the civilian agencies involved, it was understood they were under no obligation to provide any information, and they didn't (which in one case did upset the grieving family a great deal).

 

[JesseWZ]

A hospital isn't going to give ANY form of info on when the member might get released to anyone without his consent.  You'll be hard pressed to even have them verify the member is a patient.

This BOI can point out the unit didn't get info from the hospital all it wants...it won't change anything.  The military, at times, needs to comprehend that the civvie world doesn't operate like them.  The hospital doesn't care what regulations the military may have.  Unit can call 100 times...without a warrant or production order they will get no info whatsoever.

^ Good post.

MPs will normally inform a duty officer or Unit CWO/Co'xn that an incident has occurred with a member of the unit. It would surprise me if this was not done.

Depending on the type of incident, very minimal information may be given particularly if it involves an ongoing investigation or sensitive personal matter. In this case, MP likely didn't receive a timeline for when or if the member was going to be released from hospital. Just like the unit, the hospital has no obligation to give MP information unless subject to a warrant or production order.

 

[Tibbson]

As for terms of reference for a BOI, I've been involved with the sad process for 3 suicides in the military, 2 of which were investigated by civilian police as they occurred off duty and off base.
Although the terms of ref for the latter 2 included contacting the civilian agencies involved, it was understood they were under no obligation to provide any information, and they didn't (which in one case did upset the grieving family a great deal).

Which is why it astounds me when I hear Drapeau et al go on and on about how all suicides should be investigated by civilian police regardless of where they occur.  They will only investigate it as far as any potential crime wrt the death is concerned and not in any way as to why an individual committed suicide.  Three or four page report only and they are under no obligation to share the info with anyone, family or not.  Very rarely will a coroner get involved and call any sort of inquest which means an MP investigation and a BOI is a much better way to go.

In any event I'm sure the process will play itself out in this case.

 

[captloadie]

Are the regulations different based on province?

In my neck of the woods (NE Alberta), I have unfortunately had several members admitted to hospital, some being escorted there by MPs or the RCMP. We have always been notified via two means.

We get a hospital admission message from the MIR that gives us the member's details, date/time of admission, and expected release date. We also get a message when the member is released.

We also get a notification from the MPs, usually an e-mail stating that they responded to a call and were escorting the member to the hospital (either due to injury or under the MHA).

In all instances, someone goes down to the hospital to check in on the individual, and we have never had an issue with getting access to them. In one instance at Emerg, they even let me go into the treatment area to check on the individaul (granted he suffered a minor head injury, not a self inflicted one). 

 

[Tibbson]

We get a hospital admission message from the MIR that gives us the member's details, date/time of admission, and expected release date. We also get a message when the member is released.

We also get a notification from the MPs, usually an e-mail stating that they responded to a call and were escorting the member to the hospital (either due to injury or under the MHA).

In all instances, someone goes down to the hospital to check in on the individual, and we have never had an issue with getting access to them. In one instance at Emerg, they even let me go into the treatment area to check on the individaul (granted he suffered a minor head injury, not a self inflicted one).

Nope, they are not different from province to province however that doesn't mean all hospitals observe or interpret the privacy laws and such the same.  It could be that your MIR sent someone to a civilian hospital in which case they would know and would notify the Unit so the member was not considered AWA.  Same goes for the MPs, they could and most likely would notify the Unit for the same reason.  Attending the hospital and getting access to a service member is not really the issue.  Visitors to a hospital are nothing new.  The main issue is the hospital, or even the MIR, divulging personal medical information to a Unit and even them informing a Unit when a patient has been discharged.  All of that is considered private and personal information of the patient and unless they ask for someone to call the Unit there is nothing the hospital can do. 

When you think about it, if you have children over 18 (for the most part) the family physician will not let you know what is going on with your son/daughter without their permission.  Children younger then 18 go to places like Planned Parenthood all the time and get birth control and there is no obligation to inform parents.  There have even been cases where girls under 18 have been able to obtain abortions without parents being notified. 

 

[Blackadder1916]

Are the regulations different based on province?

In my neck of the woods (NE Alberta), I have unfortunately had several members admitted to hospital, some being escorted there by MPs or the RCMP. We have always been notified via two means.

We get a hospital admission message from the MIR that gives us the member's details, date/time of admission, and expected release date. We also get a message when the member is released.

We also get a notification from the MPs, usually an e-mail stating that they responded to a call and were escorting the member to the hospital (either due to injury or under the MHA).

In all instances, someone goes down to the hospital to check in on the individual, and we have never had an issue with getting access to them. In one instance at Emerg, they even let me go into the treatment area to check on the individaul (granted he suffered a minor head injury, not a self inflicted one).

I'm most familiar with Alberta's Health Information Act.  I've extracted some parts that deal with your specific question.  The term "custodian" refers to a holder of health information, e.g. doctor, hospital, etc.

HEALTH INFORMATION ACT
http://www.qp.alberta.ca/1266.cfm?page=H05.cfm&leg_type=Acts&isbncln=9780779724758

Disclosure of individually identifying health information
to be with consent

34(1) Subject to sections 35 to 40, a custodian may disclose
individually identifying health information to a person other than
the individual who is the subject of the information if the individual
has consented to the disclosure.
. . .

Disclosure of diagnostic, treatment and care information

35(1) A custodian may disclose individually identifying
diagnostic, treatment and care information without the consent of
the individual who is the subject of the information

(a) to another custodian for any or all of the purposes listed in
section 27(1) or (2), as the case may be,
. . . . .
(b) to a person who is responsible for providing continuing
treatment and care to the individual,

(c) to family members of the individual or to another person
with whom the individual is believed to have a close
personal relationship, if the information is given in
general terms and concerns the presence, location,
condition, diagnosis, progress and prognosis of the
individual on the day on which the information is
disclosed and the disclosure is not contrary to the express
request of the individual,

(d) where an individual is injured, ill or deceased, so that
family members of the individual or another person with
whom the individual is believed to have a close personal
relationship or a friend of the individual can be contacted,
if the disclosure is not contrary to the express request of
the individual,
. . .
(m) to any person if the custodian believes, on reasonable
grounds, that the disclosure will avert or minimize
(i) a risk of harm to the health or safety of a minor, or
(ii) an imminent danger to the health or safety of any
person,
. . .
(r) for the purpose of obtaining or processing payment for
health services provided to the individual by a person that
is required under a contract to pay for those services for
that individual, or

A&D and casualty messages are nothing new.  Receiving health information from civilian providers is nothing new and is probably much more common now than when I was in HAO jobs in the 80s and 90s. Whether civilian providers are pro-active in providing that information to military health providers (which is legitimate - continuity of care and getting paid) will depend on the relationships established between civilian and military health providers.  My assumption is that in smaller locations where the military is much more integrated in the social and economic fabric of the community, civilian providers will be much more comfortable in dealing with the military.  In NE Alberta (I froze my ass there as a private when we had a CFH - also assisted in delivering a baby in an ambulance), my expectation would be they are very familiar with the "social" aspects of the military - not only an employer, but also health care provider, police and judicial authority, possibly landlord,  and in some sense acting as family stand-in.  I see nothing wrong with hospital staff providing some access to a representative from a member's unit when he's been hospitalized (as long as the member does not object).  In that case it could (and I stress "could" - my opinion only), in good faith, fall under para 35(c) that I quoted above - "family members of the individual or to another person with whom the individual is believed to have a close personal relationship".

 

[The Bread Guy]

This from the Kingston Whig-Standard:

The board of inquiry into the death of Officer Cadet Sage Fanstone, who died May 6 in Kingston, will begin Friday, the Canadian Forces have confirmed.

(....)

Maj. Bernard Dionne, senior public affairs officer at the Military Personnel Generation headquarters in Kingston, said members of the inquiry have been gathered and began their inquiry training Wednesday. Members of the inquiry have been selected from within the Forces, but not necessarily the Royal Military College of Canada.

"(They are) identifying a president, members and advisers, and those people will complete a two-day training period before starting their work," Dionne said. "They will all know exactly what they are to do to do a good job over the months to come."

The board of inquiry into Fanstone's death was called by Maj.-Gen. Eric Tremblay, commander of the Military Personnel Generation headquarters. The National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman information website explains that a board of inquiry is not to lay blame but to "review the facts and to learn lessons." ....

 

[jemgirl]

Couldn't stop myself from interjecting. Speaking broadly, when a person is admitted under my care, whether brought by police, army personnel, or his family, they are treated as a civilian. Their info can only be exchanged with their consent. this includes who they are, what their diagnosis is , what treatment is being provided, and when they are being released from the hospital. If patient is alert and competent, it is assumed that they can convey this information to whoever they need or want. if a patient is not alert, their next of kin may be contacted for treatment. Still their base will not be contacted. That would be considered a breach of confidentiality.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

Slightly off topic, but what is the "Military Personnel Generation headquarters?"

 

[cavalryman]

Slightly off topic, but what is the "Military Personnel Generation headquarters?"

The entity formerly known as the Canadian Defense Academy, effective as of 1 June

 

[Retired AF Guy]

The entity formerly known as the Canadian Defense Academy, effective as of 1 June

Thank you.

 

[Loachman]

Or Military Headquarters Generation Personnel?

Because Somebody's got to be doing that...