PPAO in the Media
Saturday, March 6, 2004
Toronto Star
Hospital searches patients' computers
Psychiatric centre bans pornography
Move sparks concerns rights violated
Scott Simmie
Staff Reporter
Computers owned by patients at the maximum security Oak Ridge division of the Mental Health Centre, Penetanguishene, were searched yesterday for pornographic images or video files.
The hospital says the move is based on therapeutic objectives.
Some patients and advocates believe it's a violation of rights.
"I'm not a child molester. It's outrageous — we're entitled to due process of law," says Gerald Vaughan, a 53-year-old patient who has been at the facility for 24 years.
Vaughan has refused to co-operate and would not sign a consent form authorizing the hospital to search his computer. He says much of the material on his hard drive is related to lawsuits and is protected by solicitor-client privilege. He also believes the facility has no legal authority to scan his equipment.
Because he refused, however, his computer was disabled Thursday night — the first night of the electronic search operation. Technically, Vaughan is still in possession of his files. But he cannot access them.
"They disabled it by disconnecting the power cable that goes to the PC board," he says. "They unhooked that, then closed the unit up again and put some security stickers on the back so they can tell if I opened it."
A spokesperson says the hospital had been "struggling" with the issue of pornography for some time and that it came to the forefront last month when officials became aware that pornography was on at least one computer or storage device.
"We believe that it's inconsistent to be offering therapy to sex offenders and allow some of this very violent and degrading pornography to be kept on hard drives in the facility," says spokesman Dan Parle.
A computer expert, apparently from outside the hospital, has been brought in to search the computers for offending material. Patients are permitted to watch through a window while their computers are scanned.
The Oak Ridge Division houses 140 forensic patients, some of whom are being treated for committing violent sexual offences. Roughly 23 of those patients have computers in their highly secure rooms (which some patients refer to as "cells"). They do not have online access in those rooms and wireless devices are not permitted.
On Feb. 20, a new operational policy directive outlining items banned from the facility was released. In the past, weapons, alcohol and cameras (and, more recently, tobacco) were considered contraband. The new directive, initiated by the chief of Oak Ridge's forensic division, now includes a ban on the following:
- Any material, electronic or otherwise, "that explicitly depicts graphic sexual acts, sex involving violence, sex apparently involving minors."
- Any material that depicts "unclothed or provocatively clothed persons who are apparently under the age of 18 years."
- Any material that is "exploitative or that depicts events that are morally degrading."
Hospital staff will determine whether material crosses those boundaries.
The day before that policy was released, a memo was sent to all patients. A copy of the memo was obtained by the Star. It states that "As a first step, patients will be required to authorize the hospital to conduct searches of their patient-owned computer systems, randomly or for cause, as a condition of continued access to those computer systems."
Those who fail to agree will see their computer put into indefinite storage or — as in Vaughan's case — disabled.
"Patients should expect other changes," says the memo by Dr. Brian Jones, chief of the forensic division. "For example, it is anticipated that the hospital will set upper limits on computer system hardware configurations, and on the number and type of portable storage devices that patients will be permitted to have in their possession. Other changes will also be forthcoming."
As word of the new policy spread, some patients expressed their concerns. Those concerns are echoed by the Psychiatric Patient Advocate Office (PPAO), a provincial body that represents the interests of patients in Ontario's psychiatric facilities.
"One of the things that we are most concerned about is that they (patients) were supposed to be voluntarily consenting. And if they don't, the computer is going to be seized indefinitely. That is not consent," says Vahe Kehyayan, director of the advocate office.
The advocate office also expressed concerns about potential Charter violations, noting that under Section 8, "Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure," and that a search should proceed only if authorized by law and based on reasonable and probable grounds.
The advocate office contacted the hospital this week and asked that the searches be postponed until some of the issues concerning patients could be addressed. However, the searches proceeded.
"It's a complete denial of rights and highly abusive," says Vaughan. "(They're) making us feel like non–persons."
Lawyer Marshall Swadron, who is representing a number of psychiatric patients in a lawsuit over conditions they endured during a strike by provincial public service employees, believes numerous legal and ethical issues are involved.
"These people are patients — not prisoners," he said yesterday.
"It seems to me that if you were going to seize somebody's personal property and hold on to it you'd probably want to have a warrant. You'd want to have reasonable and probable grounds before you went and got that warrant. And I don't think even lip service has been paid to those requirements," he said.
"To deprive people of the protection of those laws generally is the thin edge of the wedge. Next, my computer or yours will be seized." The hospital counters that there are, indeed, grounds for these searches.
"The reasonable and probable cause is that he's (they're) in a maximum security psychiatric hospital," said Parle. "And we have the right and obligation to make sure it's safe, and that there are no illegal or offensive materials, or no contraband. And we determine what the contraband is."
Parle says the facility is trying to walk a "fine line" between respecting privacy, protecting safety, and promoting a therapeutic environment for the patients. He also points out that not all material that's deemed to be contraband is necessarily illegal.
The February memo effectively gave patients a two-week window to delete any questionable material from their computers, said Parle, adding that most patients would not be using their computers for pornography.
'It's a complete denial of rights and highly abusive. (They're) making us feel like non–persons.'
