Welcome back, Captain Anatine.I haven't been here for a long time.
When ready people are here.I hope I can bring this conversation back to life.
Knowing what you wrote, good grief.There was a parallel program at a nearby women's institution.
The action began its legal life in 2000 as a proposed class action, but has since been reconstituted as an individual action by the 28 named Plaintiffs. In a 2003 ruling that denied certification, Cullity J. identified the three programs at which the claim is specifically aimed: a mind-altering drug regime called Defence Disruptive Therapy (“DDT”), an isolation cell for group encounters, including hallucinogenic drug encounters, called the Total Encounter Capsule (the “Capsule”), and a strict physical disciplinary regime called the Motivation, Attitude, Participation Program (“MAPP”): Joanisse v Barker, 2003 [...] In 2018, the Court of Appeal reversed a summary judgment that had been granted to the Plaintiffs and remitted this action for trial: Barker v Barker, 2018 ONCA 255. The Court indicated that the matter was to proceed by “trial or summary trial as deemed appropriate to the Regional Senior Judge for the assignment of a trial judge ...
In an effort to expedite matters, the trial has proceeded as a hybrid summary and full trial. Each of the Plaintiffs has testified and been fully cross-examined in court. In addition, each has submitted an affidavit and/or agreed statement of fact which has served as part of their evidence in chief. While the initial plan for the trial was to have the affidavits and agreed statements entirely replace examination-in-chief for each of the Plaintiffs, it quickly became evident that testifying as to their own personal experience of Oak Ridge and the STU programs was an important part of the trial process that could not be entirely replicated by written evidence. Accordingly, each of the Plaintiffs had an opportunity to testify at some length in chief before being cross-examined in full.
The Doctors and/or the Crown, in various combinations, are liable to each of the Plaintiffs for having caused them varying degrees of harm by breaching their fiduciary duties and by perpetrating assault and battery. In the case of the Crown, it is liable to each of the Plaintiffs for these claims on a direct and vicarious liability basis. Where either or both of the Doctors are liable, the Crown is also liable for knowingly assisting them in perpetrating assault and battery.
Mr. Bonner is awarded $200,000 in general damages as against Dr. Barker and the Crown.
As with Mr. Bethune, the imperative to denounce the reprehensible treatment of a young patient by a doctor and a government-run hospital is strong. Mr. Bonner is awarded $100,000 in punitive damages, divided 50% as against Dr. Barker and 50% as against the Crown.
Mr. McMann is awarded general damages in the total amount of $1,000,000as against Drs. Barker and Maier and the Crown
Mr. McMann is awarded punitive damages in the amount of $500,000, divided 50% as against Dr. Maier and 50% as against the Crown.
Mr. McMann is awarded $385,000 in damages for lost income as against Drs. Barker and Maier and the Crown.
I was sent there at the age of 16 from the Ontario Training school for boys. That was called Hillcrest that was in Guelph Ontario. I am appalled at the utter contempt Myself and others were treated with by the lawyers representing the doctors and the crown. At 62 living off a very miniscule disability pension. I was not and still am not a psychopath. Barker sure said I was though. ... I sure was pissed when I seen that now after two justices have ruled in Our favor that They are once again going to try and appeal. They are not defense for the doctor and province. They are accomplices who want to keep revictimizing those of Us who went through that hell. Also Barker is now suffering dementia and will not even know what may or may not happen. But knowing how evil he is I have to wonder if the dementia is real or just something he paid to use as an excuse to be free of his liability.
The most disturbing thing .. There was a parallel program at a nearby women's institution.
All the same torture with exotic drugs, Naked encounters, restraints made from seat belt material and pad locks.
here is the most disturbing part..
It was set up by at least four Oak Ridge patients I have so far documented.
All four were violent sexual predators.. convicted of rape.
They were sent to this hospital to live on the women's ward and run the program.
CLASS ACTION LAUNCHED ON BEHALF OF PATIENTS OF THE ST. THOMAS PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL
Jan 26, 2022
TORONTO, Jan. 26, 2022 /CNW/ - Rochon Genova LLP has commenced a proposed class action against the Ontario government and the former medical and unit directors of the former St. Thomas Psychiatric Hospital ("St. Thomas") relating to their alleged systemic abuses of involuntary patients between the years 1976 and 1988.
St. Thomas was a government operated psychiatric facility located in St. Thomas, Ontario. The claim alleges that, from 1976 to 1988, involuntary patients detained in the medium secure forensic unit of St. Thomas were subjected to an abusive and punitive patient-run program with no medical merit.
The proposed class action, filed with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, alleges that this "treatment" program, run with the government of Ontario's knowledge for over a decade, was initially developed and implemented by patients detained in the maximum security Oak Ridge Division of the Mental Health Centre Penetanguishene, including those with histories of sexual violence.
As part of this program, male patients were transferred from Oak Ridge to St. Thomas and placed in charge of the control, treatment, and punishment of female patients. These female patients included teenagers such as the proposed representative plaintiff, who was seventeen years old at the time of her admission at St. Thomas.
The claim alleges that Ontario and the former medical and unit directors of St. Thomas who oversaw the program were systemically negligent and breached their fiduciary duties and the patients' Charter rights by implementing this unethical, harmful and medically meritless patient-run program.
The claims have not yet been proven in court. For information about this proposed class action please contact [...].
Rochon Genova LLP [...]