In terms of the lack of validity of the testing brought up here, a recent Ontario, Canada legal case won on the MotherRisk test being proven to cause false positives resulting in children being put into foster care. There is current , final solution, in the Canadian legal system by an outspoken “mental health” advocate, who ironically, is senior crown counsel at the Serious Fraud Office of the Ministry of the Attorney General to encourage the Law Society of Ontario, Convocation, and all willing justice sector participants, to forge partnerships committed to improving the mental health of the legal profession, including lawyers, students, and paralegals. The LSO is also well suited, through strategic partnerships, to address the mental health of the broader justice community, including, judges, prosecutors, first responders, jurors, self-represented litigants, and vulnerable members of society engaged in the justice system. The ATSSC provides support services and facilities to 11 federal administrative tribunals through a single, integrated organization, including the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, with a budget of approximately $100 million. If allowed to be further entrenched into the law without challenge, there will be no way to roll it back. The lack of validity of the DSM opens the door to conducting: 1. a junk science litigation case asking the court to stop the specious labeling of millions of people. 2. a public debate and transparency about the true nature of the diagnosis and treatments 3. to enforce strict legal informed consent forms to be signed prior to dx and treatment 4. to investigate any financial conflict of interests they may have with the pharmaceutical and “MH” industry that works hand in glove with the legal industry 5. to ascertain if the confidentially he is seeking for lawyers with “MH” problems is different from level of “privacy” that the public ‘enjoys” 7. using the example of ADHD, Breggin argued that the public has the right to know their lawyer will be forgetful, unorganized etc and put their case/future at risk. 8. and potentially question if the fact that 75% of young drs on psych drugs, put the public health & safety at risk.