# 2022-043 Medical and Dental Care, Joint Personnel Support Unit, Medical Treatment, Mental Health

Case summary

F&R Date: 2023-06-05

The grievor contested the quality of the medical care and support he received from the Canadian Forces Health Services (CF H Svcs) Centers, as well as from his unit. Specifically, the grievor explained that there was a significant gap in his care between the date of his final appointment with a social worker and his visit with an external psychologist. The grievor further contended that his Return to Duty (RTD) program and his posting to a Transition Center (TC) were not administered appropriately. As redress, the grievor requested that his medical file be reviewed, that a RTD be implemented based on that review, and that his Chain of Command initiate the posting process to TC.

There is no Initial Authority decision on file since the grievor requested to have his grievance forwarded to the Final Authority (FA). However, as part of the grievance analysis, the input of the Director Mental Health (D MH) from CF H Svcs was included as a subject matter expert (SME). D MH explained that he believed the grievor had received the appropriate quality of primary and mental health medical care by the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). The D MH also confirmed that following a review of the grievor's file, his diagnosed medical condition was discussed with the grievor and his treatment was adjusted accordingly, ensuring an interdisciplinary approach to his medical care.

The Committee found that the D MH's comments on the grievor's file and situation followed a comprehensive review of the grievor's medical file. The Committee did not find evidence of negligent medical care by the personnel at CF H Svcs Center, nor the grievor's unit. The Committee noted that despite the gap in the grievor's referral to external mental health services, the CAF had no control over wait times and potential delays involved with the civilian health care systems. The Committee also noted that the grievor was eventually posted to the TC, resolving that aspect of the grievor's requested redress. The Committee did not find the grievor's claims of sub-par health care to be substantiated by any available evidence and found that following the SME review of his file, fulfilled the grievor's request for a review of his medical file.

The Committee recommended that the FA not afford the grievor redress.

FA decision summary

The Director Canadian Forces Grievance Authority, acting as FA, agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation not to afford the grievor redress.