CAPL Newsletter

Vol. 2, Issue 1

In This Issue


CPD and Training

Ask the Experts

Professional Practice

Inside CAPL

President’s Corner

Joel Watts, MD, FRCPC, DABPN (Forensic Psychiatry)

It is my pleasure to update you on CAPL’s activities and advocacy in the past few months. As president of CAPL, I am a member of the Canadian Psychiatric Association (CPA) Board and this affords us and the CPA the opportunity to benefit mutually from our combined expertise and influence.

One such example involves a position paper published by the Canadian Psychological Association earlier in 2018. In it, the authors state that the Criminal Code should be modified to allow psychologists to be added to the list of potential court-ordered assessors of Fitness to Stand Trial and Not Criminally Responsible (NCR). Even though the Criminal Code does not prohibit them from being named by individual courts currently, they presented many arguments advocating from them to be explicitly included in the pool of potential assessors.

As an example of our close collaboration with the CPA, our Board discussed this issue and then reached out to the CPA Board to discuss a joint position statement/letter to the federal Minister of Justice. The letter, which the CPA president, Dr. Wei-Yi Song, and I signed on behalf of our respective organizations, outlined our concerns about the psychologists’ positions and proposals, and reassured the government about the current functioning of the forensic system in Canada.

The following is a summary of the key points we made in our letter:

  • We respect and recognize the expertise of our psychologist colleagues and our patients benefit from our ongoing collaborative working relationship. We noted that many psychologists are already recognized by courts as experts, including risk assessments and Dangerous Offender matters. They do also already provide appropriate expert evidence in non-medically complicated cases of Fitness or NCR.
  • Legislators should be cautious as about designating psychologists specifically in the Criminal Code. Courts address most assessment orders to designated hospitals where psychologists cannot be the primary responsible clinicians for evaluees.
  • Only psychiatrists have the requisite medical training and expertise to conduct complicated assessments, particularly where the issue is Fitness to Stand Trial and recognition, diagnosis and treatment of medical and psychiatric illness can be crucial to the legal issue. Due to the bar being quite high in Canada for individuals to be found Unfit and therefore serious mental illness being implicated most often, it is in fact necessary for medically trained physicians to give evidence in cases where a Treatment Order must be obtained to render an accused Fit again.
  • Despite concerns raised that delays in timely completion of Fitness or NCR assessments could caused problems in light of the Supreme Court decision in R v. Jordan, current canvasing of the major forensic centres across the country has revealed that these assessments are being completed within the statutory timelines in the vast majority of cases. CAPL and the Royal College are aware of some pockets of the country where significant manpower issues exist but are already involved in recruitment and training initiatives to ensure adequate forensic psychiatry coverage across the country.
  • There would be no cost or time savings to the system from the psychology proposal due to the need to have psychiatrists involved in many cases, especially where treatment is an issue.

It does not appear currently that there is any appetite by the government to modify the Code according to the psychologists’ requests, but we remain vigilant and will continue to show leadership on this issue, including asking to speak with parliamentarians if necessary.

CPA also sought CAPL’s counsel when they were invited to submit a briefing paper to the he House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security, regarding the government’s proposed Bill C-83: An Act to amend the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and another Act in November 2018. Those of you who are also CPA members received notice about this briefing paper and it is available on the CPA website. In it, we offered support to the parts of the bill that seek to reduce the use of seclusion in prisons. We also encouraged the government to ensure that proper oversight of seclusion is left in place and that the legislation also backs up the measures with appropriate funding and framework for increased and properly trained mental health staffing and appropriate environments where seclusion is being used.

In September 2018, CAPL sponsored an Expert Psychiatry Series talk on capacity issues at the CPA annual conference in Toronto. The talk was well-received, and thanks to Drs. Booth and Klassen for preparing an engaging presentation and representing our field so well.

The CAPL Board continues to meet regularly and at the AAPL conference in Austin on October 2018, several of us met to further our work on developing CAPL’s operating procedures and policies. This work continued from the year before and we are closer to completing final edits of these documents. We will keep you all informed when the CAPL Board finally adopts our policy documents. This is an important step in ensuring that our future leaders have the proper tools to guide decision-making and the basic operations of CAPL.

CAPL members Drs. Glancy and Tomita are currently revising AAPL’s guidelines on prescribing in corrections with a focus on our Canadian correctional psychiatry practices. We hope that this document will serve as a resource that practitioners who work in corrections can use and refer to whenever they need to explain or justify rationale for prescribing in these difficult environments.

As president, I have the honour to be involved in assessing membership requests with some regularity. It is gratifying to see that despite our relatively small number in Canada, we continue to attract so many impressive and dedicated psychiatrists with formal forensic training, qualifications and expertise who seek to become CAPL members. Many are new or recent graduates of Canadian PGY-6 programs or forensic psychiatrists from abroad. It is great to be able to welcome new members into the CAPL family who will ensure the healthiness and renewal of our field.

This year’s annual conference will be held in Montreal; the first time we have visited this vibrant and exciting city. It is also the first time that we will be holding it a bit later in the year in the hopes that warmer weather will welcome us from Apr. 28 to May 1, 2019. Based on what I have seen from the Conference Organizing Committee, this year’s conference is on track to be one of our best ever, with engaging pre-conference seminars and mealtime speakers and the return of the our social events (remember the pub event in Victoria last year?!) We hope to see you all there.

Lastly, the Board would like to remind members that elections for CAPL Board director positions will occur in 2020 (at the annual conference in Banff) as many current directors will be at their term limits (myself included). We will be seeking enthusiastic and committed CAPL members to step up and contribute to CAPL’s leadership in the future. Please contact Nominating Committee Chair, Dr. Johann Brink, at if you are interested in being nominated for director of the Board or would like to nominate another CAPL member willing to take on this role in 2020. You may also consult the CAPL bylaws available on our website for information about the roles of CAPL Board directors and term limits.

Happy winter and see you all soon in Montreal!


Greetings From Your RCPSC Forensic Psychiatry Specialty Committee

Brad Booth, MD, FRCPC, DABPN (Forensic Psychiatry)

Chair, Specialty Committee in Forensic Psychiatry

As a reminder, CAPL as the national specialty society has a vital link to your Royal College specialty committee, in existence since December 2009.  At the specialty committee we work in close collaboration with CAPL and our profession nationally to establish training standards in the specialty, develop examinations, ensure appropriate quality training is occurring and certify individuals holding themselves out as forensic psychiatrists.

Your core voting members include:

Dr. Brad Booth – Chair
Dr. Joel Watts – Vice-Chair & Region 3 rep
Dr. Victoria Roth – Region 1
Dr. Jeff Waldman – Region 2
Dr. Fabien Gagnon – Region 4
Dr. Aileen Brunet – Region 5
Dr. Graham Glancy – Examination Board Chair

In addition to the core members, each of the program directors from the accredited programs serve as non-voting members.  Since the formal recognition of the specialty in April 2011, there has been a total of seven schools come online with accredited programs:

University Program Director Next Regular Accreditation survey
University of British Columbia Dr. Todd Tomita Spring 2020
University of Alberta Dr. Lenka Zedkova Fall 2023
University of Saskatchewan Dr. Azaad Baziany Fall 2023
McMaster University Dr. Yuri Alatishe Fall 2022
University of Toronto Dr. Lisa Ramshaw Fall 2020
University of Ottawa Dr. Michelle Mathias Spring 2024
Université de Montréal Dr. Jocelyne Brault Spring 2021

Since the formalization of the subspecialty in 2011, 164 psychiatrists in Canada have successfully been certified as forensic psychiatrists. The national distribution is quite proportional, relative to the 5,508 general psychiatrists certified by the RCPSC:

  • 36 forensic psychiatrists in BC of 893 psychiatrists
  • 17 forensic psychiatrists in Alberta of 502 psychiatrists
  • 1 forensic psychiatrist in Saskatchewan of 100 psychiatrists
  • 2 forensic psychiatrists in Manitoba of 205 psychiatrists
  • 66 forensic psychiatrists in Ontario of 2,336 psychiatrists
  • 34 forensic psychiatrists in Quebec of 999 psychiatrists
  • 0 forensic psychiatrists in New Brunswick of 52 psychiatrists
  • 6 forensic psychiatrists in Nova Scotia of 157 psychiatrists (also cover PEI)
  • 1 Newfoundland forensic psychiatrist of 58 psychiatrists

This year has been an enjoyable but busy year at the Royal College for your representatives who volunteer 100 per cent of their time to this important cause of education and establishing the standard of the discipline. The group has been working on the new standards for Competency by Design. Our first three-day workshop was May 1 – 3, 2018 in Ottawa, and our second three-day workshop was Feb. 19 – 21, 2019. Please give input to your reps on what you’d like included for future meetings.

The specialty committee is always interested in hearing from Fellows of the Royal College and CAPL members.  We continue to work on making forensic psychiatry training high quality.

CPD and Training

2019 CAPL Annual Conference

Is there a better place than Montreal in the Spring? For the first time ever, Montreal welcomes us for the 24th annual CAPL conference on Apr. 28 – May 1. The meeting will be held at Le Westin Montreal in the historic district, within walking distance of Notre Dame Basilica, McGill University, downtown and many other attractions.

The program starts on Sunday, Apr. 28 with a full day of pre-conference seminars. In the morning, Dr. David Atwood will delve into the complexities of clozapine with his presentation The BCDCAC’s of Clozapine (not just the ABC’s), while in the afternoon Ms. Barbara Walker-Renshaw will ensure that we are on the right side of the law with her presentation Recent Canadian Appellate Court Decisions Regarding Part XX.I Review Board Matters and their Implications for Clinical Forensic Practice. Both talks deal with issues essential to our multiple roles in treatment, assessment and expert testimony, and both are accomplished speakers with a wealth of information to share.

After the pre-conference seminars finish, the conference itself gets going with welcoming remarks and a presentation on treatment resistant depression by the CPA president, Dr. Wei-Yi Song, after which the recipient of the 2019 CAPL Fellowship Award will present their paper. This year the conference planning committee was extremely pleased to receive six high quality applications for the Fellowship Award. We won’t reveal the surprise yet, but the winning talk will be of interest to us all. The day ends with the welcome reception, after which people will be free to disperse to explore the city and find some of the great food for which the city is known.

The main program itself starts on Monday morning and runs through Wednesday with a fascinating mix of research in progress, flash talks, debates and panel discussions. Again, the theme of the year is abundance  – we received so many abstract submissions that the organizing committee has had to rework the schedule to accommodate all that were accepted.

In usual CAPL fashion, our learning is balanced with time for networking and enjoying the company of our colleagues and friends. Monday evening sees our annual dinner presentation, while on Tuesday evening, back by popular demand, we have the Second Annual CAPL Pub Night, this time at L’Assommoir, an easy stroll from our hotel. Depending on how long people stay, strolling back might be a little more difficult.

New this year is a special event for residents only. This will give our residents time to meet with and ask questions of practising forensic psychiatrists with different backgrounds and types of practice, all while enjoying a free meal (which we all know is important during residency).

Finally, this year we hope to roll out another initiative – the Connect Café, an opportunity for forensic institutions, such as hospitals, correctional facilities and outpatient programs, to meet with CAPL members and guests, including residents, with the goal of connecting potential employers with interested professionals considering a change in work setting. If you represent an organization that might wish to have a booth at Connect Café, please contact Chantal Goddard or any member of the conference organizing committee.

If you have never been to a CAPL conference before, please join us and join in. On behalf of the conference organizing committee, we look forward to welcoming everybody in Montreal.

Upcoming Forensic Psychiatry Meetings


50th AAPL Annual Meeting
Oct. 24 – 27, 2019
Baltimore, Maryland


24th Annual CAPL Conference
Apr. 28 – May 1, 2019
Montreal, Québec

25th Annual CAPL Conference
Apr. 19 – 22, 2020
Banff, Alberta


13th Annual Risk and Recovery Forensic Conference
Apr. 10 – 12, 2019
Hamilton, Ontario

British Columbia

Forensic Psychiatry Education Day, 10th Edition
UBC Forensic Psychiatry Division & CAPL BC Regional Section
Jun. 14, 2019

Ask the Experts

Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Difficult Questions for the Psychiatric Expert

Dr. Graham Glancy and Dr. John Bradford

One of our members recently asked us the following question. We were at a course regarding civil actions for PTSD in the U.S. and the presenter emphasized that it is the role of the psychiatric expert to come to a conclusion on causation. Is this the case in Canada?

In Canadian courts, various experts, most notably orthopedic surgeons and physiatrists, have in recent years started to opine on causation. This has been the case in the United States for some years and is becoming the trend in Canada. It is less common for psychiatrists to give this ultimate opinion. There is no rule prohibiting experts in Canada addressing the ultimate issue, and each judge may or may not allow this practice. It is prudent to hesitate if asked to address this issue, so that the judge can decide whether this is appropriate.

Causation is an issue for the trier of fact to decide. Generally speaking in Canada most civil trials are before a jury, and it is up to the jury to decide causation on a balance of probabilities. The reason that an expert should not make a definitive statement on causation is that this is a legal term of art. The Supreme Court case that guides the courts on this matter is Athey v. Leonati.1 Jon Athey had a particularly bad year in 1991. In February he was involved in a motor vehicle accident, taken to the hospital and discharged home. He participated in treatment for some time and was improving. In April of the same year a truck crossed into his lane of traffic and hit his vehicle head-on. Following this he continued to work full-time as a body shop manager, but could not perform any duties involving heavy labour. He had a history of previous back problems. Nevertheless, he made progress in treatment to such a degree that his doctor suggested that he join a local health club and exercise. One day at the health club he began warming up and felt a pop in his back, which turned out to be a herniated disc. His case ended up in the Supreme Court of Canada who defined causation, referring to well-established principles. The court ruled that the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that the injury would not have occurred but for the wrongful act of the defendant. Mr. Justice Major explained that where this test is unworkable, the plaintiff must only prove that the wrongful act “materially contributed” to the injury.2 The material contribution test can be used where it is impossible to determine the exact cause of the injury because there are a number of contributing causes.3 However, except for certain rare instances where, for instance, a number of negligent acts occurred, and, were it not for one more act, were the cause of the injury, the but for test should apply. It should also be noted that in a number of cases the courts have made the point that a mere temporal relationship between the act and the symptoms does not prove causation, and that all parties, including experts, should use caution when coming to any conclusions just because of a temporal relationship.

In practice, the issue of causation is a legal issue not a psychiatric issue. Therefore, the psychiatrist should be hesitant about not opining on this issue. The psychiatric expert should record a description of the evaluee’s account of the putative precipitating event. Extensive collateral information is also helpful. The expert should also attempt to delineate any psychological symptoms, and any decrease in social and occupational functioning that may have occurred following the event. The evaluator should be alert to any possible malingering or exaggeration. Collateral information may be helpful in this respect. Consideration should be given to the use of psychometric testing, including specific tests for malingering.5 The psychiatric expert should use a biopsychosocial model, which gives a fuller view of the evaluee. It should be noted that there is usually a multiplicity of causes that go to the genesis of psychiatric symptoms or illnesses.

Some have considered that civil trials should be bifurcated and that the issue of liability and damages should be tried separately. If this were to be the case then the trier of fact would already have decided causation, in other words the plaintiff has proven that the injury or symptoms would not have occurred but for the tortious act. The psychiatric expert would then be able to describe the psychiatric symptoms and the decrease in psychosocial functioning, if any, since the act and that would go to the assessment of damages. Regretfully bifurcation has become a dirty word in civil law, due to the possible increased expense and logistical problems that this procedure would create.

In summary, causation is a legal concept, which the trier of fact decides on a balance of probabilities. In the United States it is common for psychiatric experts to opine on this ultimate issue, and it is becoming a trend in Canada for experts to address this question. In many cases it is a difficult question to answer due to the multifactorial nature of psychiatric symptomatology.


  1. Athey v. Leonati [1996] 3 SCR 458 (Supreme Court of Canada 1996).
  2. Bonnington Castings Ltd v Wardlaw [1956] AC 613 (House of Lords 1956).
  3. Clements (litigation guardian of) v Clements (2012) 2 SCR 181.
  4. Glancy G, Ash P, Bath E, et al. AAPL practice guideline for the forensic assessment. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law. 2015;43(2 Suppl):S3.
  5. Hoffman B, O’Shaughnessy R. Malingered mental illness in compensation cases. In: Schneider RD, Bloom H, editors. Law and mental disorder: A comprehensive and practical approach. Toronto (ON): Irwin Law; 2013.

Professional Practice

My Journey Into Forensic Psychiatry: A Resident’s Path Into the Subspecialty

Kim Browning, MD

When I look back on my life it is obvious that forensic psychiatry was my ultimate destination. I have always had a fascination with the macabre; but the pinnacle event that allowed for this fascination to take on its own life happened in 1991. I was in grade six and a man named Jeffrey Dahmer had just been arrested for numerous atrocities perpetrated on other men. I followed the case as part of a current events project assigned to us by our teacher. I became utterly obsessed as to why a human being would engage in such curious behaviours. The seed of forensics was forever planted and a passion to acquire knowledge on the topic was ignited.

After high school, I began postsecondary training in criminology at Douglas College, believing naively that I could satisfy my interests through policing. It didn’t take more than half a semester to quickly change my mind. I transferred to the University of Victoria, certain that I wanted to pursue my interest in forensics from a different angle. I graduated with distinction ready for the next chapter.

I went on to the University of Calgary to do research in basic neuroscience at the Hotchkiss Brain Institute. I completed three years of graduate school. I published my MSc thesis, but ultimately forewent the PhD and applied to transfer to medicine.

Upon entering medical school, I reasoned that if forensic psychiatry was my theoretical end-point, I had to rule everything else out. While I did do some electives in forensic psychiatry, I did most rotations in intensive care, emergency medicine and trauma. I also explored the forensics perspective from the Medical Examiner’s office. In fact, that was the only rotation I read an entire text book on the subject of the rotation and for a brief time considered forensic pathology. Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed all my time in medical school, but ultimately I knew come CaRMS that my heart was still with forensic psychiatry; no other specialty appealed to me in the same way.

Now I am closing out my residency and have been offered a fellowship position at UBC for 2019. I have done many electives in forensics over the course of my residency and I engage in resident teaching on the subject of forensics in order to help increase exposure to the subject amongst my resident colleagues.

That is how I think the interest in forensics begins: there is an event, a patient case or some other form of exposure that draws someone near to the subject. Certain individuals will come in to the psychiatric residency having already had such exposure and know from the beginning forensics is the direction they want to pursue. But the majority of individuals who enter into residency have not had such an experience and therefore exposure is crucial. Regarding Royal College-certified subspecialties, our program requires that we do no less than six months in paediatrics, as well as geriatrics, yet there is no mandatory time for forensics. We receive a series of lectures in our PGY4 year and that is the only exposure one can expect unless volitionally acquiring more. Without exposure to forensics, recruiting becomes a problem as people will not apply to a fellowship they know very little about. In order to increase exposure and thus interest, mandatory rotations should be required of all psychiatric residents in forensics. It is, after all, tested on the Royal College exams. I suggest that teaching around forensics happen in the first two years of residency. This would provide time for residents to contemplate and organize their future rotations.

Additionally, recruiting can be done through presentations outlining what the career entails, along with the benefits and drawbacks. Further, simple monthly events such as a forensic journal club could be organized by staff or residents.

I hope to be a part of the process of recruitment to this fascinating and rewarding subspecialty throughout my career.

Dr. Kim Browning is a UBC PGY5 psychiatry resident who will be starting the UBC PGY6 Forensic Psychiatry Training Program in July 2019.

Inside CAPL

CAPL BC Regional Section Update

Todd Tomita, MD, FRCPC
Chair, BC Regional Section

We continue to hold spring and fall forensic education days at UBC Robson Square in Vancouver. Recent participation has been between 40 to 50 people with a mix of forensic psychiatrists, forensic psychologists, psychiatry and psychology trainees, Crown and Defence counsel, correctional and forensic managers, and members of the BC Review Board.

CAPL BC and UBC Forensic Education Day 8th Edition – Jun. 1, 2018

Intoxication and Insanity:

Perspectives from the Court and Counsel
Justice Catherine Wedge, BC Supreme Court
Richard Fowler QC, Defence Counsel
Mark Levitz QC, Crown Counsel
Moderator: Lyle Hillaby, Crown Counse

Addiction & Substance-Induced Psychosis Leading to an NCRMD verdict: A Case Presentation
Andrew Kolchak, MD, FRCPC

Blurred Lines Between Intoxication and Insanity
Michelle Lawrence, LLB, PhD

Sexual Homicides Committed by Adolescents
James F. Hemphill, PhD & Robert J. W. Clift, PhD

Folie a Deux and the Defence of Duress: A Case Presentation
David Morgan, MBBCh, LLM, FRCPC

CAPL BC and UBC Forensic Education Day 9th Edition – Nov. 18, 2018

Solitary Confinement: Segregation and Seclusion in Secure Settings

The Medical Perspective on Segregation and Seclusion Use
Dr. Nader Sharifi

The Case Against Solitary Confinement: BC Civil Liberties Association v. Canada(Attorney General)
Mr. Thomas Arbogast

Solitary Confinement: Panel Discussion
Mr. Thomas Arbogast
Dr. Rakesh Lamba
Dr. Nader Sharifi

Getting the Message: The Ways We Communicate about Violence Risk

The Forensic Psychiatry Perspective: Methods of Assessing and Communicating Violence Risk Opinions
Dr. Rakesh Lamba
Dr. Robert Lacroix

Perspectives from the Court and Review Board: How Expert Opinions about Violence Risk Opinion are Understood and Used
Justice Richard Schneider
Mr. Bernd Walter
Dr. Hy Bloom

The CAPL BC and UBC Forensic Education Day 10th Edition will be held on Jun. 14, 2019. The theme of the day will be on Cognitive Bias on Forensic Work and the Search for Countermeasures.

Update From the Quebec Regional Section

Joel Watts, MD, FRCPC, DABPN (Forensic Psychiatry)

President, CAPL-Quebec

With the annual conference coming to Montreal this year for the first time, the Quebec chapter of CAPL sends you our warmest bienvenu with the hope that you enjoy everything that this cosmopolitan city has to offer.

CAPL-QC continues to represent over 30 francophone CAPL members whose practices are vast and busy. As is the case in many parts of the country, forensic practitioners in Quebec face a great demand for their services and many services are actively recruiting forensic psychiatrists to meet the demand. Having the only francophone PGY-6 forensic psychiatry residency program in Montreal is a definite advantage to forensics in Quebec. It has already proven very been helpful in training future forensic psychiatrists who end up replacing colleagues who are nearing or making their way into retirement. CAPL-QC has been preoccupied by the forensic psychiatrist resource issue for some time and this is a topic of regular discussion at our dinner meetings near Trois-Rivières. We have been holding these meetings biannually in this central location in the province to allow as many of us to attend in person.

Since its inception as CAPL’s first chapter in 2010, we continue to gather, discuss issues, share expertise and maintain the strong tradition of collegiality and networking that has defined not only CAPL-QC but CAPL itself over the past 20 years. Unfortunately, due to our members’ workloads increasing because of fewer numbers of forensic practitioners and increased clinical loads, it was difficult to have our usual two meetings in 2018. It was nonetheless clear from our last meeting on Sept. 24, 2018 that we are committed to maintaining the strong forensic relationships we have across the province and continue to advocate locally and provincially for improved forensic services and practice conditions.

Fair and equitable remuneration for forensic psychiatrists in Quebec continues to be an issue discussed regularly, and with a new governing party in Quebec (the Coalition Avenir Québec or CAQ), time will have to tell whether any headway can be made on this issue. We have continued our advocacy regarding this issue with the provincial psychiatric association, the Association des médecins-psychiatres du Québec (AMPQ).

We look forward to welcoming catching up with as many of you as possible in Montreal in April!

Call for Applications: Officers of CAPL

Johann Brink, MB, ChB, BA Hons, FCPsych (SA), Founder, RCPSC Forensic Psychiatry

Chair, Nominating Committee

The Nominating Committee invites applications for 2019-2020 officer positions on the Board of Directors.

In accordance with section 7.01 of the CAPL bylaws, the officers of the Corporation are appointed by the Board. A director may be appointed to any office of the Corporation. With the exception of the President, Vice-President and Past-President, who must also be directors, officers need not be directors. However, in all cases, officers must meet the qualifications for directors outlined in section 5.03 of the bylaws. The term of each office is one year, renewable twice for a maximum of three consecutive one-year terms.

Current officers are:

  • President: Joel Watts
  • Vice-President: Brad Booth
  • Secretary: Phil Klassen
  • Treasurer: Victoria Roth

Drs. Watts, Booth and Klassen are each eligible to serve a third one-year term in their current offices. Dr. Roth is completing a third consecutive one-year term in the office of Treasurer, so is ineligible to be reappointed to that office.

To apply for an officer position, submit a brief statement of interest (250 words maximum) and a recent copy of your CV online at URL no later than 5:00 p.m. ET on Apr. 1, 2019. Nominations sent by email, fax or regular mail will be disqualified. The Board will appoint officers at the first teleconference meeting following the AGM, which will be chaired by the Nominating Committee Chair until the officers are appointed.