Psychologists as Non Scientists & Psychiatry as 'Always Right': Non Testable, Non Falsifiable, Employing 'Soft' Force Hence Violence

All 'legally-relevant' terminology used, is common / colloquial form. I do not know fully-correct, legal language. All statements are made as accurately as possible, given the constraints of document writing and editing time. Any error will be corrected if and when notified. Otherwise, I have no way to present this argument.

In particular, I use: slander = spoken falsehood, libel = written falsehood.

Thus not related to the legal technicalities of defamation. Medics are totally free from all recourse under law, for defamation, libel or slander, under common usage of those terms, within private meetings and the privileged Mental Health Tribunal environ. Some medics do, in my personal experience, propagate falsehoods with impunity. Many examples, below.

I also use: lie = (unknowingly ?) propagate falsehood(s) with intent.

Apparent medic intent typically being to make the complainant (me) 'sound crazier'. Such propagation of falsehoods by mis-reporting and mis-copying, often a 'Chinese-whispers'-type effect, in the direction of 'more- or sufficiently-crazy' sounding.

I appreciate greatly, the NHS and those that work in it.

I do not like to be viewed or perceived as an NHS problem. In fact, I object to being viewed as any problem at all. Particularly in the current pandemic. However, I am being treated unfairly by 'medics' (generic).

'Medics' (generic) are rightly held in high regard, especially at present. It will therefore not popular or politic, to point out that some of them can be lax and sloppy, lying, slandering and libelling me, on common usage of those terms. Such propagation of falsehoods, as a result of negligence, incompetence and discrimination, on common usage of those terms. However, human rights violation, including repeated physical assault hence violence ('soft' force), is a big deal, and I will protest it.

My immediately previous NHS-complaint narratives, here:

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/straight-answer-from-psychiatrist-patient-less-medic-world-batty/

Straight Answer from a Psychiatrist ? The 'Patient' as 'Less' . Medic World View by 'Physical Assault' ('Soft' Force) Hence Violence

and

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/negativenonvalue-psychiatric-drug-injection-forced-liberty-batty-1c/

Negative/NonValue of Psychiatric Drug Injection With Forced Deprivation of Liberty & 'Physical Assault' : Typical Mind Fallacy & Limitation of Vision

18:15, Wed 10 Jun '20:

I read the SOAD's report. Like the rest of the medics with whom I have been dealing, she fabricates things. She accuses me of referring continuously (sic) to a 'medical conspiracy'. 100% fabrication. I don't do conspiracy theories. Those are for non-scientists like psychologists and psychiatrists. And she attributes to me claims of my being 'brutalised'. Bull. I make clear throughout my LinkedIn-blogs that I am dealing with 'soft' force. These medics always mis-report in the direction of 'more crazy-sounding'.

And as by other medics, she speculates on the risk of possible increased aggression at home. This is the classic bully tactic. They beat on me again and again and again -- repeated physical assault to impose depot injections by 'soft' force, thus violence instigated by them -- then accuse me of being violent. I've never been violent in my life.

The SOAD pointed out in her report, that I didn't think she'd read my stuff, because there was not time between me emailing it and her phoning me back. I think she hadn't read my stuff well enough to understand it. If she had, she would have spotted the major difference between a well-constructed argument supplying plausible and obvious mechanisms for medic group and mass delusion, (with corresponding failures of the 'back-to-front' medical legal system), and a 'medical conspiracy'. To the SOAD, it 'all looked the same'. She dismissed my careful arguments of medic group and mass delusion (especially final-sections-of-this-blog), with derisory and trivialising mis-use of her term 'medical conspiracy'. She was pre-judgemental because she saw me only behind the 'looney-label'. She was immediately part of the medic mass delusion. The SOAD did not even notice that I had sent her four weblinks in my email. She insisted repeatedly, that I had sent her only one weblink. The attached document contained only one weblink. Which suggests that she had perhaps read the attached document, but not my email and not my web-blogs. She gave consideration of my arguments, short shrift.

I dislike this cheating / lying / bullying system. It just *matters* actually to get facts right, to report accurately and be fair !

11:00, Wed 10 Jun '20:

No emergency ambulance, today. Just police and a police van. The police used handcuffs, which dig badly into the wrists and do hurt. I said that, to the policeman who had chosen to use the handcuffs, pointing out that I was totally non violent. He replied that he did not know me. And of course, on reflection, those handcuffs are meant to hurt, to impose control. I was manhandled down the stairs as a ~14 1/2 stone, zero escalation, non violent, token passive resistance dead weight. Then locked in the grilled-bar 'dog-cell' at the back of the police van. It had a yellow 'Have you swallowed drugs ?' sticker on the back of one door. I was manhandled into a hospital room and sat onto a chair. Police went to the van. I stated clearly and repeatedly, ''No' means 'no'' to forced injection, on my grounds of my being adequately healthy. I was ignored and injected anyway, as live meat. The alternative, in response to repeated medic-instigated violence, is escalation, and the limiting case is murder. All three female nurses and the one male nurse were a lot smaller than me. I chose non violent, zero escalation. I do wonder if the injecting Community Care Coordinator enjoyed the power ? She is an on-going feature of my life now. It should not be legal for another human being to have such personal power over someone, enforced by law. This is human rights violation and it is straightforward, personal, 1-on-1 abuse.

I was not given the result of the SOAD telephone interview, before medics physically assaulted me again.

No warrant this time, either. The Community Care Coordinator said that she did not need one, as my family had let the police onto the premises. So what changed ? Last time that I insisted on a warrant, 'medics' went away at ~7 pm on a Thu evening and came back at midnight. My family had let the police onto the premises then, too. Maybe the law changed in-between. Or maybe they got it wrong last time, and didn't actually need the previous warrant. I asked my solicitor about this, and he told me that medics might have argued that my mental health was deteriorating, thus avoiding need for the warrant. If so, those medics continue to spout total bull. My mental health is excellent, relative to those in mental distress and pain who would benefit from 'care'.

And this time, 'medics' did not revoke the Community Treatment Order to Section 3 of the Mental Health Act. In the past, CTO recall to hospital has required on-ward evaluation by the in-patient Consultant. I asked the Community Care Coordinator. She said the revocation to Section 3 MHA was not required. They could simply inject me by force, directly on the CTO. No Section 3 MHA. She had the police on her side, in my lounge. This is good for the Community Team. The in-patient team has a somewhat different view of the situation. It held a 'Stop the Line' meeting, which is meant to try and avoid on-going patient abuse. However, the Community Team has successfully taken the in-patient team out of the loop. So the Community Team can now abuse at will.

I had asked for clarification on these points of law, last night, from my solicitor. However, he chose not to reply last night, or this morning. He had already stated yesterday, repeatedly, that medics had the right to recall and medicate me on the CTO. So maybe he thought that that was adequate information. No further clarification required

One policeman said that the Community Care Coordinator was a qualified health professional. I replied that she was an idiot and dishonest. Of course, he responded dismissively, and there was no point continuing the conversation after that. The police are compelled to be deluded by the 'looney-label'. They have no choice but to become immediately, part of the 'medic' (generic -- including police and ambulance staff) mass delusion. The Community Care Coordinator though, has less excuse. She is wilfully ignorant, even if not one of the senior medics. I have explained things to her in detail. And she refuses to action my explicit, detailed and formal written email complaints to PsychosisAdmin. Charges of lies, slander, libel and straight fabrication of falsehoods by 'medics', under common usage of those terms. The Community Care Coordinator had different choices available to her.

It is simply not acceptable that I now have this personal, 1-on-1 abuser, as part of my life. She pollutes my existence.

These parasite (can't get them out of my hair) medics will force injection on me again in a month's time. Then quarterly, for the rest of my life. Life is not acceptable in this form. However, I have family responsibilities. I must work around the parasites.

-- No big deal to most people, it seems. And many people have bigger problems.

The mental health legal system is 'back-to-front' compared to conventional UK law, with the complainant assumed 'guilty' until proven 'innocent' (analogy). In my case, 'medics' (generic) suffer from a group and mass delusion which is repeatedly self-reinforcing. They cannot see me behind their applied 'looney-label' (colloquial). Their delusion is toxic (to me) and refractory, i.e., resistant to being lifted. They are deluded on the dictionary variant: their belief in contradiction with my reality and my rational argument. Their belief being that I should be disabled and dependent. They gas-light. They aim to cripple me.

And I have had inflicted on me a personal, 1-on-1 abuser, who rings me repeatedly at home, visits my house repeatedly, stands in my lounge with the police and has me dragged from my own home, then physically assaults me as live meat, against my clear and explicit ''No' means 'no''. This is rather like being assigned my own personal hell-demon, whose job it is to attempt to make me feel like my life is not worth living. Does the Community Care Coordinator enjoy the power to abuse, but calling physical assault, hence violence, 'care' ? I saw a film clip for the movie 'Misery' recently, with James Caan. 'Care' takes non obvious forms ! Does it build up the Community Care Coordinator, to attempt to beat me down and try to cripple and disable me ? Does she like the idea of trying to make a drug-free, independent person, drug-dependent and reliant on the 'Community Team' ? Does she like the idea of assigning me 'to the Community' ? 'In the Community' -- is it a good place to be ? For whom and from whose perspective ?

The above comments and questions are not scurrilous. It is clear to me that some 'medics' (generic) regard those to whom they assign the label 'mentally ill', as 'less'. I am not treated as an equal. Medics are unjustifiably self-superior, from positions of inadequately-informed ignorance of my work and study areas. They will not engage in two-way, adult-to-adult conversations. They place themselves above answerability. No need to justify their subjective, never objective positions, at all. And certainly not to me. They treat me as sub-human. I am not seen or heard by these medics. They refuse to answer my questions. They reject my email. The Patient Advice Liaison Service (PALS) has provided ONE meaningful response in ~15 months. ONE. I have an experiment running at present, where I send PALS one email per day, with an increasing counter-index in the title, i.e., (1), (2), …, and see how long PALS just ignores me. It is simply not possible even to ask a medic a question, let alone receive a straight answer, which happens very rarely.

I have blogged my experience of being treated as 'less' on-ward, elsewhere in my LinkedIn blogs. For instance, I knocked on the ward office door, the Consultant made eye contact for a few seconds, completely blank-faced, then turned away from me, ignored me completely and sat down, side-on at the office desk. When questioned, he said later that 'there was someone on the phone'. I suspect that sound statistical survey would reveal that, on the whole, Consultants do not open doors for 'patients' (complainants).

I was once told by a nurse, that the strongest people do not get mentally ill. She was a nice nurse and talkative. And both a nurse and member of admin staff have made the point to me, that being detained under the Mental Health Act, is about having power taken away from you. Is that a female-male perspective ? I have also had a female nurse or social worker smirk, when I said that psychiatric medication simply made it difficult to open eyes and get out of bed in the morning. The SOAD was equally dismissive in her report, of my description of brain damage due to psychiatric drugs, specifically tardive dyskinesia. But then, she won't end life with those Parkinson's-like symptoms. So no skin off her nose.

I remember well, a female social worker who made a point of saying that she would talk to my wife (and give her the keys). That last is a repeated theme. Some medics treat those who they deem 'mentally ill', with marked disrespect. I once had a Consultant who arranged an office meeting, and sat me behind his shoulder, where I was out of the flow of the conversation. Whereas he placed my wife in the centre of the room, with everyone sat around, and addressed all conversation to my wife. He deliberately and consciously created a 'does he take sugar ?' situation. There was once a standard interview technique, which a friend described to me, where the interviewer sat at his desk, read his newspaper and totally ignored the interviewee. Polite interviewees sat, waited and got ignored. Those who got the point, crumpled up the interviewer's newspaper, or if they had matches and were going for effect, set the newspaper alight. My memory is that I spoke for myself and moved my chair into the middle of the room, next to my wife.

That same Consultant also 'feigned surprise' when I agreed to take meds. Why ? That was at a time when I trusted medics and believed that my mental health might be improved by meds. And I remember one younger medic, doing his Casualty or Holby student bit, and reeling off with obvious relish, his rote-learning list of seriously nasty side effects of meds, e.g., breast growth and milk production in men. As I had already agreed to take meds, this was rubbing my nose in it. That younger medic did appear to be enjoying himself. How many female nurses and social workers regard themselves as stronger than their (male ?) 'patients' ? And how many make that identification of 'taking away the power' ? Is that a gender-specific thing ? I have received that phrase as repeated, independent comments. What goes through medics' heads ? Really, why trust them, when they treat me with such lack of respect as a fellow human being ? How superior do they feel, relative to those who they deem 'mentally ill' ? Why is it nearly impossible to get a 2-way, adult-to-adult, straight answer from the psychiatrists with whom I deal ? Why do they adopt as a matter of course and obvious preference, 'lower level truth', i.e., mostly avoid the direct lie (not even mostly !), whilst clearly valuing indirectness, evasiveness, being misleading and misdirecting ?

The police-supported, personal 1-on-1 beat-on, to which I am being subjected, should not be legal.

'First do no harm'. These 'medics' do harm. Hypocrites.

[ As an amateur psychiatric aside, did I eat too many cheap meat pies as a student ? Could I now be suffering from mad-cow disease ? And does that quip make me sexist ? I merely report it as I experience it. 'It is as it is'. But it should be drug-free and independent. ]

08:00, Wed 30 Jun '20:

Medics have scheduled mob-handed physical assault, hence ('soft') force and violence, again for this morning. Zero acute, or emergency, situation in play. There never is. And I am simply in excellent mental health, relative to those people in serious mental pain or distress, who might benefit from hospital care.

If I tell the medics with whom I deal, that they are doing damage, yet they insist on pushing on and doing that damage, what can I conclude ? There are not many options:

(i) Those medics intend to do damage. Then they are liars rather than mere hypocrites. The Hippocratic Oath is 'first do no harm'.

(ii) Those medics are 'idiots'. 'Medic-idiots' defined carefully elsewhere in my LinkedIn-blogs.

(iii) Those medics are self-superior, arrogant, inadequately-informed thus ignorant, lax and sloppy to the point of negligence and incompetence, patronising and condescending off-the-scale. Their picture must be that by force and violence, they believe that they can improve my reality, or perhaps as higher priority that of my family, beyond what I could or would choose or achieve for myself, and for those that I love and who are my prime consideration in life.

(iv) These medics have ulterior motives and are dishonest about that.

Or some combination of the above.

The requirement then, is to be invulnerable, i.e., medics have only achieved harm if I agree and acknowledge that medics have achieved harm.

Sleeping ~12 hours per day, rather than sleeping ~6 hours and waking well-rested, can perhaps be adjusted back to norm. The SOAD dismisses this. She describes it in trivialising fashion, as 'over-sedation'. But I don't need sedation at all, even given the infuriating medic-idiocy with which I am forced to deal. And trying to get the day-job done, when conscious for only half-the-day or less, is just more difficult than it should be. Medics make my life unnecessarily difficult. Putting on ~10 lbs in weight is always reversible. But harder to take weight off, when drugs put weight on. Making people tired, lethargic and fat, really does appear to be a facet of medication that medics ignore when they should not. Perhaps inject people with 'something more testosterone-like' instead ? Then those that have to 'fight demons', might have a stronger chance, rather than being 'hobbled' (Misery). Treat people as of value, not 'less', and help them to succeed, thus feel good about themselves, rather than disable them. In my personal experience, psychiatric drugs can definitely simply make things worse and even cause pain. At least medics could help 'patients' (this complainant) to get the day-job done. However, in my case, medics have cost me likely permanent employment, by detaining by force then refusing already-scheduled, on-site, second-interview attendance. And by detaining by force then refusing an already scheduled, new-job start. Always in zero acute, or emergency, situation and in relatively excellent mental health. I never did that interview. I never started that job. And medics have taken about ~4 months out of my working life this year, time that could have been spent on piecework contracts. Being locked on a noisy and hostile, acute psychiatric ward, just does not help to get the day-job done. What do those medics think there are playing at ? How hard can they make my life ? A likely full year's permanent salary is a major hit to the financial bottom line. Do the medics with whom I deal, 'first do no harm' ? Do they even try ?

The major problem though, is that end-of-life tardive dyskinesia and Parkinson's-like symptoms are a thing. As is brain damage due to loss of grey and white brain tissue, and psychosis due to drug-induced increase in dopamine receptor density and sensitivity.

And from the day-to-day practical point of view, I now have a parasite infestation. Medics that just will not get out of my hair. And who insist on invading my personal and family life in the most intrusive manner possible, day-in, day-out. They phone me up repeatedly. They insist on frequent meetings at their offices. They visit my home repeatedly. Today, they will again have me dragged out of my own house, by force and violence, for no good-enough reason, with the Kids at home. And they plan to do this for the rest of my life.

My best guess from options (i)-(iv) ? I think that at very least, these medics are 'idiots', (ii). 'Medic-idiot' being a term that I apply to these particular reasonably smart people who have a responsibility to get things right, but get them wrong all which ways.

13:30, Tue 9 Jun '20:

I have just been delivered another Community Treatment Order: Notice of Recall to Hospital. This is based on: (1) refusal to accept depot injection, and (2) high risk of deterioration of … mental health without receiving treatment. Nothing else.

There is zero acute, or emergency, situation in play. I have zero stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment. I am highly functional, as demonstrated, for instance, by my writing of this LinkedIn-blog. I am of generally happy disposition. Despite getting beaten-on by medics, again and again and again. I have no conventional anti-social problems of any kind. I am no significant risk to myself or others. I have no history of ever having been so.

I get beaten on by medics because they are lax and sloppy, and just too self-superior, actually 'to get their facts right'. Medics have ZERO non bogus 'nature and degree' criteria for their 'assessment' (!) of my 'serious mental ill health'. Only their inadequately-informed ignorance of my own areas of work and study. Subject areas that they are not qualified to judge. But such that my writings and actions look 'bizarre and non sensical' -- to them.

My position is a straightforward one. Quite simply: life, one second at a time, 'it is as it is' and keep it honest. Drug free. Independent.

The medic position is negligent, incompetent and discriminatory. Medics refuse to show adequate due diligence in checking, corroborating, clarifying, correcting or verifying their key facts. They assert my 'serious mental ill health' and 'need for repeated forced injection' without justification. They side-step the intended protections of the Mental Capacity Act decision specific test. Thus, they assume effectively and implicitly, a level of incapacity on my part, so high that I am deemed not capable of refusing treatment at even below the level of basic sign language. Medics *know* that that is not an honest position on their part. Nobody of average capacity can fail the MCA four criteria. The bar is set very low. And I am a Technical Consultant of ~35 years' experience, who does engineering maths and computational physics for the day job. I am firing on all cylinders. It is simply not possible for me to fail the MCA decision specific test. Thus, medics simply ignore it and invoke the Mental Health Act instead.

My mental health is simply excellent, relative to those in serious mental pain and distress, who might benefit from forced hospitalisation.

Medics have now created a trauma situation (hospital leaflet definition). Sometime early tomorrow morning, I can expect to be manhandled from my house, yet again, as a ~14 1/2 stone, zero escalation, token passive resistance dead weight, by emergency ambulance staff and police. Last time, around midnight, I was looked in the grill-barred, 'dog-cell' at the back of the private emergency ambulance. I can then expect to be taken to hospital and injected by force and violence. Then released. 'Soft' force in response to my zero escalation, non violent, token passive resistance. Medics instigate repeated violence, for which the limiting case is always murder. I choose non violent response. I state ''No' means 'no'' for my absolute refusal of injection, on my grounds of my being adequately healthy. Medics inject me anyway. It is physical assault, 'soft' force and violence, even if I choose 'first do no harm'. Medics do harm.

It should not be legal to abuse an adequately healthy person like this. My capacity to refuse treatment is beyond doubt, by the MCA decision specific test criteria. Medics ignore the MCA, because it is inconvenient for them. They refuse to answer questions about the info-leafleted requirement for at least its implicit use, in their decision-making.

Medics threaten to do this to me monthly, then three-monthly, for the rest of my life. Quarterly, pre-scheduled, pre-notified physical assault, hence force and violence.

Medics are inadequately-informed and ignorant. They have ZERO non-bogus 'nature and degree' criteria for my mental ill health. They gas-light. They are trying to turn me into a drug-dependent, disabled person, reliant on Community and NHS Care. That from a position of drug-free, independence. On common usage of terms, they violate the Mental Health Act first principle, namely 'minimal intervention, maximal independence'. The group and mass delusion is theirs: their belief in contradiction with my reality and my rational argument. Their belief is that I should be disabled and dependent on them. That clearly suits them better than my reality. They therefore work to reduce my independence to a level which they find satisfactory. Minimal intervention and maximal independence -- on their usage of terms.

Medics attempt to impose their own minority world view, by repeated physical assault, hence force and violence, on someone adequately healthy, with a different, perhaps more minority, world view.

The medics with whom I deal, knowingly violate the Hippocratic Oath 'first do no harm'. They are therefore hypocrites. There is a well-known debate about the use of psychiatric drugs. And on both sides of the debate, the consensus is that use should only be where essential. There is zero acute, or emergency, situation in play. There never is. I have zero standard tick-box indicators of ill health. I am highly functional and generally happy (!), no conventional anti-social problems of any kind, no significant risk to self or others. I never have been any such risk.

Psychiatric drugs do well-known, major damage. It should not be legal to force these on people. And some of the hypocrite medics with whom I have been dealing, have even written primary journal papers on how some patients can be killed by the drugs which they prescribe, due to inadequate knowledge and characterisation of those full drug effects. However, it is not obvious whether this would be worse than brain damage and tardive dyskinesia, e.g., ending life with Parkinson's-like symptoms, say. The standard day-to-day downsides of psychiatric drugs are nasty too. And what male would want to run the risk of growing breasts and producing milk, as a rare side effect ? I do wonder whether all medic motivations in prescribing such drugs, are made clear and explicit. What goes through a medics' head ? I definitely do infer '1-on-1 medic beat-on', in some cases.

This is human rights violation. If it is legal, then this is a civil liberties issue.

And when medics have me dragged away tomorrow morning, I have a job interview in the afternoon. What likelihood medics mess-up and I miss my interview -- again ? Mar / Apr '19, medics detained me for no good-enough reason, for ~6 weeks, across a second job interview, on-site, and refused to let me attend. I never attended that job interview. And in Mar '20, they detained me for about a month, across a beginning-of-month new-job start, and refused to let me start work. That job fell to coronavirus, and I never started that job either. Medics have taken about ~4 months out of my contractor working life, over the last year or so, by detaining me repeatedly, for weeks and months at a time, and for no good-enough reason, to a locked, acute, psychiatric ward. A noisy and hostile environment where I have to try and work around medic-idiocy, as I still have the day-job to do.

Tomorrow, medics waste my time again, police time and emergency ambulance staff time. And for sure they are not helping me get any work done today ! These barely-read blogs are my only form of protest. The standard channels are ineffective and non-impartial, an us-versus-them system.

And the great thing is that those medics are 'always right'. In the form that I experience its direct application, their psychiatry is non-testable and non-falsifiable. And it is based on physical assault, hence ('soft') force and violence. If I work around those medics' on-going monthly and quarterly violence, and make sure that my family does not crash, then those medics will take the credit for their excellent 'treatment' (= physical assault hence violence). And if their gas-lighting drives me insane, and my family does crash, then those medics will be vindicated for their excellent diagnoses. 'Always right' without ever needing to 'get their facts right' at all. Quite magical.

And maybe I end life with brain damage and / or tardive dyskinesia Parkinson's-like symptoms. Maybe medics can even induce severe psychosis, due to drug-induced increased dopamine receptor density and sensitivity. Just maybe I grow breasts and lactate. Certainly, since the last, forced, high-dose depot, I have been sleeping ~12, sometimes ~15, hours per day and put on ~1/2 stone in weight. I used to sleep for ~6 hours, ~ 9 pm to ~3 am, early-to-bed-early-to-rise and wake well-rested. Whatever develops, I have to work around medic obstacles and obstructions, to look after my family. Family who think these medics are great -- 'the experts'. Umm.

And all because these medics are too self-superior actually 'just to get their facts right'. They operate a 'cheating / lying / bullying' system -- terminology which I justify clearly elsewhere in my LinkedIn-blogs.

As that is these medics' preferred system, 'lower level truth' at best, great stuff, good for them ! I think their system is rubbish. A real world view difference.

14:30, Mon 8 Jun '20:

I just had a telephone conversation with the Second Opinion Appointed Doctor (SOAD). She is appointed by the Care Quality Commission and thus independent of the NHS. The conversation was not a good one. Like a lot of the medics with whom I deal, she was arrogantly-superior. She did not speak to me 'like an equal'. She spoke to me 'behind the looney-label' (colloquially). And behind that label I am perceived as 'less'. She interjected repeatedly, across what I was saying, and did not listen to the points that I was raising from beginning to end. I had a lot to say. However, she had her own questions and agenda and clearly thought that I was talking too much. She even laughed at me, at one point, and told me that she did not need me to tell her how to do her job. When I picked her up on being laughed at, she said because 'she could not get a word in edgeways' (paraphrase). She sounded business-like and not unpleasant. But she did 'sad, sympathy'. This is definitely a gender-different thing. Do women realise how damaging and destructive is 'sad, sympathy' ? I don't know. Damage with intent, or not ? Men do not do 'sad, sympathy'. Though they can definitely be just as arrogantly-superior. Do the medics with whom I deal, realise how damaging and destructive it is to gas-light, and to force 'care' (= physical assault hence violence) on someone independent and adequately healthy, in need of no care ? How could they not ? Damage with intent, or not ? Do those medics 'first do no harm' ? Do these medics build themselves up, by attempting to create a disabled and dependent person (me) ?

I spent the morning, writing a carefully-edited 2-page list of bullet points for the SOAD, in hope of a considered response. However, my immediate impression is that she is part of the 'medic' (generic) group and mass delusion, deluded from the outset, by the 'looney-label' (colloquial). At one point, she asked me if I was able to work. I was a little taken aback. I had just written that careful, two-page Word document, in a couple of hours. Could she not tell therefore, that I was very obviously able to work ? Umm. The SOAD got back to me within ~1/2-hour of my sending my email and document to PsychosisAdmin for forwarding. So I think that the SOAD did not read very much. I asked her about the web-links that I had sent her. She was emphatic (even nasty ? -- hard to tell when speaking to someone new and unknown) that she had received only one web-link. I had put one web-link in the Word document itself (a LinkedIn 80-minute read). And four web-links in the email. So had she even read my email ? I emailed back to PsychosisAdmin, which confirmed that it had forwarded my whole email, not just the attachment. And said that it would resend. Odd. Implied lie by the SOAD that she had read all of my stuff ? (And whomever I deal with by email at PsychosisAdmin, never 'signs' their email. Could be one person. Could be many. No name or names. Though polite and efficient, it seems.)

That question of 'whether I am able to work', is closely related to another stock question, about 'whether I have suicidal thoughts'. Clearly, a bad situation for many people, for whom that is a required and necessary question. However, in my case, I am happily in excellent mental health, relative to those in real mental pain or distress -- and medics just cannot tell. They cannot tell if I am able to work. They cannot tell whether my work is good or not -- even when I have just emailed a tidily-edited, two-page Word document. Yet they declare me repeatedly, to be 'seriously mentally ill', simply because what I write (or in a couple of cases do / did, some time ago) looks 'bizarre' to them. And they violate my human rights repeatedly, on that basis alone, i.e., on the basis of their being inadequately informed thus ignorant.

Interestingly to me, at one point, the SOAD asked if anybody else argued that I was mentally healthy. Which captures the situation well. Being perceived as 'seriously mentally ill', in my specific case anyway, is nothing to do with my feeling ill or being ill. I feel fine and I am highly functional. It is all about 'medic' (generic) group and mass delusion. I am 'seriously ill' because 'medics' are deluded enough to believe and declare me seriously ill (!). Power defines sanity. And insanity is being in a minority of one.

I did not get the impression that the SOAD took my allegations of slander and libel (common usage of terms) against those medics with whom I deal, at all seriously. Her report uses the phrase 'The clinical information made available ...'. A similar phrase was used by the Mental Health Tribunal Judge. Neither report gave the impression that either had checked, or even questioned, the veracity of any sources. However, the medics with whom I deal, are simply too self-superior, lax and sloppy, actually 'just to get their facts right'. And I am ignored routinely by those 'medics', behind their 'looney-label'. My impression, from the SOAD's 'sad, sympathy', was that the SOAD is immediately part of the 'medic' (generic) group and mass delusion, i.e., her belief in contradiction with my reality and my rational argument. Will her delusion lift ? From our conversation, I suspect not. I suspect that it will instead, be reinforced by interaction with other deluded medics. I would though, be pleased to observe otherwise … . Perhaps the SOAD is good at her job.

Wed 10 Jun '20: The SOAD was not good at her job. She laughed at me and told me not to tell her how to do her job. But she did not check my allegations of lies, slander, libel and fabrication by medics, on common usage of those terms. The system is us-versus-them, one-sided, non-impartial and pre-judgemental by construction and implementation. The medics with whom I deal, 'lie' with impunity, on common usage of that term. The SOAD points out the legal appeal channels. However, despite my telling her explicitly, during our telephone conversation, she makes no acknowledgement at all, that *all* of those channels refuse to pursue my charges of lying, slander, libel and fabrication by medics, on common usage of those terms. The SOAD ignores the fact that my claims are 100% ignored by all medical legal channels. Umm. Including her. And she is with the Care Quality Commission, not the NHS.

Pre-telephone interview document for SOAD: W Batty, Mon 8 Jun ‘20

1.     I aim for 2 pages of key bullet points, in the hope of fair consideration, never yet received.

2.     In my repeated personal experience, over the last ~15 months, medical decision-making in my case has been superficial, pre-judgemental, self-reinforcing, and based on highly cursory and incomplete consideration at each stage.

a.     A few minutes’ telephone conversation is simply not adequate to treat my case fairly.

3.     Medics detain me repeatedly and completely unjustifiably, by emergency ambulance and police, to a locked acute psychiatric ward, for weeks and months at time. They impose depot injections by force, against my absolute refusal, on my grounds of my being adequately healthy. They impose forced detention and injection:

a.     Always in zero acute, or emergency, situation.

b.     Always at zero stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment.

c.     Always with zero conventional anti-social problems of any kind.

d.     Always with zero significant risk to others. No history of ever having presented any such risk.

e.     Always in excellent mental health relative to those persons in real mental distress or pain, who might benefit from emergency hospitalisation.

4.     Medics deprive me unjustifiably, of my liberty and livelihood and assault me repeatedly physically.

a.     They violate my human rights for no good enough reason.

b.     They attempt repeatedly to impose their own minority world view by physical assault, hence force and violence, on someone adequately healthy with a different, perhaps more minority, world view.

5.     ‘Medics’ (generic) slander and libel me on common usage of those terms.

a.     Though ‘medics’ are totally free from all recourse under law for defamation, within private meetings and the privileged Mental Health Tribunal (MHT) environ. Therefore, they are lax and sloppy and do not bother ‘simply to get their facts right’. They mis-state, and do not correct, collateral evidence, their dominant source of information.

b.     ‘Medics’ show lack of due diligence in checking, corroborating, clarifying, correcting, or verifying key facts.

c.     They make repeated ‘Chinese-whispers’ written medical record mis-copyings, always in the direction of ‘more- and sufficiently-crazy’ sounding.

6.     ‘Medics’ have ZERO non-bogus ‘nature and degree’ criteria for their assertion of my ‘serious mental ill heath’.

a.     ALL their bogus ‘nature and degree’ criteria, reduce to inadequately informed ‘medic’ ignorance.

b.      Medics declare me ‘seriously mentally ill’ ONLY because my writings and actions ‘look odd to them’.

c.     However, they REFUSE to consider my writings, e.g., LinkedIn-blog articles, Quora answers, my day-job technical notes, my day-job software, …, carefully and critically.

d.     And those medics simply do not have the ability to assess the work of an IT and Technical Consultant of 35 years’ post-graduate experience in his own areas of work, study, and expertise.

e.     ‘Medics’ ASSUME without KNOWING. And they simply GET THEIR FACTS WRONG. They behave IGNORANTLY.

f.     They therefore LIE, SLANDER and LIBEL under common usage of those terms.

g.     They are NEGLIGENT, INCOMPETENT and DISCRIMINATORY, under common usage of those terms, on the above basis. Their lax and sloppy failure simply ‘to get their facts right’ costs me repeatedly, my liberty, my livelihood and physical assault hence violence -- an on-going trauma situation.

7.     ‘Medics’ (generic) maintain a group and mass delusion about my ‘serious mental ill health’. ‘Medics’ gas-light.

a.     My mental health is adequate. It always has been.

b.     NEVER serious enough to justify such repeated, forced, emergency detention, to a locked acute psychiatric ward, for weeks and months at a time, with forced injection.

c.     ‘Medics’ now accuse me of being toxic, due to circumscribed delusions. However, the delusion lies entirely with ‘medics’. I never believed the ‘drooling madman stuff’ (colloquial) of which they accuse me (below).

8.     The Mental Health Tribunal system is pre-judgemental and discriminatory, compared to standard UK law.

a.     The ‘patient’ (complainant) is assumed ‘guilty’ (seriously mentally ill) until proven 'innocent'.

b.     Previous ‘crimes’ (mental health record) are presented at all hearings.

c.     ‘Medic’ and ‘patient’ testimony are given totally different weights

-- ‘Patient’ testimony is assumed to be unreliable and ignorable, essentially zero consideration given.

d.     Burden of proof rests on the ‘patient’ to demonstrate ‘medic’ lies / slander / libel (common usage of terms);

-- No onus on ‘medics’ to justify their sources, assertions or subjective medical opinions.

e.     Medics are allowed opinions, with no factual basis demanded or imposed at all.

f.     The Mental Health Tribunal is an inquisitorial decision-making system, based on balance of probabilities, with veracity of medic statement or assertions never questioned.

g.     ‘Medic’ falsehoods are always taken as ‘good’, post-hearing, with no First Tier Tribunal appeal available on the basis of false information, only on due process; thus due process followed on the basis of false, unchallenged and essentially unchallengeable false information;

9.     The MHT is therefore effectively an us-versus-them system, with the ‘patient’ treated as ‘less’. Effectively unseen and unheard; sub-human. And the Mental Health Tribunal Judge, and the Hospital Managers, are ‘on the same side’ as the ‘medics’ to all practical intents and purposes. Hospital Managers even congratulate medical staff openly, during hearings, on the quality of their testimony and on the work that they are doing. The system is openly partisan and non-impartial.

10.  I list below, a small subset of slanders and libels by medics, on which they form their entirely bogus appraisal of ‘nature and degree’ for my ‘serious mental ill health’. The MHT Judge, Hospital Managers, and my solicitor, all refused to consider or treat these ‘patient’ (complainant) charges of slander and libel against ‘medics’ (common usage of terminology).

a.     If the SOAD assessment is fair, objective, and impartial, she could question critically, the veracity of sources for these totally unjustified assertions.

11.  Community Consultant, Dr **, in-patient Consultant Dr **, Mental Health Assessment Team Consultant, Prof **, and Psychologist, **, and other ‘medics’ MUST justify THEIR LIES, below. For LIE, I could perhaps use ‘(unknowingly ?) propagate falsehoods with intent’. However, that is too wordy. ‘LIE’ is succinct and close enough.

A)     I have NEVER written about rescuing Miss Piggy from (T)he (M)uppet(s) (S)how. MEDIC LIE.

B)     I have NEVER written about Charlie, wherever he comes from. MEDIC LIE.

C)     I have NEVER written about ‘round earth’. MEDIC LIE.

D)     I have NEVER been obsessed or pre-occupied with cloning myself. MEDIC LIE.

E)     I have NEVER written anything bizarre or non sensical about any related topics, UNDER STANDARD usage of those terms, as judged by fair and well-informed people. MEDIC LIES.

a.     NOT though, judged by ignorant and wilfully dismissive medics, who deliberately write their reports to 'sound crazy' without examining carefully or adequately, the contents of my written web-posts.

F)      There is nothing bizarre or non-sensical about placing a steel bin on my head, to test partial Electromagnetic Interference (EMI) screening of Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) and Super Low Frequency (SLF) environmental sources, on tinnitus-like head noise. MEDIC LIE.

a.     This is such an easy and obvious, well founded experiment, that it would be stupid not to try it.

b.     Medics are inadequately informed and ignorant, to declare that this indicates ‘mental ill health’ on my part.

G)     I have NEVER spoken or written pseudo-scientifically on these or related topics. MEDIC LIES.

a.     And this could be put to test by INDEPENDENT EXPERT review. SO WHY NOT DO THIS ?

b.     Medics are sloppy and unprofessional, to conclude mental ill health on my part, on the basis of subject matter outside of their own domain of expertise, and thus qualification to judge, but within mine.

H)     I have NEVER shredded (toilet) paper, or arranged shredded paper into patterns, around the toilet. MEDIC LIE.

I)      I do not have ‘dozen (sic) notebooks full of illegible notes’. MEDIC LIE.

a.     My quick, scruffy-handwriting notes are (mostly) legible to me and they are not written for anybody else.

b.     And my notebooks contain engineering maths and programming notes which I have shown to medics.

c.      It is medic 'lower level truth', i.e., merely avoid the direct lie, whilst being indirect, evasive, one-sided, non-impartial and non-objective, misleading, and misdirecting, which paints this picture.

d.     When in fact, writing 'time-stamped' maths / programming / finance / admin / philosophy / logic / science / diary notes is a routine part of my day job as an IT and Technical Consultant.

J)      I have never wandered around the garden, or in view of the neighbours, in my underpants or boxer shorts. MEDIC LIE.

a.     I have stepped onto our back patio, at night, in the dark, in warm weather, in view of nobody, in dressing gown and slippers. And there is nothing wrong with that. I am a free man.

K)     I never play on my computer. MEDIC LIE.

a.     I earn my living as an IT and Technical Consultant on my computer. I do not play games. I do serious work.

12.  The implicit ‘medic’ assumption that it is not actually very important to get their facts quite right, is simply negligent and incompetent on common usage of those terms. I have done perfectly well-justified and ‘sane’ things ‘like these’, i.e., writing LinkedIn-blog thought experiments, Quora answers, or day-job technical notes. 

a.     Thus, when all the above are stated quite correctly, medics have ZERO non bogus ‘nature and degree’ criteria for their subjective medical opinions of my ‘serious mental ill health’ and ‘lack of patient insight’.

I have LinkedIn-blogged my on-going complaints against the NHS, starting here – please read:

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/psychologists-non-scientists-psychiatry-always-right-testable-batty/

-----Original Message-----

From: William Batty <[email protected]>

To: [email protected] <[email protected]>

Sent: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 13:17

Subject: W Batty -- Letter and weblinks for SOAD -- as pre-notified by **

Hi PsychosisAdmin,

** told me that she would notify you of my letter and weblinks (attached), to be forwarded to the SOAD, before our telephone call.

-- The SOAD has already called me briefly. We will speak later today, Mon 8 Jun '20.

Could you please forward to the SOAD, this email and its attachment ?

Thanks,

Bill

----

My further NHS Complaint, LinkedIn-blog links are:

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/psychologists-non-scientists-psychiatry-always-right-testable-batty/

[1] Psychologists as Non Scientists & Psychiatry as 'Always Right' : Non Testable, Non Falsifiable, Employing 'Physical Assault' Hence Violence

My immediately previous NHS-complaint narratives, here:

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/straight-answer-from-psychiatrist-patient-less-medic-world-batty/

[2] Straight Answer from a Psychiatrist ? The 'Patient' as 'Less' . Medic World View by 'Physical Assault' ('Soft' Force) Hence Violence

and

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/negativenonvalue-psychiatric-drug-injection-forced-liberty-batty-1c/

[3] Negative/NonValue of Psychiatric Drug Injection With Forced Deprivation of Liberty & 'Physical Assault' : Typical Mind Fallacy & Limitation of Vision

https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/nature-delusion-non-delusion-mental-ill-good-health-william-batty/

[4] The Nature of Delusion, Non-Delusion, Mental Ill and Good Health

My LinkedIn site also contains scientific articles, which illustrate clearly that medic assertions of my 'talking pseudo-scientifically', or of 'not being able to manage my professional commitments', are totally unjustified professional slurs. Libel under common usage of terms. As is the medic claim that I cannot 'understand or comprehend hospital meetings' (!). I have discussed these medic delusions, or 'lower level truths', in my blogs.

And my LinkedIn site also contains last year's full complaint against the NHS -- still unresolved.

If we are to speak this afternoon, the SOAD will not have time to read all relevant LinkedIn blogs. However, if she could read [1] and [4] and some substantial part of [2] and [3], that would be very helpful indeed.

I find myself in an on-going trauma situation, with 'medics' threatening to:

-- call emergency ambulance and police, and physically manhandle me from my own home, 

-- as a 14 stone, zero escalation, token passive resistance dead weight, 

-- then to inject me by physical assault, hence force and violence, 

-- *every three months for the rest of my life*.

-- It should not be legal to do this to anyone.

-- I say ''No' means 'no'' to forced injection, and I am totally ignored and injected anyway.

-- I am white not black, but this is akin to 'mindscape racism', i.e., even be suspected of 'thinking the wrong way' (maybe 'thoughts of the wrong colour') and get beaten on by medics.

?

Medics just by-pass the intended protections of the Mental Capacity Act decision specific test, 

-- simply by declaring subjective medical opinion of 'lack of patient insight' and invoking the Mental Health Act, instead.

-- I am an IT and Technical Consultant who does engineering maths and computational physics for the day-job. It is not possible for me to fail those four very basic MCA criteria.

Medics violate the Mental Health Act first principle, i.e., minimal intervention, maximal independence.

-- Their whole intent is to make me drug-dependent and dependent on the Community Team and NHS, for no good reason.

-- And from a position of being both drug-free and independent. Visiting my GP for an annual check-up, just once per year.

Yet they have ZERO non-bogus 'nature and degree' criteria. ZERO.

-- They are lax and sloppy, thus negligent, incompetent and discriminatory, on common usage of those terms.

-- They just do not bother, 'actually to get their facts right'.

'Medics' utilise the holistic psychiatric viewpoint, based almost entirely on INCORRECT AND UNCHECKED collateral evidence, to create 'whole system' (!) medicine, without the complainant (me) actually in it !

William Batty

[email protected]

12:15, Tue 2 Jun '20:

I have what I assume is a Second Opinion Appointed Doctor interview, arranged for next Wed, 10 Jun '20. The trauma situation (as per hospital leaflet definition and examples) is therefore on-going, with physical assault hence violence, ('soft' force), on-hold, at least until Wed 10 Jun '20.

I have complained of on-going libel and slander by the 'medics' (generic) with whom I deal, (common usage of terminology), to every available channel. I am always ignored. No-one examines veracity of those medics' sources or the independent validity of their assertions. The system is effectively a pre-judgmental and one-sided one.

11:15, Sun 31 May '20:

The stand-in Community Care Coordinator made clear at last Thu 28 May '20's, Hospital Managers' appeal, that I should expect to be dragged from my house by police and emergency ambulance staff, again, tomorrow, Mon 1 Jun '20. I will again be a 14 stone, zero escalation, non violent, token passive resistance dead weight. Last time, at around midnight, I was locked in the dog-cell-like, grilled-bar compartment at the back of the emergency private ambulance. There was no acute, or emergency, situation in play. My mental health was excellent relatively, compared to those people in serious mental distress and pain, who might actually benefit from immediate, forced, emergency hospitalisation. The situation will be exactly the same, tomorrow. No standard tick-box indicators of ill health at all. Zero stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment. High functionality, generally happy disposition. No conventional anti-social problems of any kind. No significant risk to self or others. No history of ever having been so. Zero acute, or emergency, situation in play, on standard definitions of all terms.

This year, medics started their repeated unjustified locked-ward detentions, followed by physical assault, hence violence ('soft' force), back in Feb '20. After 3 months, and a 'Stop the Line' meeting, they should, by law, appoint a Second Opinion Appointed Doctor (SOAD), I believe. Medics lie / libel / slander and fabricate with impunity, on common usage of those terms. They cheat on common usage of that term, i.e., break rules. They bully on common usage of that term, by imposing repeated physical assault, hence violence, to attempt to impose their own minority world view by force, on someone with a different world view.

Will medics try tomorrow, to impose their next round of physical assault, hence violence, without appointing the SOAD legally required at 3 months of on-going abuse ?

-- No idea. I will email that question to all relevant parties. I will find out, tomorrow.

08:30, Sat 30 May '20:

If medics write in medical notes often enough, that someone is smelly, they can make that person sound like a 'ridiculous looney', quite easily. As soon as the notion of someone's personal hygiene and self-care are raised, that person sounds disabled straightaway. Medic gas-lighting therefore creates immediately, dependent, damaged people. Throw in a large number, and wide range, of other ridiculous lies / libels / slanders and 100% fabrications, and the situation can be totally misleading and extremely difficult to argue or retrieve.

-- Where does the burden of proof lie, in the mental health legal system ? Can the medics with whom I deal, simply lie with impunity ?

-- I could use the phrase '(unknowingly ?) propagate falsehoods with intent'. But that is too wordy. 'Lie' is succinct and close enough, for these particular negligent and incompetent medics, on standard usage of those terms.

Email to my solicitor:

-----Original Message-----

From: William Batty <[email protected]>

To: ***@solicitors.com

Sent: Sat, 30 May 2020 8:38

Subject: 'Degree' not proven -- zero risk to others -- currently not very smelly

Hi **,

That very 'thin' Mental Health Tribunal decision, from Tue, stated quite clearly: 'degree' not proven and 'zero risk to others'. The only 'justification' (umm !) for 'treatment' was for my health, e.g., preventing me from smelling too badly, if I am not injected repeatedly by physical assault, hence force and violence.

I am currently not very smelly. At least, I won't be, once I have had this morning's bath.

** told me on Fri, that she and **, would hold off on physically assaulting me, until this Mon 1 Jun '20 (my terminology). Thus on Mon, I can expect again, being lifted from my house by police and emergency ambulance, and on-going physical assault, hence force and violence.

-- And I won't even be particularly smelly.

As I am both non smelly and reasonably sane, how can they force treatment on me ?

-- How can that be legal ?

-- Non-smelly, sane people should be allowed to decide for themselves whether to refuse 'treatment' (= physical assault hence violence).

How can this be legal ?

Thanks,

Bill

18:30, Fri 29 May '20:

Before the Mental Health Tribunal, on Tue 26 May '20, I supplied a 'defence' document with clear, direct and explicit allegations of libel against the NHS medics with whom I am dealing, on common usage of that term. Before the Hospital Managers' appeal, on Thu 28 May '20, I supplied documents with direct and explicit allegations of slander and libel against the NHS medics with whom I am dealing, on common usage of those terms. Those Word documents web-linked directly to my key, NHS Complaint, LinkedIn-blogs.

I was ignored totally.

Concrete examples from one of my Hospital Managers' documents:

Drs **, ** and ** and other medics MUST justify THEIR LIES, below: 

(1) I have NEVER written about rescuing Miss Piggy from (T)he (M)uppet(s) (S)how. MEDIC LIE.

(2) I have NEVER written about Charlie, wherever he comes from. MEDIC LIE.

(3) I have NEVER written about 'round earth'. MEDIC LIE.

(4) I have NEVER been obsessed or pre-occupied with cloning myself. MEDIC LIE.

… and many more examples … .

The MHT Judge did not raise the issue of libel during the hearing. She addressed no questions to medics, about the veracity of their sources or the validity of their assertions. Her decision document does state: ' … Having considered the written and oral evidence before it, and in the absence of any independent evidence to the contrary, the Tribunal concluded that the statutory criteria for the CTO are met. ...' Which does perhaps indicate that the onus rests with the complainant to prove that medics lie / libel / slander. Umm. Perhaps I actually have to list the full falsehoods-chains, explicitly, in order to be heard. Medics do simply make it up. Their lack of due diligence in 'actually getting their facts right,' is negligent and incompetent, on common usages of those terms. As is their many-times repeated 'Chinese-whispers'-type, mis-copying of medical records, always in the direction of 'more crazy-sounding'. Medics propagate falsehoods with impunity. And perhaps the MHT Judge's statement above, says that medics' sources and evidences are never considered to be in doubt or dispute. Whereas complainant allegations of libel (and slander), under common usage of those terms, can simply be ignored without further discussion, in the absence of whole evidence chains demonstrating the origin and false nature of those medics' lies / libels / slanders. I am not legally trained or well informed. I will ask those questions.

The Hospital Managers equally, did not raise the issue of slander or libel during the hearing. They addressed zero questions to medics, about the veracity of their sources or the validity of their assertions. Instead, the Hospital Managers stated that I cast aspersions on the abilities of the medical staff and accused me of persecurity (sic) beliefs, below. And objected to my questioning the impartiality of the panel. The MHT Judge made no mention at all, of my libel allegations, in her final written decision. She imply ignored them.

-- So just how impartial were the MHT Judge and the Hospital Managers, when they all ignored totally, my direct and explicit, pre-notified, written allegations of libel and slander ? How can they, from a position of honesty and integrity, claim to be impartial, when they simply ignored allegations that serious, from one party in the dispute ? Really ? They did not even raise the matter and asked medics ZERO questions about the veracity of their sources and thus the validity of their assertions. How can that be 'due process' ? MHT Judge and the Hospital Managers didn't have to *agree* the point, but they didn't even *examine* the point. They pre-judged the situation and ignored me like a 'looney' (but no doubt in correct legal and lay-person terminology). The were totally non impartial. They took sides. They assumed that medics were honest and correct. And made the totally non expert and non qualified judgement that I evidenced persecurity (sic) beliefs -- without asking a SINGLE respective question of those medics.

-- Perhaps the MHT Judge's '... in the absence of any independent evidence to the contrary ...' really does imply that medics can propagate falsehoods with total impunity and that the onus rests on the complainant, to prove 'the origin' (?!) of such falsehoods. Umm ! Rather than medics having to demonstrate the validity of their sources and justify their 'expert' assertions. If so, wow, just wow ! I will check ... .

The conclusion of the Hospital Managers' appeal decision:

'... At the end of the hearing he ... concluded by reading out a long statement casting aspersions on the abilities of the medical staff and the impartiality of the panel.

Mr Batty clearly suffers from a mental illness as evidenced by his lack of insight and his persecurity (sic) beliefs. ...'

Of course consistent and not at all unexpected, that the panel accuses me of persecutory beliefs.

-- A classic bully position:

Claim that bullying is all in the victim's head. 'Fight back' and get beaten on -- just take the beating in silence.

-- Irrespective of whether the panel are actually bullies, or not, they cannot see beyond the 'looney'-label and are part of the 'medic' (generic) mass delusion.

Am I a victim ? No. Am I silent ? Very definitely not !

As for the accusation that I regard the panel as non impartial, and as already illustrated above, the whole mental health legal system is unbalanced. Unlike the standard UK legal system, the complainant is assumed guilty until proven innocent. And past crimes are raised at trial. (Both analogies.) Medic evidence is given far dominant weight. And the complainant is not believed, as a matter of course. Both MHT Judge and Hospital Managers, ignored totally, my direct and explicit, pre-notified, written allegations of libel and slander, under common usage of those terms. The MHT Judge's '... in the absence of any independent evidence to the contrary ...' perhaps makes the position very clear. I am still checking. This is very definitely an 'us versus them' system.

The Judge and Hospital Managers could have proven their impartiality, by fair and balanced critical examination of evidence. However, it is undoubtedly fair comment to say that there was no critical examination or appraisal of medic evidence. There never is. Medics can and do lie with impunity, under standard usage of that term. And I think it would simply be disingenuous of the Judge or Hospital Managers, to argue that they give medic and complainant evidence anything like equal weight. In fact, it would be a straightforward lie. The complainant is seen only behind the 'looney'-label, thus his credibility is almost zero. That complainant credibility negligible compared to the credibility of 'medics', whom the Judge and Hospital Managers clearly regard very highly. But maybe the MHT Judge's '... in the absence of any independent evidence to the contrary ...' implies that the MHT Judge and the Hospital Managers do not have to prove their impartiality, or be impartial ? Maybe legally, the system is simply all weighted in favour of the medics ? I don't know. I'm checking.

It is a one-sided system, at least effectively. Medics are just not required to get their facts right. And they should be. Their unprofessional laxity and sloppiness is off the scale. But the Judge and Hospital Managers simply and uncritically take medic evidence as good, as indicated clearly by the Hospital Managers' accusation of my casting aspersions on the abilities of the medical staff -- as opposed simply to saying it as it is !

Very clearly, from the MHT Judge's '... in the absence of any independent evidence to the contrary ...', and from the above Hospital Managers' appeal concluding statement, and the fact that the MHT Judge and Hospital Managers made ZERO critical evaluation of medic evidence, simply taking it all to be good as stated, the system is in practice, an unbalanced and pre-judgemental one.

Contrary to the sound of the ''Hospital Managers' appeal'', the 'Managers' are essentially lay people from the community. They are appointed by the Trust to review the decisions made by the clinical team relating to people's detentions/Community Treatment Orders. They are provided training by the Trust. The Code of Practice states that the Managers conduct the hearing how they wish and it is for them to satisfy their thoughts. It is where two parties disagree, that the Managers make the decision, ultimately.

*Key Question:* Honest best guess. Given my documents and LinkedIn-blogs, how many of that panel were well educated enough to get the science, philosophy and logic -- and not just say 'looney' ?

-- Honest best guess ? From the tone and content of their panel contributions ?

-- I think NONE. I think that if they read my stuff at all, they just said 'looney' (but in correct lay-person language). As they did in their concluding statement.

-- From my own concluding statement, they were able to 'hear' nothing but insults. No indication at all, of comprehending in the slightest, the careful technical argument made.

Contrary to comments made to me, that key underlying argument is nothing to do with people accepting that I am intelligent, say. The argument is that the ONLY 'nature and degree' criteria that the medics ever list, are the bizarre nature of my writings, plus a single bizarre action, months ago.

If my writings and that action are not bizarre, then medics have ZERO 'nature and degree' to justify their assertions of my very serious 'mental ill health'.

-- To see that my writings and that action are not bizarre, requires an intelligent layman's grasp of science, philosophy and logic.

For sure, I think the HMs' appeal panel did not get that key point, or indicate education levels sufficient to understand the arguments supporting that key point. They saw only 'looney' (in correct lay-person terminology).

And if the Mental Health Tribunal Judge got the point, at Tue's hearing, two days ago, then she totally ignored it in her decision document. All she said, was that my initial verbal presentation covered the same ground as my document. She never acknowledged my ZERO 'nature and degree' argument, at all. So I suspect that she did not even read it carefully enough to understand it. Charges of lies, slanders and libels, are serious enough to warrant some serious decision document discussion. I believe that she also, saw only 'looney' (in correct legal terminology).

Thus, I am not being treated fairly.

-- 'Medics' (generic) have ZERO non-bogus 'nature and degree' criteria. ZERO.

8 am, Fri, 29 May '20:

Thought to self: What is the value of active rationalisation, i.e., thinking things though carefully ?

Answer to self: 'Odd stuff' happens. It is just a thing. And without thinking things through carefully, it might be too easy to become as unscientific and irrational, or perhaps more-accurately-stated, as non-scientifically-rational, as those psychiatrists, psychologist and 'medics' (generic) with whom I deal.

The Hospital Managers' appeal was held, yesterday. I have not received the result yet. I should hear that, today. I fully expect that the Community Treatment Order will be upheld. Due process was followed yesterday. And in response to my closing statement -- I read some paragraphs from by blog, below -- the meeting Chair responded with 'Thank you, that was very helpful'. The system is predictable. I am well-used to that particular response from 'medics' (generic) by now. It says, as a reasonably accurate paraphrase, 'now that you have explained yourself, we can indeed see more clearly that you are literally a drooling madman' (but in correct medic terminology, of course).

So I am now back in an on-going abuse and trauma situation, according to hospital leaflets. I am awaiting the next forced depot injection, which I will refuse, as always, on my grounds that I am adequately healthy. There is zero acute or emergency situation in play. There never is any such. I have zero stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment. I am highly functional, e.g., I write these tidily-edited and well-argued LinkedIn-blog articles, around my day-job. I am of generally happy disposition, despite getting beaten on regularly, by medics. I have no conventional anti-social problems. Except getting beaten on regularly by medics, for being suspected of 'thinking the wrong way'. And I am no significant risk to myself or others. I have zero history of ever having been so.

My medical records do refer, very frequently, to my poor personal hygiene and self-care, and just how smelly I get. I don't actually smell abnormally. I bathe regularly (rather than shower). Sometimes I smell. But it's a great way to 'create a looney' (though in sound medic terminology). Interestingly, Tuesday's Mental Health Tribunal generated a very 'thin' decision not to revoke the CTO. It did not find proven, the 'degree' of my 'mental ill health'. And it did not find 'risk to others'. Treatment was agreed necessary on the basis of 'my health', e.g., things like my level of personal hygiene and self-care and roughly 'just how smelly I might let myself get' if not injected repeatedly by force and violence. Umm ! Think adult professional.

There were interesting features of yesterday's Hospital Managers' appeal. The stand-in Community Care Coordinator -- who is very nice, I spoke to her for a good while, yesterday -- was congratulated on doing a good job of reporting and decision-making, despite the fact that she had only ever spoken to me for about two minutes. All of her information was second-hand. And the discussion of employment aid and possible availability of benefits, was agreed to be well in hand and extremely good. I try not to be totally facetious, but I can only conclude that these NHS staff do not have a clue. Such discussions are valueless for a professional IT and Technical Consultant, running his own Ltd company, as an independent contractor. The Hospital Managers' simply did not have the required concepts. And it is of course quite possible, that deluded by the 'looney'-label, they do not actually believe that I really do a paid job of professional work, at all. I did stack shelves during the night at Sainsbury's, as a PhD student. That was an excellent job. The night-hours worked well and pay was good for a student. Maybe Hospital Managers believe kindly that I should go back to my roots ?

One Hospital Managers' appeal panel member was particularly strident and clearly pre-judgemental. She commented 'fairly and in unbiased fashion' (umm !) on my levels of aggression and on how I stressed my family by doing no work. She was particularly appreciative of the unemployment and benefits situation being put in place. Her particular delusion would appear to be that I am a 'violent, shiftless, waster' (my colloquialism). I do wonder how she pictures me physically ? Maybe she thinks that I have a big pot-belly and wear a string vest ? Though I do pull that from my own mental catalogue of old stereotypes. And I wonder how badly she thinks I smell ? The hearing was by telephone conference only, no video. And clearly, even video does not transmit smells (usually, I think). My psychological inertial state is 'mellow'. I don't do aggression. I don't smack the Kids. We have always used other in-home discipline, if required. And I do work. However, having to defend myself against repeated and on-going medic physical assault hence violence, wastes literally months of my time. As do months locked unjustifiably on an acute psychiatric ward, which is not a good place to have to try and work !

One aspect of Tuesday's Mental Health Tribunal decision report that I did find more than a little galling, was the Judge's summary statement that I blamed medics for preventing me from finding permanent work. The Judge mostly summarised my position fairly accurately. But it is clear how that statement looks and how it is meant to look. In fact, last March '19, medics detained me, locked on-ward, across a scheduled second, on-site job interview for a permanent job, local-to-home, and refused to let me attend that second job interview for what might well have been a 'sitter' of a local job. After detaining me, locked on-ward, for almost six weeks, for no good-enough reason, I never interviewed for that job. And this Mar '20, medics detained me across a scheduled permanent job start, and refused to let me attend and start that job. That job has since fallen to coronavirus and will now never start. Yet, 'medics' (generic) paint me as a shiftless waster (my colloquialism), causing financial hardship for my family. When 'medics' have likely cost me a year's permanent salary by now, as well as ~4 months' contractor work time on piecework contracts, payable on completion. And the MHT Judge, in her wisdom, indicates essentially the same view. My excuses. Not medic liability.

Next forced depot injection is imminent, though not scheduled precisely. I am not sure if precisely-scheduled, pre-notified physical assault hence violence, is deemed more or less traumatic, than non-precisely-scheduled, pre-notified physical assault hence violence. Maybe uncertainty in the exact time of pre-notified physical assault hence violence, is a relevant trauma factor ? All 'soft' force, of course, against my zero escalation, non violent, token passive resistance, by concerned NHS staff. Physical assault hence violence, all the same. The hospital did provide me with a leaflet on trauma, detailing this definition, with examples. I won't bother to recheck.

Thus, I expect again, for the police and emergency ambulance to be called, and to be physically man-handled from my home, as a 14 stone, zero escalation, token passive resistance, dead weight. Then locked in the grill-barred, dog-like detention cell, at the back of the emergency ambulance. Perhaps at midnight, again. In zero acute or emergency situation. Always. And in a state of mental health which is undoubtedly excellent, relatively, when compared against people in actual mental distress and pain. I really object to how much time medics waste this way. Months and months of my time. Police time. Emergency ambulance staff time. Nurse time. On-ward auxiliary staff time. Time is precious. Time spent locked away from my home and family, for zero good reason, on an acute psychiatric ward, against zero acute situation ever, is not fair. And the increased COVID-19 risk to my family, for no good reason, was reckless and irresponsible.

-- The situation is ludicrous. However, 'medics' (generic) have the legal power. The 'medics' with whom I deal, are 'idiots' on my reasonable usage of that term, defined more carefully elsewhere in my LinkedIn-blogs. And of course, they are 'always right'. If I work around them, and don't let my family go under, then they will take the credit for their wondrous interventions and 'treatments' (= physical assault, hence violence). And if I do let them sink me and my family, then that will of course, vindicate their rather excellent diagnoses of my 'mental ill health'. Serious 'mental ill health' exemplified by the fact that, like the drooling madman that they believe I am: (i) I spend extensive time thinking about how to rescue Miss Piggy from (T)he (M)uppet (S)how; (ii) that I write notepad after notepad of total-gibberish, illegible notes; (iii) that I spend huge amounts of time writing bizarre things about round earth; (iv) that I am obsessed with cloning myself; (v) that I cannot even understand or comprehend hospital meetings; (vi) … ; (vii) … ; (viii) … ; etc., ad infinitum. Think normal, adult, professional.

I do not do, and never have done, any of (i), (ii), … . Those are variously LIES, slanders, libels, under common usage of those terms. I *have* done 'corresponding' stuff, which is simply 100% sane and rational, e.g., web-post LinkedIn-blog thought experiments and Quora answers, and fill my day-job notebooks with engineering maths and computational physics, and those same journal/diary notebooks with personal notes and entries. However, medics just do not care about their propagated falsehoods and 'Chinese-whispers', medical records mis-copying -- always in the direction of 'more crazy-sounding'. They do not need to get this stuff 'actually correct', because they are 100% safe under the law. All the above slanders and libels are 'near enough correct' to them, because they already 'know' that I am 'so seriously mentally ill', that *I* really believe stuff 'like this', even if not quite this exact crazy-stuff. They 'just know', because they are 'experts', that I believe 'other crazy stuff', roughly the same -- though without knowing quite what exactly. And despite the fact that once all the corresponding 'actual' stuff is stated correctly, the 'Chinese-whispers' 'crazy-list' contains ZERO remaining items. ZERO 'nature and degree' criteria for their 'expert' assessment of my 'mental ill health'. Umm ! At least, 'medics' (generic) 'know' that I *did once* believe stuff as crazy as this -- whatever that may be, and even if not precisely this crazy stuff. And they 'know' that they have now injected me to 'part sanity', so that my circumscribed delusions make me toxic. That is, I don't agree that my 'actual' stuff was ever 'crazy'. And cannot imagine any better than they can, what other, totally unknown and totally unspecified 'crazy stuff', I am meant once to have believed. These 'medics' (generic) and the medical legal system, truly are a wonder to behold.

These senior 'medics' (generic) act like 'idiots' -- but they are not, they should be smarter. They are unprofessionally lax and sloppy, negligent, incompetent and discriminatory, all on common usages of those terms, and they refuse absolutely to recognise their own toxic and refractory, group and mass delusion.

Tue, 26 May '20:

The Mental Health Tribunal did not revoke the Community Treatment Order.

-- Due process was not followed. The Judge should have come back to me at the end of proceedings, after my solicitor's final questions, to allow me any further points. She did not do so. And she should have done so. She went straight to her decision-making.

Now I am back in an on-going trauma situation, according to hospital leaflets. Medics will recall me to hospital this Fri 29 May '20. And then every three months, for the rest of my life. Those recalls, to force depot injections on me, by mob-handed physical assault with a sharp implement, hence repeated, pre-scheduled, pre-notified violence.

Medics have ZERO 'nature and degree' criteria for my 'mental ill health': zero stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment. Always high functionality and generally happy disposition. No conventional anti-social problems of any kind. No significant risk to self or others. No history of ever being so. Zero acute or emergency situation in play. Ever. All they have, is that in their infinite wisdom, they believe the things that I write and do look bizarre and non sensical -- to them. However, they are inadequately informed, hence ignorant. Amazingly, the Community Consultant *actually said* that he could *not tell* whether the things that I write and do are non sensical, because he is not a scientist. He actually *said* that *he could not tell*. He just 'thinks' they look 'crazy' (my colloquialism).

More than that, the specific example that the Consultant chose for illustration, was of my writing extensive notes about how to save Miss Piggy from the Muppet Show. This is absolute b**l, 100% total fabrication. I talk about medics propagating falsehoods. But that is too much of a euphemism, in this case. '(Unknowingly) propagating falsehoods with intent', is too wordy. This is a straight LIE, to keep the description of the situation both simple and adequately accurate. I had a notion that as I am dealing with so many (medic) muppets, it might be preferable to have a head full of Muppets. I LinkedIn-blogged accordingly. However, I can only guess that somewhere along the line, some 'idiot'-medic has made a disparaging quip, about me 'trying to save Miss Piggy', and another 'idiot'-medic has then taken that literally and written the whole exaggeration and falsehood into my medical notes ! My writing extensive notes about rescuing Miss Piggy, just never happened. It is simply not a thing. And it appears that I will be physically assaulted again, this Fri, i.e., I have the on-going trauma of pre-scheduled and pre-notified violence, because medics really do play that fast and loose with the truth. They LIE, under reasonable usage of that succinct term.

-- The judge will have heard the Consultant's comments as clearly as I did. So I need to think carefully about the implications of that. Just what gives medics 'the right' to beat on me like this, with the judge's consent ? Umm. That I need to consider further. I am not a lawyer.

I suspect that that this comes down, as usual, to the holistic psychiatric viewpoint, based on collateral evidence, i.e., very little decision-making weight given by any party, to the complainant's (my) own statements or external observation. Also, the inquisitorial nature of the mental health tribunal system, based on balance of probabilities. If medics propagate enough falsehoods, for long enough, then that self-reinforcing forest of falsehoods simply becomes too impenetrable to get past. I discuss the toxic and refractory nature of medic group delusion, and resulting gas-lighting by medics, below.

The judge read a couple of my key LinkedIn-blog, NHS Complaint narratives, and my carefully written defence document. She had the facts. So how to read her decision ? At very least, I read her decision as 'is legal' (colloquially). So the law is an ass.

-- But she should have gotten the due process right. I did not get my 'final' chance to speak at that hearing. Which is reflective of my whole experience of interacting with the NHS and the mental health legal system.

Well it won't be my 'final' chance. The only available legal avenues are the tribunal and appeals systems. Hospital Managers' appeal, this Thu 28 May '20. How much more of my time can these medics waste ? How many permanent jobs can they cost me ? Of how many work hours, thus corresponding invoiceable earnings, can they deprive me ? How many times can they assault me physically, thus treat me with violence ?

-- Answer: For a whole remaining lifetime to come, every three months, apparently, by law.

So this Fri, I can look forward to the police and emergency ambulance arriving -- again -- then being physically lifted by police and emergency ambulance staff from my home -- again. This as a 14-stone, zero escalation, non violent, total passive resistance dead weight. Then being man-handled into the dog-cell-like, grill-cage at the back of the private ambulance -- again. Lifted into hospital, because I won't be sitting in any chair if I can avoid it without violence. Then mob-handedly physically assaulted, to impose depot injection by force and violence -- yet again.

-- All because what is normal for me, e.g., what I write and do, looks bizarre or non sensical to medics. 'Idiots' ! But idiots with legal power and the force of the law behind them.

Zero stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment. Always high functionality and generally happy disposition. No conventional anti-social problems of any kind. No significant risk to self or others. No history of ever being so. Zero acute or emergency situation in play. Ever.

-- My mental health is simply excellent relatively, compared to those in mental health difficulty and distress, who can benefit from hospitalisation. And of course, medics claim the credit for injecting me by violence ! Last depot injection, I was at 100% good, before they injected me with an increased dose of drugs. From 100% good, they only did me harm. Psychiatric drugs are nasty. No-one would want to take them. Brain damage, e.g., tardive dyskinesia (Parkinson's-like) and loss of grey and white brain tissue, increased risk of psychosis due to increased dopamine receptor density and sensitivity, loss of sexual performance, even breast growth and milk production in men. And for the first couple of weeks after that last injection, I slept for silly numbers of hours at night, and during the day as well. Will I now spend large amounts of my life tired, sleepy, lethargic and unmotivated ?

There is no justification for this mal-treatment. It is human rights violation. Or a civil liberties issue, if legal. Medics are inadequately informed thus ignorant. Their dominant source of decision-making information, collateral evidence, is easily mis-stated and mis-reported. And they show no adequate due diligence in checking, corroborating, clarifying, correcting or verifying key evidences. They are negligent and incompetent in not 'just getting their facts right'. My medical records are absolutely riddled with falsehoods propagated by medics. A 'Chinese-whispers'-type system, always in the direction of mis-copying towards 'more- and sufficiently-crazy looking.' All such falsehoods assumed good, post-hearing, with no appeal available. These medics' whole process is deliberately subjective, never objective, with no clear definition of terms. All subjective reasoning and decision-making remaining forever only in the heads of NHS medics.

And what are those repeated forced injections by medics supposed to achieve ? I have zero stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment. I am highly functional and of generally happy disposition, despite getting beaten on by medics repeatedly. I have no conventional anti-social problems, except getting beaten on by medics repeatedly, for being suspected of 'thinking the wrong way'. I am no significant risk to myself or others. I have no history of ever having been so. There is no acute or emergency situation in play. There never has been. So just what wondrous improvements are medics going to achieve by drugging me ? What benefit ? To whom ? And why ? Ludicrous though it sounds, the last Mental Health Tribunal decision-statement does appear to indicate risk to my health, due to poor personal hygiene and self-care, thus not allowing me to get too smelly, by injecting me regularly by physical assault hence force and violence. That really does appear to be about it, from the written MHT decision. And how are those medics going to tell when their wondrous improvements have indeed been achieved ? Perhaps I smell better ? Just what successes are medics going to attribute to their brilliant 'treatments' (= repeated physical assault, hence violence) ? Are medics going to keep on injecting me until I don't believe that they are LYING 'idiot'-medics, on reasonable usage of those terms ? That won't happen, because they absolutely refuse, simply to get their facts right. Whereas my written work and actions are scientifically rational. The toxic and refractory group delusion is theirs. My position is a simple one: life, one second at a time, 'it is as it is' and keep it honest. Is the medic position an honest one ? Is it a self-critical position, compatible with personal integrity ? Or is it lax and sloppy, insufficiently-thinking, and a direct abuse of power ?

Medic gas-lighting is implicit immediately, in the fact that the Community Consultant Psychiatrist believes literally, that I spend all my time on things like writing extensive notes about how to rescue Miss Piggy from (T)he (M)uppet (S)how. The Psychologist believes literally that I write notepad after notepad of illegible notes. The in-patient Consultant Psychiatrist believes literally that I write bizarre things about round earth. And the Mental Health Assessment team (Professor) Consultant Psychiatrist believes literally that I am obsessed with cloning myself. All reasonably accurate paraphrases of written statements by those various senior medics. That is their group delusion. All of those things are false. Just never a thing. 100% medic fabrication. But those things exist in the minds of NHS medics. And NHS medic subjective opinion and decision-making, based on all of that false information, decides that I am detained repeatedly by force, and assaulted repeatedly, physically hence violently.

How do such falsehoods get propagated ? Easily, because those medics expect and want to see 'crazy'. I considered the notion that as I was dealing with so many muppets, a head full of Muppets might be preferable. I LinkedIn-blogged a couple of paragraphs on that. However, the medics with whom I am dealing, come from age ranges and cultures which did not know The Muppets. These are medics who do not appreciate the full subtleties of the English language or English cultural references. And rescuing Miss Piggy was simply a 100% fabrication. I have never written extensive notes on that. I have never written any notes at all about rescuing Miss Piggy. But that sounds 'crazier', so gets introduced as a total falsehood into my written medical notes, via a 'Chinese-whispers'-type effect. A many-times repeated and on-going process which always moves in the direction of 'more crazy-sounding'. I never wrote anything about round earth. I supplied some well-considered Quora answers on the Flat Earth debate. Carefully thought-out, written and edited stuff. However, the in-patient Consultant dismisses those answers as bizarre writings about round earth. That is actually deplorable, because deprivation of my liberty, livelihood and physical assault, are a result of him simply not bothering to get his facts right. The Psychologist actually stated in my medical records, that I agreed that I wrote lots of notepads of illegible notes. Umm ! That was her take-away from our interviews. She believes that literally. I don't write notebook after notebook of illegible notes. I can mostly read my own notes. I agreed that my quick hand-writing is messy. Mostly, I keep my maths tidy and written at large character size. And contrary to the lie by the (Professor) Mental Health Assessment team Consultant, I have zero interest in cloning myself. I did though, LinkedIn-blog a time-travel thought experiment about jumping back in time, then there are 'two of you', the usual time-travel fiction scenario. And I repeated the process to consider issues such as mass, volume and number conservation. Both of you jump back in time together, giving four of you, eight of you, etc., and keep going. Crazy stuff ! Umm. The medic group delusion then, is that medics believe I am, or was, at the 'drooling madman' level (colloquially), on the basis of nothing more than their lazy and sloppy mis-understandings and careless medical note writing and transcriptions. Yet I get beaten on again and again, month after month, simply because they are so lax and sloppy. This is negligent, incompetent and discriminatory, under common usage of those terms.

I refer to the medics with whom I deal. Why are those medics so lax and sloppy ? Because of self-superiority and conviction of own correctness. They are deluded as a group, by their own applied 'looney'-label. And they do not believe that a 'looney' (colloquial) deserves, or should be given, the same treatment as a 'normal' person. And because they 'know they are right', they believe that they simply do not have to take very much care, actually 'getting their facts right'. These medics show no adequate due diligence in checking, corroborating, clarifying, correcting and verifying key facts. Instead, they largely accept collateral evidence as given, uncritically and without anything other than cursory further consideration. Discrimination (medical) by the Community Consultant, for instance, is evidenced by his written statement, in my medical records, that I am mentally ill, but that my family are not. When that is the very issue under judgement and to be decided. The key point being that the 'patient' / complainant is simply not believed. This is very evident on-ward. The 'patient' is 'less', much 'less', and is treated in corresponding social fashion. I have blogged about this elsewhere, based on much recent time on-ward -- completely unjustifiably (!).

This same treatment of the 'patient' / complainant as 'less', carries over into the Mental Health Tribunal, Hospital Managers' appeal and NHS Complaints process, too. These are very much 'us versus them' scenarios. These systems are discriminatory and pre-judgemental from the outset, in the sense of the normal UK legal system, with the 'patient' / complainant 'judged on previous crimes' (analogy), i.e., found against, again and again, on the basis of collateral evidence and previous medical record. The judge or complaints investigator is not impartial, but is on the 'same side' as the medics. Medic and 'patient' / complainant testimony are not given anything at all, like equal weight. The judge and complaints investigator are part of the 'medic' (generic) mass delusion and cannot see behind the 'looney'-label either. And they are no better than any other 'medic' (generic), at seeing beyond the above-listed plethora of falsehoods, lies, slanders and libels.

To break that senior medic group delusion, requires at least one of those senior medics to get scrupulously honest and admit that they have messed up *really* badly. Meanwhile, the ~90% of medic 'followers' must simply continue to follow senior medic lead, on the basis of good professional practice. And the mass 'medic' (generic) delusion is effectively self-sustaining. However, the Community Consultant Psychiatrist is totally convinced that *I* really *believed* all of their 'total drooling madman stuff' in the past. And that my 'delusions are now circumscribed', due to the wondrous interventions of medic physical assault hence violence. The Community Consultant, honestly, with total sincerity, believes that he has 'injected me by force and violence, into partial sanity'. And that I am now toxic as a result of circumscribed delusions. This is easy for him and his senior medic colleagues to believe, because they all deal routinely with mentally ill people. They have only ever seen me behind their attached 'looney'-label, and they have always been deluded by that label. Mentally-ill people are these medics' norm, their day-jobs. Whereas a mentally-well person behind their attached 'looney'-label is an anachronism. They simply cannot get their heads around that concept. They deny selectively, all evidence pointing in that direction. The reality though, is that I have always been as adequately mentally well as I am now. I never believed any of these senior medics' 'total drooling madman stuff'. Only they have ever believed that. So now the Community Consultant exhorts his colleagues to read up on, and beware of circumscribed delusions, because they are a banana skin on which his colleagues must not slip. Thus this 'medic' group and mass delusion becomes refractory and resistant to elimination. Umm. How complicated can reality get ?!

-- And how do I get just one of these senior medics, to 'get honest, impartial and objective' ? The trouble is that they are all 'too lazy or superior' to do it. Too much effort, just to read my written web-posts or emails, critically and fairly. Even though I exhort them to do so. And despite the fact that I flag all of their slanders, libels and delusions (common usage) at Mental Health Tribunals and Hospital Managers' appeals, my only channels of legal recourse.

-- Do I also suspect that at least some of these senior medics are now just covering their own backs, and simply do not have the integrity to admit their almighty b**s-up ? Not sure.

I would guess: Senior Registrar -- arrogant 1-on-1 beat-on; Psychologist -- less-arrogant superiority; Community Consultant -- honest total delusion; in-patient Consultant -- from medical records, the in-patient team is stated to disagree with the Community team, so maybe he knows things are wrong; Mental Health Assessment team (Professor) Consultant -- arrogant superiority.

-- Will any of them admit to that total mess-up ? We'll see … . I won't hold my breath.

Below is a list of recent libels against me by medics, under common usage of that term. But with medics absolutely safe from all recourse in law, within private meetings and the privileged Mental Health Tribunal environ. And of course, even listing these libels makes me look 'crazy'. Great system. Medics really have it sown up !

Email to NHS Complaints --

NHS Complaints,

Please add to my on-going formal complaint the following direct and formal accusations of libel -- under common usage of that term -- against Dr ** and other medics.

Thanks,

Bill

----

Lies by Dr ** and other medics:

Dr ** LIES that I have written bizarre things about round earth, or about rescuing Miss Piggy -- 100% TOTAL FABRICATION -- thus, he should put his money where his mouth is and declare and justify his sources and his assertions.

He LIBELS me under common usage of that terminology.

And even if he can get away with this, within private meetings and the privileged MHT environ, it is NOT ACCEPTABLE, that HIS IGNORANCE costs me my liberty, livelihood and repeated mob-handed physical assault with a sharp implement.

As Dr ** and other medics declare repeatedly, my mental ill health, on the basis of what looks bizarre and non sensical to them, they should put this written work out to INDEPENDENT EXPERT REVIEW, but by appropriately qualified EXPERTS, NOT INADEQUATELY INFORMED thus IGNORANT medics.

(o) Having a known diagnosis of paranoid schizophrenia does not mean that that diagnosis is correct.

-- Psychiatry must be one of the few subjects in the world, to do something as 'stupidly' simplistic as assume invariance of a bio-system, on a ~35-year time scale, geographical distance the length of a country, and marked change in circumstance, e.g., single student to long-standing, married family-man.

(i) I have never told medics that I hear voices. That is purely medic terminology and fabrication. Medics lie and make things up purported to have been said by me, but which I have not said.

(ii) I have never told medics that I suffer from auditory hallucinations. That is purely medic terminology and fabrication. Medics lie and make things up purported to have been said by me, but which I have not said.

Dr ** knows that the 1-page statement that he provided IS NOT a statement of 'nature and degree'.

Nature = Symptoms

Degree = Severity and Chronicity

Why did he not provide a statement of 'nature and degree' ?

-- Answer: Because he has no valid statement of 'nature and degree'.

The only bogus 'nature and degree' criteria that Dr ** and other medics have, are false accusations of bizarre and non sensical actions and web-posts by me.

-- However, these only look bizarre and non sensical to medics, because those medics are inadequately informed and thus ignorant.

Dr ** and other medics have made the following DIRECT LIES about me.

-- And he uses these DIRECT LIES to conclude my 'mental ill health', unjustifiably and unfairly.

-- This is variously incompetent and negligent on his part, under common usage of those terms.

-- And libellous under common usage of that term.

-- These lies lead to human rights violations, on-going physical assault and trauma.

-- However, medics know that they are free from all legal recourse in private meetings and the privileged MHT environ. Thus they can afford to be lax, sloppy and unprofessional.

Those few medics with whom I deal, operate a 'lying / cheating / bullying' system. My own terminology for those medics, safe to show no adequate due diligence in 'simply getting their facts right', and free to 'libel', under common usage of those terms. They know that they face absolutely no legal recourse under law. And they employ repeated physical assault, hence violence, to attempt to impose by force, their own minority world view, on someone with a different world view.

*Key question:* Medics have no valid list of 'nature and degree' criteria of my 'mental ill health'. Zero. So what do they hope and expect to achieve by their repeated, forced, locked acute-ward detentions and their repeated, forced depot injections ?

I will never think like these medics. They are really bad scientists. Perhaps they would claim that psychiatrists and psychologists, are not, and need not be, scientists. Are they gas-lighting ? Attempting brain-washing ? Do they expect me at some future point, to state that they are not inadequately-informed and ignorant ? That will not happen, because my LinkedIn-blogs, my Quora answers, and my low-tech-equipment home experiments, are well considered, well argued and increasingly well-edited. And those medics should put my claim to *independent expert* review and test.

Dr ** and other medics MUST justify THEIR LIES, below:

(1) I have NEVER written about rescuing Miss Piggy from the muppets show. MEDIC LIE.

(2) I have NEVER written about Charlie, wherever he comes from. MEDIC LIE.

(3) I have NEVER written about round earth. MEDIC LIE.

(4) I have NEVER been obsessed or pre-occupied with cloning myself. MEDIC LIE.

(5) I have NEVER written anything bizarre or non sensical about any related topics, UNDER STANDARD usage of those terms, as judged by fair and well informed people. MEDIC LIES.

-- NOT though, judged by ignorant and wilfully dismissive medics, who deliberately write their reports to 'sound crazy' without examining carefully or adequately, the contents of my written web-posts.

(6) There is nothing bizarre or non sensical about placing a steel bin on my head, to test partial EMI screening of ELF and SLF environmental sources, on tinnitus-like head noise. MEDIC LIE.

-- This is such an easy and obvious, well founded experiment, that it would be stupid not to try it.

-- Medics are inadequately informed and ignorant, to declare that this indicates mental ill health on my part.

(7) I have NEVER spoken or written pseudo-scientifically on these or related topics. MEDIC LIES.

-- And this could be put to test by INDEPENDENT EXPERT review. SO WHY NOT DO THIS ?

-- Medics are sloppy and unprofessional, to conclude mental ill health on my part, on the basis of subject matter outside of their own domain of expertise, and thus qualification to judge, but within mine.

(8) I have NEVER shredded (toilet) paper, or arranged shredded paper into patterns, around the toilet. MEDIC LIE.

(9) I do not have dozen (sic) notebooks full of illegible notes. MEDIC LIE.

-- My quick, scruffy-handwriting notes are (mostly) legible to me and they are not written for anybody else.

-- And my notebooks contain engineering maths and programming notes which I have shown to medics.

-- It is medic 'lower level truth', i.e., merely avoid the direct lie, whilst being indirect, evasive, one-sided, non impartial and non objective, misleading and misdirecting, which paints this picture.

-- When in fact, writing 'time-stamped' maths / programming / finance / admin / philosophy / science / diary notes is a routine part of my day job as an IT and Technical Consultant.

(10) I have never wandered around the garden, or in view of the neighbours, in my underpants or boxer shorts. MEDIC LIE.

-- I have stepped onto our back patio, at night, in the dark, in warm weather, in view of nobody, in dressing gown and slippers. And there is nothing wrong with that. I am a free man.

(11) I never play on my computer. MEDIC LIE.

-- I earn my living as an IT and Technical Consultant on my computer. I do not play games. I do serious work.

Sun, 24 May '20:

Considering the psychologist's report for next week's Mental Health Tribunal and Hospital Managers' appeal:

The psychologist writes '... On both occasions when interviewing Bill he brought a note pad and pen to the session. He wrote down questions he was asked and it felt at times like he was the one doing the interviewing. On the second occasion we met I raised this with him and he was open to that he was making notes, although these did seem illegible which he admitted. I noted in his room were around a dozen note pads with lots of illegible notes on. ...'

-- The psychologist then believes literally, that I write notepad after notepad of unreadable stuff. She really does believe this, apparently.

-- Strangely enough, I feel quite let down by that. Odd.

The psychologist attributes to me, statements like '... I'm smart ...' mostly in isolation and largely out of context. Which of course, sound stupid, near stand-alone. Who on earth says stuff like that with direct intent ? Perhaps someone with learning difficulties. So she thinks I'm 'quite dumb'. Or perhaps that would be unprofessional. She is having me tested for autism. Umm ! I did an online test. I scored less than ~20% likelihood. And my layman's view of autism was always of having no concept of, or indeed ability to conceive, how another mind might work. Whereas I think about the nature of my own mind, and of other minds, a lot and with great interest and curiosity. Does that mean that I read people well ? Perhaps not. But I'm learning with time. And nothing like autistic, in my own inexpert opinion.

-- How well do the psychologist and the psychiatrists read me ? Do they do better at reading people, than I do ? In my opinion, they are all deluded by their applied 'looney'-label (but in professional terminology) and cannot see me behind it.

A psychiatrist asked me at one point, if I had considered things from my family's point of view. I had given it thought. And I had also considered my family's view of my view. And my view, of my family's view of my view. Whereas, when I asked the psychiatrist about just how well he had established a mapping of psychiatrist view of complainant view, to actual complainant view, I got the distinct impression that he had not considered that perspective-mapping at all. My personal experience is that psychiatrists are not that reflective. They work predominantly from a position of the their own assumed superiority and correctness. Those medics with whom I deal, do not appear to be at all concerned that they have zero meaningful internal metrics of mind for the complainant (me). I 'am better' when 'I look better to others'. Collateral evidence and the holistic psychiatric viewpoint. 'Whole system' medicine, without me really in the loop at all.

The real trouble though, with the psychologist's written report statements that I write notebook after notebook of illegible notes, is that standard 'Chinese-whispers'-type mis-copying, which is commonplace for medical reporting, then turns this elsewhere in my medical reports into the implication that (colloquial paraphrase) like a drooling mad-man, I scribble nothing at all but gibberish in my notebooks. So where is the fair and balanced assessment of my advanced engineering maths, particularly my good linear algebra, my computational physics and my software development notes ? Do the psychologist and the later transcriber(s), capture my notebook contents honestly, fairly and accurately ? Are the good 'maths / science / philosophy / logic / admin / finance / diary' contents of my notebooks now indicated correctly, to the independent tribunal and appeal assessors for whom these medical records and reports are their primary source of information ?

-- Even if my quick hand-writing can be seriously messy, my stuff always looks tidy by the time that it gets edited carefully into LinkedIn-blog articles, Quora answers, email, programming technical notes or software.

At other points in her report, the psychologist does not follow my arguments. And naturally enough, her implication is that that is my problem. Her lack of comprehension. My fault. Perhaps her report is more factual and objective than that ? Maybe. But I think not, in practice. I think that that conclusion is implicit. Equally, the psychologist describes me as going off at a tangent repeatedly and needing to be steered back on track. From my perspective, there was a lot to say. It was not a one-track, linear argument. Instead, multiple branches. And I always steered myself back on-track, to the correct initial branch-off point, once I had made the point I thought relevant. Perspective is a big deal in psychology, psychiatry and life.

And the psychologist totally did not get the point of my light-hearted discussion of anal retentivity from the psychoanalytical and scientific points of view. I LinkedIn-blogged it elsewhere.

A key takeaway from the psychologist's report, is that psychologists, at least this psychologist, are not scientists. The psychologist summarises interviews, with me and with others, and naturally attempts to pull everything into a coherent picture and overview. It is interesting to observe the process:

' ... Bill seems to identify from being young with intellectual ability. ... It likely this defines who he is and any challenges to this, challenge his core identity. It is possible that when feeling less connected to reality or having experience that do not make sense to him, he over compensates by searching for an explanation in science, where he feels most comfortable, irrespective of the subject. The goal may be to distract from the current difficulty and it’s likely to be an unconscious process. Protection of his identity is likely to be maintaining factors for his mental health difficulties as well as noncompliance with his medication....'

I read this as roughly 'Bill thinks he is smarter than he is, and that maintains his mental health difficulties. And so he sciences everything'. In the past, a Mental Health Tribunal judge described me as 'grandiose', which I have discussed in other Linkedin-blogs. 'Grandiose' is used in these latest medical reports also. So I do speculate whether it is used repeatedly in the technical sense of 'delusions of grandeur.'

But the psychologist, like the psychiatrists, gets me badly wrong. I don't ever feel less connected to reality, or have experiences that do not make sense to me. Reality is immediate combined primary experiences, internal world and external world, local to self in space and time. Thus reality is easy. Existence is a given. And life simply requires 'it is as it is', which is a pretty simple premise, and 'just do it', for living daily life. Epistemology though, is 'much harder' than ontology. It is probably possible to know a lot. However, I think it is never possible to know what is known or how well. Which though, really is not any sort of a problem for daily life, either.

With subjective reality as immediate combined primary experiences, everybody must make 'reasonable assumptions' about how to interpret their own experience. Intuition is personal and based on unique life experience to date. One person's reasonable assumptions or intuition need not be another person's reasonable assumptions or intuition. And it is never possible to experience another person's reality as they experience it. So why expect to interpret own view of someone else's reality, the same way they do ? And why should medics feel sufficiently superior to attempt to force their own view of reality on someone else, by physical assault hence violence ?

However, what really sums up the difference between the psychological position (or this psychologist's position) and the scientific position (or my position) is the phrase ' ... he over compensates by searching for an explanation in science, where he feels most comfortable, irrespective of the subject. ... ' From my perspective, everything is science, old science, new science and always mixed science. (Though 'single science' works amazingly well, which probably implies objective reality.) Whereas the psychologist appears to have a picture of subjects where scientific explanations do not apply. Like psychology and psychiatry maybe ? The psychologist got exasperated with me at one point and told me 'not to science it'.

'Medic' (generic) Group and Mass Delusion: Toxic and Refractory

In this context, it is interesting to me, to speculate on the possibility and nature, of psychologist and psychiatrist / nurse / social worker / auxiliary staff / admin staff / police / emergency ambulance staff / ..., group or mass delusion. From two opposing perspectives. Firstly, psychologist and psychiatrists are continuously aware of patient 'delusions' as their own day-jobs and thus their own day-to-day realities. So how do they explain obvious 'patient odd stuff', if they do not do so scientifically ? The Community Consultant, for instance, in the context of our discussions of intelligence, pointed out the well known difference between left-brain and right-brain thinking. The psychologist does actually write as though she has first hand experience of '… feeling less connected to reality or having experience that do not make sense ...'. And she writes as though she explains such first-hand experience non scientifically. Thus, totally speculatively, what possibility that medics (generic) who spend a significant proportion of their time with the 'mentally ill', get pulled into a mass delusion, i.e., non scientific beliefs for what is actually scientific reality and instead of scientific rational argument ?

The second perspective is then my personal flip-side case. How easy for medics (generic) to maintain a group or mass delusion about a complainant (me, say), i.e., medic belief in contradiction with complainant reality and complainant rational argument ? How easy for them to gas-light, unintentionally or intentionally ? On reflection, this would be very, very easy indeed. Roughly ~90 % of all 'medics' (generic) are 'followers' (my rough guess). Nurses / socials workers / auxiliary staff / admin staff / police / emergency ambulance staff / … must accept the 'looney'-label (but in professional terminology) as given by 'senior' medics (generic). It would simply be unprofessional of them to be pulled into a complainant (apparent) delusion. The problem is compounded further by the fact that even senior in-patient medics defer to Community, Mental Health Assessment team, and crisis team medics. Once locked on-ward, no 'simple rational argument' suffices to achieve escape from detention. In-patient rules must be followed, in order to escape finally. All reporting, on-ward and off-ward, about someone to whom the 'looney'-label has already been attached, is from the perspective of 'assumed-crazy' (colloquially). And repeated personal experience tells me that anything that does not look 'crazy enough', can be simply rewritten ('lied' about) to make it look 'crazier' and 'sufficiently crazy'. Often as a 'Chinese-whispers'-type, mis-copying-of-medical-records effect. Thus simply apply the 'looney'-label and it is ~90% self-reinforcing, immediately. So a key question becomes: once the 'looney'-label has been applied, how could any 'senior' medic (generic), ever 'see me' behind their applied 'looney'-label ? In my case, the only (bogus) 'nature and degree' criteria of my 'mental ill health' that 'senior' medics (generic) ever list, are their subjective medical opinions of the bizarre and non sensical nature of my web-posts, my emails, my written notebooks, etc., and my actions -- from their perspectives. In fact, medics have even declared in written medical notes and records, that I could not understand or comprehend hospital meetings ! Umm. 'Lower level truth' at best, if they were actually implying that their 'understanding of the situation' was simply going over my head. Straightforwardly then, medics are deluded on standard dictionary variants of that term. But how to shift toxic and refractory 'senior' medic (generic) group or mass delusion ? To do so, would require those 'senior' medics to realise that my web-posts, my emails, my written notebooks, etc., and my actions, were actually scientifically rational, then to come clean, and thus to admit that they had made a total b**s-up. No wonder then, that these 'senior' medics (generic) are toxic and refractory to elimination of their mutually-sustained, group or mass delusion. And therefore that the ~90% of medic (generic) 'followers' continue to follow.

Quite generally, it is 'scientistic' and unscientific, to pre-judge such an issue without examining critically all respective evidences and analyses. So how to treat a case of mutually declared delusion between disputants ? The scientific approach is 'higher level truth', i.e., keep asking direct questions and obtaining and supplying direct answers, with intended 2-way conveyance of meaning, not just words, and an ultimate aim of mutual comprehension. From direct experience, psychiatrists work very differently. They work mostly with 'lower level truth', which is deliberately indirect, evasive, misleading and misdirecting, one-sided, pre-judgemental, subjective not objective, non independent and non impartial. And a key psychiatrist position is that of assumed self-superiority, which declares the other disputant 'insane' and therefore refuses nearly all direct dialogue. Instead, the psychiatric position resorts to repeated physical assault, hence violence. This to impose repeated depot injections, in an attempt to force medic minority world view, on someone else with a different world view. Such medics then argue that they are doing the other disputant (me) a favour by being violent. All in his own best interest. And that that repeated mob-handed physical assault with a sharp implement, (against my zero escalation, non violent, token passive resistance) is not violence at all. The disputant is simply claimed not to have the capacity to think for himself, so that his thinking must be done for him. Even when that disputant is an IT and Technical Consultant of ~35 years' post-graduate experience, highly functional and firing on all cylinders. A 'powerful' (umm !) way to attempt to force 'the win' in an argument ! Power means sanity.

The trouble with psychology and psychiatry as non-scientific subjects then, in my personal experience and to my own detriment, is that they are 'always right'. Non testable. Non falsifiable. Always subjective. Never objective. Based on ego, sense of psychologist/psychiatrist superiority and correctness, not on proven-to-be-sound methodology. And the upshot is that I get beaten on, again and again and again, month after month, by psych's, for no better reason than what I do or write, looks bizarre and non sensical to them.

The Meaning of 'Meaning'

As an interesting to me related follow-on, e.g., in 'logic', any system could define itself always to be: (a) correct and (b) truthful. That irrespective of what it 'says or does'. However, is any such system then meaningless ? As everything depends (?) on the definition and meaning of terms, do we then get to the meaning of 'meaning' ? Wrapped up in that, certainly from the view of 'logic systems', one key consideration is the definition and nature of 'equality' (=). And given some application, another can be the nature and relative importance of 'power'.