# 2022-074 Medical and Dental Care, Dental Services, Release - Medical

Case summary

F&R Date: 2024-06-03

The grievor was to be medically released, and as a person affected by Harmful and Inappropriate Sexual Behaviour (HISB), the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) acted as their release authority, setting the grievor's original date of release based on the grievor's requested date. Later, the grievor requested to have their date of release extended to allow for the completion of ongoing dental procedures, but was not supported by their chain of command. The grievor argued that they were at risk of a poor transition to civilian life, that they received deficient dental care during COVID-19 pandemic restrictions and that their transition should be considered as complex. 

After submission of the grievance, the Director Military Careers Administration (DMCA) denied the grievor's request, determining that the grievor's dental condition did not substantiate retention. Subsequent to that decision, the Director General Military Careers, acting as the Initial Authority, declined to accept the grievance, stating that the original release date was the decision of the CDS and that the grievance should therefore proceed to the Final Authority (FA). 

The Committee recognized that while the grievor had complex issues affecting their transition to civilian life, the Committee did not have the medical and social work expertise to reject the professional opinions determining the grievor to be a non-complex transition. The Committee noted that in their decision, the DMCA failed to take the grievor's status as a member affected by HISB into account. The Committee noted that CDS Directive – Retention of Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) Members Affected by Harmful and Inappropriate Sexual Behaviour outlined that all aspects of transition should be considered for members affected by HISB and that maximum transition support should be offered, including completion of ongoing medical care. The Committee found that while a concrete connection between the grievor's dental condition and their HISB affected status could not be established, this possible connection was not identified and that, given all of the circumstances, the grievor had compellingly substantiated a basis for retention. As such, the Committee found that the CAF erred in denying the grievor's request to amend their date of release. Because the grievor had been released from the CAF, the Committee recommended that the FA consider an ex gratia payment to recognize the injustice and hardship caused by the unreasonable denial of their request.