The history of the Forensic Psychiatric Institute (FPI) of British Columbia is reviewed through a description of the 3,500 remand admissions to the Institute between 1975 and 1990. Individuals charged with only minor offences and those who were certified under the Mental Health Act 1983 and subsequently had their charges stayed are examined in more detail. Results appear to suggest that these two groups are particularly vulnerable to the process of criminalization. The possible link between criminalization of the mentally ill and deinstitutionalization is explored.

No abstract

No abstract

The current Canadian legislation regarding dangerous offenders is reviewed, with specific emphasis on the role of the required psychiatric testimony. It is suggested that, although this legislation as it is currently formulated could be viewed as an attempt to broaden the insanity defence, and permit the diversion of mentally ill offenders from a punitive to a therapeutic milieu, it enables the preventive detention of recidivist offenders. Some fundamental ethical issues which follow from this are identified, together with the issues which have dominated expert testimony in hearings held in British Columbia during the past 13 years.

Clinical and legal data were collected on 1265 schizophrenic patients remanded to a maximum security hospital, for psychiatric evaluation of fitness to stand trial. Schizophrenics accounted for over half of the remand population. When compared to the nonschizophrenic group, they had more previous admissions to the Forensic Psychiatric Institute and the Provincial Mental Hospital. They were also more likely to be found unfit to stand trial or to have their charges stayed by the Crown. However, approximately half of the schizophrenics in this study returned to Court, fit to stand trial and with no further psychiatric treatment provided. This study raises major questions about the purpose and value of remanding schizophrenics to a maximum security hospital for in-patient fitness evaluations.