# 2021-221 Medical and Dental Care, Medical Treatment

Case summary

F&R Date: 2022-07-29

The grievor asserted that the quality of the medical care she received from the personnel at a Canadian Forces Health Services Center amounted to malpractice. She stated that the physician assistant and the physiotherapist misdiagnosed her, that she was treated for an incorrectly identified injury and that she was denied additional testing. The grievor also claimed that the medical staff ignored her orthopaedic surgeon's instructions regarding her recovery time.

The Initial Authority (IA) granted partial redress by requesting that an investigation be conducted into the grievor's medical care by the Director Health Services Quality and Performance (D HS Q&P). The IA reviewed the D HS Q&P's findings and determined that the plaintiff's access to care was consistent with clinical best practice and aligned with the Canadian Armed Forces Spectrum of Care.

The Committee found that the grievor's claims of malpractice were properly responded to and managed by the Canadian Armed Forces, and that the findings in the D HS Q&P report were justified and reasonable in light of the evidence available. The Committee also found that the report fulfilled the grievor's request for an investigation into the quality of health care that she received, and that the Committee's review fulfilled the grievor's request for an investigation by an external agency.

The Committee recommended that the Final Authority not afford the grievor redress.

FA decision summary

The Chief of the Defence Staff agreed with the Committee's recommendation to deny the grievance. The CDS explained that the grievor's allegations of medical malpractice were not administrative affairs of the Canadian Armed Forces and that he did not have jurisdiction over such matters. He noted that he does not have the authority to regulate or discipline the medical profession and that this responsibility lies with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of each respective province. The CDS clarified that Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) is not a licensing body and does not have the mandate to investigate individual health care providers or institutions. The CDS noted that the grievor did file a claim to VAC and that the 64-month delay of treatment was regrettable, but that he again does not have jurisdiction over VAC claims.