Source: https://fasdjustice.ca/cases/summary-of-legal-literature.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 06:19:49+00:00

Document:
The invisibility of FASD is one of the major causes of the difficulties that sufferers experience in the justice system.6 This contention was reinforced by Trueman J. in R. v. Gray.7 People with a form of FASD also tend to find ways to mask their cognitive disability. This makes it increasingly difficult for legal professionals to identify the disorder.8 Legal professionals are not trained to recognize the symptoms of FASD. However, in R. v. Steeves, an accused was diagnosed with a form of FASD after a police officer prompted his family to seek an assessment. This illustrates the importance of legal professionals gaining a greater awareness of FASD.
Although there is a general lack of awareness of FASD, there are some courts that have recognized the symptoms or the assertions of the accused. This recognition has resulted in assessment orders to obtain a proper diagnosis of FASD. R. v. Williams, R. v. Gray, and R. v. Harris are all cases where the courts have made determinations on assessment. Gray held that an assessment order could be made based on the Criminal Code as opposed to the Charter. However, the court made some comments that indicate that if an offender with FASD is treated like other offenders, it may be a violation of their s.15 Charter rights.
There is an obvious need for change in the judicial system. Where there are high rates of recidivism, alternative approaches to sentencing become increasingly important to ensure the health of society in general. Some courts have moved toward a more treatment-oriented approach to sentencing. Initial evaluations illustrate that this approach is effective.
An offender's fitness to stand trial is an important consideration. In some cases, the offender's ability to instruct counsel and understand the implications of guilt are so impaired that he is unfit to stand trial due to mental disorder. In R. v. T. J., TJ was diagnosed with FAS. The court held that he was unfit to stand trial due to mental disorder.28 He would have had to remain in the criminal justice system for an indeterminate period of time. People who are UST are treated more harshly than other offenders. This was a violation of his Charter rights. TJ was held to no longer be a danger to society, so he was granted a stay of proceedings.29 Other examples of where the court considered UST included R. v. W.D and R. v. W.A.L.D.
In R. v. R.F. and R. v. S.L.P., neither offender was able to prove that he did not understand that his actions were wrong.32 The accused in D.J. v. Yukon was found to be NCR. However, there was no suitable place for him in the mental health or criminal justice systems. But the court did hold that he would not benefit from being in prison.33 This illustrates the need for the legal profession to consider the mental health of the offender and advocate for a proper treatment plan.
1 Larry N. Chartrand & Ella M. Forbes-Chilibeck, "The Sentencing of Offenders with Fetal Alcohol Syndrome" (2003) 11 Health L. J. 35 - 70 at pg 37-38.
2 Timothy E. Moore & Melvyn Green, "Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD): A Need for Closer Examination by the Criminal Justice System" 19 C.R. (6th) 99; 19 CR-ART 99 at pg 1.
3 Supra note 1 pg 38.
4 Supra note 2 pg 1.
5 Supra note 1 pg 36-37.
6 Supra note 1 pg 39; Supra note 2 pg 2.
8 Supra note 2 pg 2.
9 Supra note 2 pg 3.
10 Supra note 2 pg 4.
11 Supra note 1 pg 38-41.
12 Supra note 1 pg 41.
13 Supra note 1 pg 44.
15 Supra note 1; Saskatchewan, Final Report of the Commission on First Nations and Métis Peoples and Justice Reform. Vol. 2. Chapter 9.
16 Supra note 1 pg 41.
17 Supra note 2 pg 7.
18 Supra note 2 pg 7.
19 Supra note 2 pg 8.
20 Supra note 1 pg 45.
21 Supra note 2 Pg 8.
23 Supra note 2 pg 8.
24 Supra note 2 pg 8.
25 Supra note 2 pg 9.
26 H. Rae Mitten, Barriers to Implementing Holistic, Community-Based Treatment For Offenders with Fetal Alcohol Conditions (L.L.M Thesis, University of Saskatchewan, 2003) [unpublished] at pg 22.
28 Supra note 26; Schneider, Richard D. "Mental Disorder in the Courts: Absolute Discharge for Unfits?" (2000), 21 For the Defence 36. QL; Supra note 1.
30 Supra note 26 pg 85-86.
31 Supra note 26 pg 88.
32 Supra note 26pg 89.
33 Supra note 26pg 94.
35 Supra note 2 pg 5-6.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.