Straight Answer from a Psychiatrist ? The 'Patient' as 'Less'. Medic World View by 'Physical Assault' ('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.
I appreciate greatly, the NHS and those that work in it.
My previous NHS-complaint narrative, here:
16:30, Sat 23 May '20:
Still reading through extensive medical notes for next week's Mental Health Tribunal and Hospital Managers' appeal. The Community Consultant goes for the drama award, in order to revoke the Community Treatment Order with no good-enough reason (no reason):
' ... until he is symptom free and has better insight otherwise with his sense of frustration about what he regards as a shabby treatment by Mental Health Services and his anger towards his wife would fuel his rage and the risk of violence to his family would be significantly high and also the risk to himself if he feels entrapped and hopeless about his situation while he is still symptomatic and his judgment is impaired.
I have revoked the CTO and Mr Batty is now on section 3 MHA 83. ... '
The Community Consultant is a 'liar in spirit' on the above basis. My psychological inertial state is mellow. I've never been violent with anyone in my whole adult life. I got into just a couple of fights at school. This guy does not have a clue. There is zero risk to my family or myself. Zero history of ever having been so. Maybe the Community Consultant speculates 'raging monster', because he imposes mob-handed physical assault, hence violence, as routine. That to impose depot injections against my absolute refusal of treatment on my grounds of my being adequately healthy. And he gets away with 'soft force' because I adopt zero escalation, non violent, token passive resistance, in response to repeated medic-instigated physical assault, hence violence -- for which the medic-instigated limiting case is murder.
-- A really solid bully tactic, then. Accuse the non violent disputant of violence, to justify locking him up and beating on him. Good stuff !
And straightforward medic falsehoods:
' … Risk: Rapid and cyclic admissions, non – compliance of depot in community. Paranoid schizophrenia with mental and behavioural disorder due to harmful use of substances, vulnerability … '
I am ~35-years' tee-total, have never done recreational drugs in my life, have never smoked, and don't do prescription meds either -- except those that medics force on me by violence. Thus maybe medic 'lower level truth', i.e., merely avoid the direct lie and *impose* the harmful substances by force against the *vulnerable*. Umm !
Some falsehoods can, of course, be straightforward errors. Perhaps the above. And perhaps also, some reports of complying with physical health observations and weights, when I actually refused absolutely all medical intervention on-ward, except for COVID-19.
However, some of those errors can be pretty major:
'... Regarding medication he is currently prescribed -
Palaperidone 100mg depot
Regular Multivitamin at his request however due to constant refusal this has been stopped.
PRN
Promethazine 25mg Oral
Promethazine 25mg IM
Lorazepam 1mg Oral
Lorazepam 1mg IM
Medications prescribed on Kardex are correct at time of report completion. It is advised that Panel take into consideration that medication changes may have occurred between now and Tribunal date/hearing. ... '
Medics force the Palaperidone depot on me, by mob-handed physical assault, ('soft' force), hence violence. But despite the claim that medications are correct at time of report completion, I've never taken, nor been prescribed, any of those other medications in my life.
This same nurse writes ' ... Bill has further comprised of writing bizarre things on blogs which make no sense these include writing about a chocolate factory and life to muppets. Bill also writes about his human rights being violated in mental health and has commented about staff by stating Freak. His blog is on Linkdin- (sic) with his Name (William Batty) ...'. Discussed further below, and in the companion LinkedIn-blog, web-linked at the top of this page.
10:00 and 07:00, Sat 23 May '20:
Formal 'libel' complaint to NHS Complaints:
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Sat, 23 May 2020 10:02
Subject: Re: Please also forward to MHT, 26 May, and HMs' appeal, 28 May '20 -- Direct and formal accusations of libel -- under common usage of that term -- against Dr ** and other medics
Hi ** (solicitor),
Is there really no way that I can press formal, legal libel charges, as indicated below ?
-- Are medics absolutely free from all legal recourse, within private meetings and the privileged MHT environ ?
-- Is there no other environ in which they are liable for explicit and formal legal libel charges ?
-- How about slander ? Or defamation ?
Thanks,
Bill
William Batty
wllmbatty@aol.com
-----Original Message-----
Sent: Sat, 23 May 2020 6:57
Subject: Direct and formal accusations of libel -- under common usage of that term -- against Dr ** and other medics
Hi ** (PALS),
Dr ** and other medics simply lie about me.
-- Can you please forward to them, this direct and formal list of libel accusations (under standard usage of that terminology).
This is a direct information request to PALS. Not an NHS Complaint.
-- I would appreciate another informational reply, like the last.
Thanks,
Bill
----
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, etc., -- 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.
William Batty
wllmbatty@aol.com
17:00, Thu 21 May '20:
The Patient Advice Liaison Service (PALS) duly replied to my request for information. I had asked Dr ** for a list of 'nature and degree' justifying his diagnosis of my 'mental ill health'. Dr ** supplied no such list. I suspect strongly that he cannot supply any such list. However, he did take the time to write me a 1-page-A4 statement, which I appreciate.
What is really interesting about Dr **'s statement, is that it does not read like a statement from a professional at all.
-- It contains exaggerations, blatant inaccuracies and propagated falsehoods that you might expect from a school child.
' … Mr Batty was spending all his time on his computer and writing extensive notes about Charlie from the chocolate factory and how to rescue Miss Piggy from the muppets show. … '
I spend *a lot* of time on the computer.
-- I am an IT Consultant !! With a living to earn.
Dr ** makes it sound as though there is a problem spending all my time on the computer. How does he think I do my job ? To do that job, when I am not on the computer, I write extensive notes, e.g., lots of engineering maths algebra and software development notes, amongst a wide range of other notes.
And reading medical reports for next week's Mental Health Tribunal, it is apparent that NHS on-ward staff describe me repeatedly as 'playing on my computer'. That is clearly because that is what they do with computers, and how they think computers are used. They do not have a concept of earning a living at a computer, doing serious work. And they do not appreciate that I am simply not a game player. I just do not play games. Life is serious. Even if I choose to see the upside and the funny side.
However, I was not ' … writing extensive notes about Charlie from the chocolate factory and how to rescue Miss Piggy from the muppets show. … '.
That is absolutely 100% LIES and TOTAL FABRICATION.
Professional standards should be higher. These medics' professional standards clearly are not that high.
I LinkedIn-blogged a few paragraphs about these medic delusions. However, I never wrote about Charlie at all. Dr ** though, clearly thinks that I wrote extensive notes about someone called Charlie. And that Charlie comes from the chocolate factory. Dr ** also clearly believes that I wrote extensive notes about how to rescue Miss Piggy from the muppets show.
I almost burst out laughing reading this back to myself. It is almost hilarious -- except that it is not really funny at all.
-- Once you realise that Dr ** believes this *literally*. And therefore thinks that I am insane. And therefore injects me by force repeatedly -- because he thinks I am insane.
-- Dr ** should check and correct his facts. But medics are under no legal obligation to do so. And the medics with whom I deal, show no adequate due diligence in checking, corroborating, clarifying, correcting or verifying their key facts.
-- Instead, they copy each others' notes, from document to document, complete with spelling and punctuation errors illustrating clear mis-understanding of the content.
Really. You couldn't make it up, right ? Who runs the asylum ?
(Dr ** did correct notes to Miss Piggy. It is Mrs Piggy at another point in the medical reports. The fact that Miss Piggy is not married, might be very important.)
14:00, Tue 19 May '20:
Email to my solicitor, in response to documents for next week's Mental Health Tribunal:
On the excerpts below, bold in '... quotes ...', by Dr **, ...
-- He talks absolute twaddle without bothering to get his facts right.
-- He copies what others have said, without making independent checks.
-- He is a professional -- notionally. And that is professional incompetence. Or dishonesty.
' ... What appears to be rational explanation of his psychotic behaviour is just primitive defense mechanism of rationalisation and it is pseudo-science ...'
-- I don't talk pseudo-science and his claim is libellous -- on standard terminology -- but absolutely safe within the privileged Mental Health Tribunal (MHT) environ -- and that should not be legal either.
' ... What is rational about putting a rusty metallic bin liner over his head and walking in his underpants in the garden? ...'
-- I did not walk in my underpants in the garden. That is just a straight falsehood. I did step out onto our private back patio, in the dark, late at night, impossible to be seen by the neighbours, in my dressing gown and slippers.
-- I did not try the metal bin whilst on the patio. But I should do so, at some point. For the to-do list.
-- And naturally enough, given the nature of medic reporting, in other sections of the medical notes, the above gets transformed in solid 'Chinese whispers'-fashion, simply to putting a bin liner over my head. Which now, of course, sounds appropriately crazier, like being at insane-person risk of smothering myself with a plastic bag. And duly described in medical reports as psychotic behaviour.
-- It was not a bin liner. It was a mesh bin. And the fact that it was rusty, means that it was almost certainly iron / steel, thus magnetic. And if you have tinnitus-like head noise, a low frequency environmental electromagnetic noise source is a real possibility. Brain waves are delta / theta / alpha / beta at extremely low frequency, ELF 3 - 30 Hz, gamma at super low frequency, SLF 30 - 300 Hz. Mains electricity is at 50 - 60 Hz. Noise due to lightning strikes, magnetic field variation, etc,., as used in magneto-telluric passive base station monitoring in the oil and gas industry, is at ~ 100 Hz. I've worked on magnetotellurics and diffusive electromagnetism.
-- And Electromagnetic Interference shielding, EMI, redirects low frequency fields. It does not attempt to attenuate or reflect them. Thus a steel (magnetic) bin is eminently sensible. This is the Faraday cage effect. To someone who knows what they are talking about. Perform the surface integral over the whole enclosed inner surface.
And Dr ** does not know what he is talking about. He is pretentious and sloppy to make unfounded and baseless allegations of my talking pseudo-science, from a position of his own ignorance ! And certainly to assert my views as a 'primitive defence mechanism of rationalisation' when his general knowledge and broad science knowledge are so 'primitive' for an educated person.
I have never tried to '... rescue Miss Piggy ...' (though that sounds quite gallant; more like Link Hogthrob). He is an idiot again. This is incompetent. He should d**n well get his facts right ! I've mentioned Miss Piggy once in my LinkedIn blogs. And *my* comment about muppets and Muppets was sensible !
[ Re-reading my own blog entry, I can hear that I sound angry. And I am. However, in the past I have thought that Dr ** is one of the more human of the psychiatrists. So it is unfortunate that he now finds me toxic. We differ on both reality and rationality. He cannot experience my reality any more than I can experience his. And from the fact that he gets it so badly wrong, it is pretty clear to me that he does not read me, any better than I read him. The difference is that I am always asking for more information. Whereas the medics with whom I deal, 'know it all, already'. When in fact, given liberty, livelihood and repeated physical assault in the balance, they should be less 'superior' and blase, and actually take the trouble just to get their facts right. Their general knowledge and broad scientific knowledge are poor for educated people. And that costs me. They have ZERO valid 'nature and degree' criteria for my repeated forced, emergency, locked, acute-ward detention and forced injection. ALL their criteria are bogus. My reality: 'it is as it is'. My mental health is good. How much damage do medics do by repeatedly ignoring me, detaining me and injecting me ? And what are those injections supposed to achieve ? I am never going to think like one of these psychiatrists. They are such bad scientists. ]
' … or spending many hours researching time travel …'
I have never researched time travel. I have blogged it on LinkedIn. And it makes interesting blog articles. And what right do medics have to dictate to me, a free man and an independently-thinking individual, just what I should and should not blog ?
' … so engrossed into his “ research” at the expense of his work and providing for the family? … '
LinkedIn-blogs and Quora answers are not research. And I have put ~£****k pm, monthly average, though my bank account since Aug '19. My family is my number one priority.
-- What has cost me a packet, is that medics have cost me two permanent jobs now. Thus a whole year's permanent salary. And they are just too arrogant, or stupid, to admit that costing someone a year's permanent salary d**n well matters ! And they have taken ~4 months out of my contract piecework and that d**n well matters too ! The fact that we are still afloat financially, after two lost permanent jobs and 12 + 4+ months' lost salary, due to unjustified medic detentions with no good-enough reason, means that I have worked the finances well, around medic-'moronicity' !
*Key Q:* Are these medics morons ? Or are they malign ?
' ... they do not suffer with mental illness but he does ...'
-- So Dr ** *does* simply discriminate against me on the basis of my past medical record. And he just does not bother to get his facts right !!
' … The longer he remains psychotic the more he would become toxic and refractory to treatment. Please read more about circumscribed delusions and how they can present and the high risk to others associated with them. It is banana skin so please be careful and do not slip. ... '
-- That last, being an active exhortation to colleagues, explicitly not to consider the possibility that I might actually be sane. Dr **'s mind is already made up, and not going to be swayed by any evidence to the contrary.
It is interesting to consider symmetry in the above context. Medics are deluded on the dictionary variant definition, 'medic belief in contradiction with complainant reality'. Dr ** is already far more toxic to me, than I am to him. I do not inject him repeatedly by force; mob-handed physical assault hence violence. ('Soft force' because of my zero escalation, non violent, token passive resistance policy, in response to repeated, medic-instigated violence.) And now Dr ** has become increasingly refractory. His position is one of clearly stated resistance to modification of his own delusion.
-- I do wonder what reading material Dr ** has available, on medic (group / mass) delusions and gas-lighting, intentional or unintentional ?
It is interesting to consider NHS medic and admin staff, group / mass delusion. And the nature of propagation of memes, in the sense of shared false beliefs. Alongside a definition of 'insanity' as being in a minority of one. Clearly, NHS staff as a group, sustain each other's delusion that I am so seriously 'mentally ill' that I require repeated, emergency, prolonged, locked acute-ward detention and forced injection. And they achieve sustenance of that group delusion, by maintaining group ignorance of the fact that all of my LinkedIn-blogs and Quora answers, maths, software and other notes in my notebooks, emails to colleagues, emails to the NHS, and actual day-job maths modelling and software development, etc., are well founded and justifiably argued.
It really is interesting to me, given interaction with some few dozen NHS medics and admin staff, (many less than ~100, I think), that that moderately large group delusion has not yet been shattered appropriately, by someone just doing their job correctly, objectively and conscientiously, and simply checking out my written NHS complaint, science, philosophy and logic web-posts, really carefully. Group negligence, group incompetence and group delusion. It only takes one person in the group to get this right, to inform the others. In a group that large, many people will be people of honesty, integrity and good intent. A partial explanation for my own observation then, is that only a minority of that large group will be educationally equipped to understand and appreciate all of my web-posts, and even then only with some significant 'intelligent layman' effort.
But why has one of the best-educated members of that group not been set, or taken on, the task of reading my web-posts in full, objectively, impartially and critically ? A few hours' to a day's work.
-- Repeated unjustified loss of *months* of my liberty and livelihood, and repeated unjustified forced physical assault hence violence, ought to be enough to justify that day's effort by somebody. We are talking a situation as serious as on-going abuse, trauma and human rights violation, due to negligence, incompetence and discrimination by the NHS. And that day's work would also offer the possibility of avoiding further unnecessary waste of emergency ambulance, police, on-ward auxiliary staff, nurse and medic time. And possibly saving further wasted taxpayers' money on a hospital room that could be usefully allocated to someone actually in need.
It is also interesting to me, to consider how such an assessment would be made. An independent expert, with sufficient expertise, could make a global assessment of my web-posts, email, notebooks, maths modelling and software development work, etc. The question would only be: is the work justifiably-argued ? As opposed to clearly insane and an indication of very serious mental ill health ? However, I am confident that no member of the NHS medic and admin staff group with which I interact, has anywhere like the broad scientific knowledge required for such an independent expert assessement. And my direct personal experience is anyway, that this group is partisan, not impartial, not objective and not critically thinking.
However, if such an assessment were attempted by a member of this medic group, with good intent, what would be achievable ? An ex-school acquaintance once told me that studying medicine at Uni, was like doing ~40 O-levels. Lots of material. Not a lot of depth. That certainly squares with my recent interaction with medics. Even Consultants do not have background at the level of just the 'kill your own grandfather' time-travel paradox. They certainly don't grasp Special or General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics. And even where they might be expected to have some broad scientific background, such as in medical imaging, they make unjustified statements which illustrate no real grasp of science subjects such as low frequency classical electromagnetism. Then with a broad, low-level background, the best medics could honestly do, would be to check the 'shape of an argument'. The quality of its English language and the argument construction, the absence of clear and obvious non sequiturs, the apparent use of sound technical language and concepts, apparent knowledge of the broad subject area and literature, etc. And if such apparent expertise were demonstrated, what reason for ever declaring someone else 'seriously mentally ill', just because that person's arguments looked bizarre or non sensical at an initial superficial viewing ?
-- The question then arises: how has any honest member of that medic group, declared me so very seriously 'mentally ill', on the basis of their lack of comprehension of my fields of expertise ? I suspect that any members of that medic group, who have examined any of my work, were pre-judgemental, made very superficial appraisal, and that superficial appraisal only with the intent of 'seeing crazy'. Such superficial and uninformed judgement is very apparent in phrases like 'he did bizarre work on the round earth', 'he once performed a thought experiment' (as though there is something wrong with that !), 'he was pre-occupied with cloning himself', 'he was writing extensive notes on Charlie, from the chocolate factory, and rescuing Miss Piggy from the muppet show', 'dozen notebooks with ineligible notes'. Those are trivialising, very poor and unfair assessments (recounted by me, as reasonably-accurately-stated paraphrases).
-- Medics propagate falsehoods with impunity. And they have legal power. THAT is a toxic mix !
Dr ** irritates me seriously ... ! Umm. Annoyed. He should just make the effort to get his facts right. And not be so ignorant.
Really. What can I do about this ?
-- This CANNOT be legal.
-- Medics HAVE to get their facts right !
They are just stupidly uninformed … !
[ Medic-'idiot' / 'moron', I define carefully elsewhere, as a term for these few reasonably smart medics who should do better and get things right. Instead, they get things wrong all ways. ]
And further straightforward fabrication by a medic, in those Mental Health Tribunal reports, in email to my solicitor:
' ... also reported that once he was spending too much time in the toilet and all of the tissue paper he shredded around the toilet and he was sitting on the toilet seat, when asked ... , he got agitated, pushed everyone out and was focused on shredding the paper. … ' (written and punctuated as given, apart from the '...')
-- This is just total b**l. The medic was not told this, so he has simply fabricated it.
-- Why should I have to put up with rubbish like that ?!?
-- Really. They make it up. But they have the power to deprive me of liberty, livelihood and assault me repeatedly.
-- It simply is not a fair or just system.
I don't *push* anyone anywhere, ever.
But *Key Q:* IF I had pushed everyone out, how does the writer know that I was then '... focused on shredding the paper ...' ?
It is a nasty fairy story. I am being libelled. This is someone else's nasty imagination. And / or a deliberate 'hatchet job'.
*Repeat Key Q:* Really, how can that story be anything other than fabricated ? Who *saw* me ' … focus(ed) on shredding the paper ...' -- once I'd pushed everyone out ?
-- For sure, I didn't ! So who else did ? Umm !
Just lies. Straightforward lies. It simply did not happen.
-- Why should I have to put up with this ?
What did happen was that I thought of the steel-bin-on-head experiment, which was so quick and easy, it would have been silly not to try it. So I tipped the contents of the bathroom bin onto the mat by the bath, tried the experiment, and put the stuff tidily back into the bin afterwards.
That was it. The rest was totally embroidered by the medic. Completely his imagination. He totally made up the paper shredding and arranging variant.
-- And I got a result. The tinnitus-like loud head noise increased (!). Which made a lot of sense, on reflection, and I have LinkedIn-blogged that experiment, elsewhere. Unfortunately, the effect does not appear to be reproducible. An unmixed, single science effect would have been remarkable. Instead, I suspect that the situation is more akin to placing the bin over a laptop and trying to deduce the digital signal processing of CPU, RAM and HDD from the EMI shielding. Umm. (For medics, that is an analogy.)
In the past, a nurse also wrote into my medical notes that I was writing a thesis on telepathy. Total fabrication. I have written a PhD thesis, on long wavelength semiconductor quantum well lasers, for optoelectronic telecommunications. That was four years' hard work. Nobody normal writes a thesis on the basis of a couple of weeks' background reading. That reading being preparation for a job interview in portable medical imaging, functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIR) and diffusive optical tomography.
An Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) once shifted dates in my medical notes by a whole six months, from December '18 to July '18, to fit her own preferred narrative. Just changed the dates by six months (!). Some medics simply play fast and loose with the truth. They just don't care. As a rule of thumb, in reports for my appeals and tribunals, the 'crazier'-sounding the better, seems to be about it. That is, have the decision made the medic-preferred way, rather than the objectively-correct way. Power rather than impartiality or critical (self-)examination.
And once the 'looney'-label is attached, NHS staff are simply patronising and condescending by default. They are all deluded by their own applied 'looney'-label (but in correct medical terminology). For instance, when I spoke yesterday, Tue 19 May '20, to the Community Care Coordinator, and told her that I had received ZERO useful replies from the Patient Advice Liasion Service (PALS) in my full 15 months of interaction with that service, she said sympathetically that she could see how that might look bad to me. (Representative paraphrase.) Without the 'looney'-label, ZERO useful responses EVER, from PALS, would be a downright bad result, or totally rubbish performance. However, from the point of view of the Community Care Coordinator, the problem apparently lay with me.
It is an interesting fact, that the PALS representative who last year supplied ZERO responses from PALS, is also the NHS Complaints 'independent' investigator who refused point-blank to consider a single item of my offered key documentary evidence, in list-based fashion, true / false, true / false, … against key respective complaints. ~10+ months of NHS Complaint 'due process' and she absolutely refused to examine a single one of those falsehoods that I listed in my medical records. My medical records remain littered with falsehoods propagated by medics. All taken as good, post-hearings. No appeal possible.
-- Was that 'slow track' NHS Complaint 'due process', independent and objective, or always subjective and pre-judgemental ?
No doubt that point-blank refusal to examine my key offered documentary evidences -- 'I have enough evidence already' -- was also a reflection of my NHS-perceived 'mental ill health', behind the 'looney'-label. But if my claims were considered spurious, malicious or trouble-making, then why not simply throw them all out on day-1, by simple list-based, true / false, true / false, … comparison ? Dates simply wrong by six months, for instance, are pretty blatant. As are the direct numbers of just how much money I was putting through my bank account monthly, when libellously (common usage) accused by medics of: (i) professional incompetence, (ii) talking pseudo-scientifically, (iii) not even being able to understand or comprehend hospital meetings, and (iv) financial mismanagement.
I also asked the Community Care Coordinator for the list of 'nature and degree' criteria written by the Community Consultant, in response to my simple requests for information and my complaints. PALS will not supply that list. NHS Complaints will not supply that list. What is the point of writing that list, if I am not allowed to read it ? And the Community Care Coordinator sounded highly sceptical that she would be able to obtain that list. Though she did say that she would ask the question. The Community Consultant regards me as TOXIC (above).
-- But really, why not supply that 'nature and degree' list of criteria which forms the basis for the Community Consultant's assessment of my 'mental ill health' ? Why not, if medics are honest, people of integrity, and their intent is good ? Why would that not be good professional practice ? Why would that not be aiding a (non-)'patient' / complainant (me) ? Clarifying and helping to resolve, 'lack of patient insight'. How is such 'lack of patient insight' meant to improve, if the respective 'medic insight' remains forever subjective and always inside the heads of NHS medics ? Never placed in the physical, external, mutually-accessible world for objective evaluation ? It is for sure that I would like to understand what medics are thinking. But what goes through the heads of medics ? What personal issues do they consider ? What personal definitions of concepts and terms do they employ ? What personal evidences do they assess ? What personal lines of reasoning do they adopt ? Thus what personal justifications for their individual, subjective medical opinions and decisions ? All they will 'tell me' is the repeated mantra 'nature and degree' / 'lack of patient insight'. Therefore, right now, I can only see medic ignorance, inadequately-informed general knowledge and lack of broad science background. If they have more, why not spell it out ? Then I would understand it. Understanding things, and making engineering maths and scientific software work, is my day-job.
-- Hippocratic Oath, 'first do no harm', or hypocritical ?
14:00, Mon 18 May '20:
Email to my solicitor:
' … The bottom line really appears to be that … medics, have ZERO mental ill health criteria.
-- 'ALL' they 'have' is that they do not understand my science, philosophy or logic.
-- What looks bizarre or makes no sense to them, they all ascribe to my insanity. Which is both ludicrous and unfair.
-- I have ~35 years' post-graduate experience, so why would medics, nurses and social workers understand my every thought ? Mine is the perspective of a well-educated ~55-year-old science-professional.
-- The buck stops with medics. And medics are simply ignorant. Ignorant of general knowledge, English language cultural references and broad science.
-- Really and surprisingly ignorant. They have not heard of the Flat Earth debate. They do not know what a thought experiment is. They do not know the 'kill your own grandfather' time travel paradox. They do not know of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, The Muppets, or I suspect many details of the Harry Potter books and films. That really is pretty ignorant.
-- And they beat me up repeatedly, on the basis of their ignorance. For my part, I am not ignorant. I work hard at understanding things. Including opposing points of view. And yes, I do see the asymmetry in that prior statement.
*Key Q:* This shouldn't be allowed. Detention and physical assault due to their ignorance. So what can I do about it ?
-- Can they beat on me every month, forever ?
And my solicitor's reply:
' … The simple answer is yes.
On a CTO (Community Treatment Order) you can be recalled and medication given and if your mental state is such can have the CTO revoked. That is based on the opinion of the medical staff. Unfortunately it is not something we can contest other than through MHTs (Mental Health Tribunals). ... '
The problem now is that the 'looney'-label delusion held by medics, is simply self-reinforcing. Legally, medics can insist that they inject me, every month.
-- I refuse. They call the police and emergency private ambulance and drag me from my home as a 14-stone, token passive resistance, total dead weight. Then they find a treatment room in the hospital and assault me physically, to impose the depot injection. Against my absolute refusal of treatment on my grounds of my being adequately healthy.
There does not need to be any mental ill health problem apparent. There does not need to be any acute or emergency situation in play.
Medics can simply do this now, because in their superior-and-all-knowing wisdom, without bothering actually to get their facts right, they just 'know that they are right'. Really quite magical.
Thus nothing to do with anybody else, at all, now. Strictly, the omniscience of medics. And the 'always-correct' nature of psychiatry. Not testable. Not falsifiable. Always subjective. Never objective. No requirement even to define terms or concepts. Unanswerable.
14:30, Wed 13 May '20:
I just had a meeting with the Community Care Coordinator, as routine follow-up to Mon's meeting, which converted Section 3 Mental Health Act (MHA), Section 17 leave, back to a Community Treatment Order (CTO).
Our first conversation, last week, was brief, as there is no point talking. These NHS staff listen, but they do not see or hear me. I am invisible behind their 'looney'-label (but in correct medic terminology). Today, I decided to explain my position to this new contact, just once. It was clear that again, I was simply not seen or heard behind the 'looney'-label. Reply was (as a reasonably accurate paraphrase): 'That is your perception. Other people's perception is different. That is why we do not agree. Your explanations do not look rational to others. Your answers do not demonstrate good judgement, appropriate to someone of your intelligence and ability'.
-- Quite gob-smacking really. Because my explanations are the honest and correct explanations, by someone mentally well, intelligent and able. What this means is that I am being judged 'mentally ill' on the basis of what others consider intelligent and rational. And many / most of the people making that judgement are not as intelligent or educationally-experienced as me. And we do not share the same definition of 'rational'. Or experience the same 'reality'. It is never possible to experience someone else's reality as they experience it.
-- Despite their (sometimes) many years' of experience in a subject known to be philosophically-demanding, and in my personal experience, psychiatrists do act routinely as though they believe there is only reality and one rational argument, i.e., medic reality and medic rational argument.
Delusion: belief in contradiction with reality or rational argument.
-- Then whose reality and whose rational argument ?
Reality: combined immediate primary experiences, internal world and external world, local to self in space and time.
-- Beyond immediate personal reality, always 'reasonable assumptions'. For everyone.
Rational argument: almost always means intuitive argument. And intuition is subjective and based on unique personal life experience to date.
-- One person's intuition or reasonable assumptions are not another person's intuition or reasonable assumptions.
Delusion IS NOT: experiencing 'odd stuff', or thinking 'odd stuff'.
-- 'Odd' for whom ?
I asked the explicit direct question: ''do medics have any information 'secret' to me, on which they base their 'nature and degree' assessment of my 'mental ill health'' ?
The Care Coordinator was equally explicit that that was not the case. Only 'nature and degree' already shared with me. Which is ludicrous. It really is. What medics have then is 'scientist stuff', but phrased in medics' own words, so as to look 'lunatic' (many examples of such medics phrases, and that 'scientist stuff', described in detail in my other LinkedIn-blogs and Quora answers):
(i) Order of magnitude calculations of brain-to-brain mutual induction, at a distance of O(1 m), based on easily available numbers from Magleby, 1971, for frog sartorious nerve-muscle preparation.
(ii) (Rusty) steel-bin-on-head experiment, to test for any impact on tinnitus, of low frequency environmental noise, i.e., EMI shielding of electromagnetic ELF and SLF, and / or strongly emergent fields / matter.
(iii) The above combined with quantum teleportation with classical Alice->Bob co-channel, as a putative mechanism for telepathy, should any such exist in nature.
(iv) Related near-future 'telepathy' based on currently almost-available hi-tech: Elon Musk and Neuralink, Body Machine Interfacing (BMI) and Artificial Intelligence (AI), e.g., Carnegie Mellon University (CMU), and my other LinkedIn blogs.
-- For instance, pick up extremely and super low frequency delta / theta / alpha / beta (3 - 30 Hz ELF) and gamma (30 - 300 Hz SLF) brain waves by portable imaging sensors, e.g., Electro-Encephalography (EEG), functional near infra-red spectroscopy (fNIR), ..., transmit wirelessly to a remote server and apply: signal processing techniques (deconvolution, filtering, …); machine learning for acoustic and visual signal manipulation (classification, partitioning, principal component analysis, …); artificial intelligence trained on MRI, PETS and CAT scans, EEG, fNIR, …, test sets. Then transmit someone else's audio and visual 'thoughts' to your Windows HoloLens-type spectacles, where you can view those thoughts in an Augmented Reality (AR) window of your everyday life.
For example, what do composers or conductors visualise whilst composing or conducting ? Do they have visuals ? If so, might it ever be possible to capture these and play them back, sync'ed to the music ?
Synthetic Telepathy has been studied, e.g., by the US Army for voiceless battlefield communications: 2008 MURI project, University of California, Irvine (UCI), School of Social Sciences, Cognitive Neurosystems Lab, Mike D'Zmura, MURI: Synthetic Telepathy (projectavalon.net).
(v) Time-travel thought experiments, including repeatedly time-jumping back singly / in pairs / fours / ..., i.e., one self / two selves / four selves / eight selves / ... , to compare the usual 'self-consistent picture', i.e., 'you simply do not kill your own grandfather' against possible space-time singularity-and-branching at each jumped-back-to point. Particularly in combination with the 'butterfly effect', i.e., no way to have zero impact after jumping back in time.
(vi) Same thought experiment with Harry, Hermione and the time-turner.
What is important are the concepts. Irrespective of maths models, current or future, if the Universe contains such behaviour then it is extant. If the Universe does not contain such behaviour, then it is not extant. The thought experiments are well motivated either way.
The chronology protection conjecture is a hypothesis first proposed by Stephen Hawking that the laws of physics prevent time travel on all but microscopic scales.
(vii) My Quora answers on aspects of the 'Flat Earth' debate and other broadly philosophical topics.
(xiii) Special relativity, e.g., could we build a micro-rocket to exceed the speed of light ? (It is not obvious that electromagnetic speed limits are the same as mechanical speed limits.)
Interestingly, NASA is examining the Alcubierre drive, 1994, which requires negative mass (for instance the Casimir vacuum between parallel plates) to achieve faster-than-light traversal of the Universe, without ever exceeding the speed of light locally.
(ix) Does SR relativistic mass in the transverse direction, go to zero or to infinity, for a body approaching the speed of light ? (Experiments might test for instance, only ratio of transverse and longitudinal masses, not absolute values.)
(x) Statistics including: the 50:50 'fair' coin flip is never 50:50; the p = 1/6 'fair' die roll is never 1/6; ecology or environment can come into the coin flip or die roll sequence at much less than the age of the Universe and maybe on typical psi-event test sequence lengths, say; as perhaps can pseudo-random number generation 'non 50:50' or 'non p = 1/6'; (are all of those orders of magnitudes, and respective probability distribution functions, well known and in routine use ?); the normal distribution has unphysical 'fat tails' to infinity, i.e., physical measurement errors require empirical probability distribution functions, whereas in practice, a best fit standard PDF is simply guessed; Bayesian inference is 'many things to many people' -- all kinds of things, because definitions of parent populations and formula terms can be so woolly; … .
(xi) The solution of Schrodinger's equation appears obtainable in large part by classical pre-computation, without inserting the particle mass, m*, or the quantum, i.e., Planck's constant, hbar, until the end of the calculation.
(xii) For k a natural number, limit k -> infinity 1/k is not zero, but delta > 0 arbitrarily small but finite (which is the difference between 'a.e.' and not, in some constructions; and also in deciding whether a straight line can always be defined uniquely in the Euclidean plane by any two points, or any point and gradient).
(xiii) Classical probabilistic determinism requires an N-multiverse of fully deterministic sub-Universes (distinct from the quantum mechanical 'Many Worlds' interpretation).
-- Then link this to backwards-in-time-travel, conventionally self-consistent, or with 'butterfly-effect' Universe-branching at a jump-back-point singularity. Physical body or mindscape world-line.
And lots other people blog on time travel, so why do medics beat on me for it ?
Why do scientists keep insisting that time travel is impossible? They don't. … [www.quora.com]
(xiv) Citing the well-known psychologist scene with Johnny Depp, in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory; and noting the Typical Mind Fallacy, i.e., incorrectness of the common implicit assumption that 'all minds are the same'.
(xv) And pointing out that when dealing with muppets, a head-full of Muppets might be preferable -- and completely speculatively, potentially sensible as a possible psychiatric intervention.
Lots of this stuff is known to practitioners. Though interesting as LinkedIn-blog articles and Quora answers, because not obvious, I think, until thought through and highlighted. Some claimed results are not known and are thus contentious. And I'll correct any errors, as and when I find that I have made errors. These are blog articles, with thought experiments and discussion points, not journal papers. I expect to make fewer errors in journal papers.
The reasoning sections of this blog, and the specific logic sections of some of my other related blog articles, are well founded. As are my thought experiments on time travel and telepathy.
Is what is normal for this self-labelled scientist, 'crazy' for some other people ? I think it likely that I have fallen foul of medic arrogance and their unjustified, assumed, better-ability to judge work in someone else's specialist areas. For instance, medics' apparent conclusions that I am displaying evidence of mental ill health. Those pre-judgements due apparently, and in large part, to their mis-comprehension of my zero- or low-tech-equipment, home-experiments and my 'crazy'-science thought-experiments described on my LinkedIn blogs.
On the basis of such LinkedIn-blog articles and Quora answers, medics lock me up repeatedly for weeks and months at a time. And assault me physically repeatedly, ('soft' force, as I employ zero escalation, non violent, token passive resistance in reply). Thus medics utilise violence again and again, to attempt to force me to conform to their world view. In this case, delusion defined in the variant form 'medic belief in contradiction with complainant reality'.
-- Medics have no other 'nature and degree' criteria on which to base their judgement of 'mental ill health'. 'Mental ill health' so bad, that they can detain me forcibly, by emergency ambulance and police, month after month, to a locked, acute, psychiatric ward and then depot-inject me forcibly.
-- No stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment. High functionality and generally happy disposition. No conventional anti-social problems. No significant risk to self or others. Never any acute or emergency situation in play. Ever.
In the 'Mad Scientist's Guide to World Domination', I find a description of the mental health condition, Schizotypal Creative Genius Personality Disorder. An idea that occurred to the writer of the short story. It is an interesting fact, that personality disorder can be defined largely for falling in the tails of the probability distribution, i.e., not being normal or average enough. And in the real-world definition of Schizotypal Personality Disorder, one of the listed assessment criteria is being eccentric or looking odd. (I looked for, but did not find, a list of attempted World Domination by Mad Scientists. Though I did not include psychologists or psychiatrists, as scientists.)
Then that opening paraphrase rings very true: 'That is your perception. Other people's perception is different. That is why we do not agree. Your explanations do not look rational to others. Your answers do not demonstrate good judgement, appropriate to someone of your intelligence and ability'.
-- It is my bad judgement to have been honest and straightforward with medics. Talking to medics is not like talking to other PhD students or post-docs in a University office. For their part, medics employ mostly 'lower level truth', i.e., merely avoid the direct lie. And they are too arrogant and unjustifiably-'superior' to admit that it is only their inadequately-informed ignorance of general knowledge and broad science, that 'allows them' to 'beat on me' again, and again, and again -- legally, they claim.
-- I suspect that these days, medics are also covering their own backs. Much easier than admitting a total c**k-up on their part.
-- The moral of my particular story is a negative one: it was a mistake to be straightforward and honest with those few medics with whom I deal. Those few medics do not reciprocate. No 'higher level truth': direct, with intended two-way conveyance of meaning and mutual comprehension; merely 'lower level truth': indirect, evasive and only avoiding the direct lie. Those medics operate a consistently 'cheating / lying / bullying' system based on arrogance, unjustifiably-assumed 'superiority' and inadequately-informed ignorance. (My particular choice of terminology is defined and justified elsewhere.) Ignorance which they refuse to examine self-critically or to correct. They listen, but wilfully refuse to hear or to see me. They treat me as 'less'. They apply physical assault, hence violence ('soft' force) repeatedly, as though I am sub-human.
I also really dislike the fact that medics waste police time, ambulance staff time, hospital staff time and so very much of my time. And repeatedly waste tax-payers' money, including my own, on enforced, locked acute ward, hospital detentions. That auxiliary-staff-cleaned, en-suite room, with all meals provided, might usefully and helpfully be allocated to someone in need. Someone who would be grateful for 'care' (not repeated 'physical assault') actually required.
-- And medics are irresponsible and reckless to raise my family COVID-19 risk, by detaining me repeatedly to a busy hospital ward, with no good-enough reason.
-- I clearly need to get smarter in dealing with medics. Still thinking about that. Direct honesty does not appear to be the best strategy. The law seems to be on the side of medics. Again, not quite sure about that, either.
13:30, Mon 11 May '20:
Whose perspective is skewed by the system ? And what is medic intent ? Gas-lighting ?
-- To skew or unskew ? That is the question --
I find myself dealing with the insults of arrogant men, …, the inefficiency of the legal system (and) the rudeness of people in office [www.sparknotes.com]. Though in a much happier frame of mind than Prince Hamlet.
I am now back on a Community Treatment Order (CTO), and thus in an on-going trauma situation, according to hospital leaflets. A trauma situation knowingly and wilfully constructed by medics. Pre-notified of imminent physical assault, hence violence, at the next pre-scheduled, forced depot injection, in a couple of weeks' time. I will refuse that 'treatment' (= physical assault / 'soft' force) again, on the grounds of being adequately healthy. As always. No stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment. Always high functionality and generally happy disposition. No acute or emergency situation in play. Ever. On common usage of terms. However, medics are not even required to define their terms. And those few medics with whom I am dealing, work with only 'lower level truth', i.e., merely avoid the direct lie.
-- Just medic 'beat-on': (a) to make me drug-dependent, Community Team- and NHS-dependent, and (b) to try and impose medic world view by repeated physical assault, hence violence, on someone with a different world view. However, it is simply not possible 'to do crazy', just because a few dozen NHS staff insist on it. And the 'lack of insight' does not lie with this complainant.
-- Perspective is a really big deal in psychiatry. So whose perspective is skewed ? Medic belief in contradiction with complainant reality. Whose delusion ?
10:00, Mon 11 May '20:
Meeting with Community Consultant Psychiatrist, Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) and Care Coordinator. They will review moving me from Section 3 Mental Health Act (MHA), currently on Section 17 leave, to a Community Treatment Order (CTO).
-- Medics are not even required to define their terms. Thus every opinion that they express is 'correct' and 'unarguable'. How can the law fall foul of a tactic so blatant ? The law is a word profession, too. It should be smarter. Email to my solicitor, below.
-----Original Message-----
To: ***solicitors.com>
Sent: Mon, 11 May 2020 10:50
Subject: Re: Appeal before next injection -- or just more on-going detentions and physical assaults ?
Hi **,
I just had a meeting with Dr ** (Consultant), ** (AMHP) and ** (Care Coordinator) at the ** Center.
-- No idea what their decisions will be.
-- These people play games.
I pointed out that there is never any acute or emergency situation live, either when they detain me forcibly, or when they inject me forcibly.
-- The AMHP trotted out the usual line,
-- i.e., that is my opinion but the opinion of medics is different.
However, this simply highlights that: (a) medics are not required to define their terms, and (b) therefore they are totally unanswerable and a law unto themselves, they can do whatever they like.
-- There has never been any acute or emergency situation in play, by any common usage of those terms.
-- However, as medics deliberately do not define terms, then their positions are variously meaningless, or mean absolutely anything that medics want them to mean.
From the point of view of symbolic logic, meaningful shuffling of meaningless symbols is valuable, if it is generic. What must be avoided, is meaningless shuffling of meaningless symbols.
The law though, is a word game. Meanings can and should be made precise. Lawyers are smart. Judges are very smart.
-- So how can medics get away with anything so obvious and blatant ?
-- Why are they not required to define their terms ?
-- Clearly, I can state that black is white. That does not mean that black is white.
-- Equally, I can declare that a non emergency situation is an emergency. That does not make it an emergency.
-- Medics should not be allowed to skew the system to total meaninglessness in this fashion.
-- So how do they get away with it ?
Can medics get away with this ? Is the law such an ass (again), that it actually allows it ?
-- Such trivial word play and the law trips up and falls over ?
-- Really ?
14:30, Fri 8 May '20:
Another check-in call from the Community Team. Again, somebody new, who I had not met previously and who does not know me. Like lots of the people that I deal with, she sounded really nice. We discussed VE-day celebrations. However, she must of course, and can only, see me behind the 'looney'-label (though with correct medic / social worker choice of terminology). She cannot 'get' the science, even though she said she found it interesting. And was good at physics at school. She clearly cannot adopt the position that some medics are 'idiots' (I define medic-'idiot' carefully elsewhere), when those few medics assume that they understand my work and study areas better than I do -- despite my ~35 years' professional, related work experience. Medics have ZERO justifiable 'nature or degree' criteria for their diagnosis of my on-going 'mental ill health', beyond those few medics' uninformed ignorance, lack of general knowledge and inadequate broad scientific knowledge.
-- Life is funny. And I would simply laugh off these issues. However, that uninformed medic ignorance means that I get detained forcibly, again and again, for weeks and months at a time, dragged from my own home repeatedly by police and emergency ambulance staff, and mob-handedly assaulted physically, thus violently, ('soft' force), time and again. Not funny in the least.
-- And caring carers just do not get, that forcing 'care' on adequately healthy and independent people, by violence ('soft' force), is detrimental and damaging to those people so 'treated' (= mob-handedly physically assaulted / depot-injected). Especially when those repeated, forced, month-long detentions, and repeated mob-handed physical assaults, mean that the assaultee is listened to, but wilfully not seen and not heard. And is simply ignored when refusing clearly all 'treatment' (= physical assault) on grounds of being adequately healthy. Adopting zero escalation, non violent, token passive resistance himself, in response to repeated, medic-instigated, mob-handed physical assault -- 'soft' force, by concerned NHS staff, just doing their day-jobs under orders from 'idiot'-medics.
Attempting to force an independent person to become both drug-dependent and dependent on Community Team and NHS care -- gas-lighting, intentionally or unintentionally -- is a really, really bad thing to try to do to someone.
And being made effectively invisible, and treated as 'less' than an intelligent human being, is bad for mental well-being. Good mental health is about much more than drug physiology. Drugs of often unknown and dubious benefit, but with huge known downsides. Drug physiology is science and medicine of bodies, not minds. And often reduces to experimentation, in the direction of increasingly nasty prescribed drug effects. Good mental health requires being listened to, seen and heard, not ignored. It requires being treated with the respect due a fellow human being. Not being treated patronisingly and condescendingly, or from positions of unjustified assumed 'superiority' and inadequately informed ignorance.
11 am, Thu 7 May '20:
Introductory meeting with the new Community Care Coordinator. A two-minute meeting, as there is no point trying to hold two-way conversations with many / most / all (?) NHS staff. I am invisible to them, behind their 'looney'-label (but in correct medic terminology). They listen to me. But wilfully do not hear or see me. I am 'less' to them. Unheard. Unseen. A 'medicated person'. Medicated by them, repeatedly and by physical assault hence violence, for no good-enough reason. Always adequately healthy. Never any acute or emergency situation.
They operate a consistently 'cheating / lying / bullying' system, based on uninformed ignorance. (I define and justify those terms carefully, below). And that is unfortunate. Because no doubt the system is mostly populated by decent 'caring' people.
What carers really do not get, it seems, is that offering sympathy, support and care, in fact insisting on providing such 'care' -- by repeated physical assault, hence violence -- to an adequately healthy and independent person, in no need of such, is damaging and destructive.
-- Unless of course, some of 'them' do get that. How could they not ? Really ? Which would be a different story altogether … .
13:30, Tue 5 May '20:
Just reading the Responsible Clinician's report, actually written by the Senior Registrar, for my Hospital Manager's appeal, tomorrow. It contains far too many falsehoods to list. However, an example of straightforward 'lying' by a psychiatrist, presumably for effect: 'In the reviews, it has been noted Mr Batty takes notes and writes notes which are illegible. His room has dozen (sic) of note pads with lots of illegible notes. ... '.
-- Conceivably 'lower level truth' again, i.e., avoid the direct lie. What the psychiatrist cannot read or understand perhaps counts as 'illegible notes'. Even though those notes were not written for him and are (largely) legible to me. It is a well known thing that people can often read their own scruffy handwriting. And some writers are notorious for their bad handwriting, e.g., GP's for instance. Not 'higher level truth' by the psychiatrist, then. No acknowledgement, or slightest indication, that I write serious engineering maths and software development notes in my notebooks. My linear (and nonlinear) algebra is really very much above average. Certainly for a software developer.
Clearly, those psychiatrist 'lies' ('lower level truths' ? -- umm !) are written so as to read, and / or will read, to an independent reader with no other information, as though, like a drooling madman, I scribble gibberish in my notebooks. At school, I won prizes for my handwriting. Mine was an 'italic handwriting' school. These days, my handwriting is undoubtedly very scruffy. Which perhaps says something about the long-term utility of 'calligraphy' as a school classroom subject. The psychiatrist's 'identified' 'illegible notes' are rather like the nurse placing 'work' in quotes, when the she 'speculates' about what I do when seen 'working' at my laptop. Do I really have a day-job at all ? Or is that all part of my delusion (as opposed to the medics' delusions) ?
-- How do medics 'know' that I have 'dozen (sic) of note pads with lots of illegible notes' ? Just how much of my engineering maths are they qualified to assess ? Are they well informed on fatigue-lifetime data modelling, for oil and gas coiled tubing ? Or on fast, forward, acoustic scalar wave simulation, for seismic inversion ? I know that they are not. How about probability and statistics or Bayesian inference ? Or all the 'wordier' sections of my notes, on ontology, epistemology, philosophy of science, science, …, a lot of different stuff, …, along with my daily 'thoughts', finances and admin ?
-- Why do those 'lots of illegible notes' look carefully well-edited and readable, (at least, to fair and critically-thinking people), when typed into my LinkedIn-blogs and Quora answers, emails to work colleagues, emails to friends, technical programming notes, ..., etc. ? Odd that, right ?
The above paragraph in the Responsible Clinician's report, finishes 'In the reviews, it has been noted Mr Batty takes notes and writes notes which are illegible. His room has dozen (sic) of note pads with lots of illegible notes. He has been spending all the time in his room in isolation and engages in no ward activity.'
-- 'Fair enough' then, as 'lower level truth', i.e., merely avoid the direct lie ? Just do not present the 'higher level truth' that I have a job to do, and invoiceable income to earn, in order to support my family. No monthly PAYE as a Ltd company contractor. I am very definitely never on holiday when medics lock me up (again and again) for weeks and months at a time. And because of various medic-'stupidity/idiocy', (related terminology defined carefully elsewhere in my various LinkedIn-blogs), I have to do those invoiceable hours locked on a noisy and hostile psychiatric ward. Medics' absolutely, and totally unfairly, refuse to acknowledge or agree, that they have cost me both probable permanent employment, thus likely a year's permanent salary by now -- by refusing my attendance at an arranged job second interview in an effective redundancy situation -- as well as ~4 months' contractor work time -- due to repeated, extended, locked on-ward detentions of weeks' and months' duration.
And 'lower level truth' also avoids pointing out that engaging in 'ward activity' means things like watching television, thick-brush painting with poster-paints and making coloured-pencil drawings, for the ward walls, shaping and poster-painting simple clay figures, or playing plastic bat-and-ball cricket on the small, enclosed lawn, maybe 20 m x 5 m, with the in-patients.
Key Questions: Is the above word picture, painted for the Hospital Managers' appeal, for Hospital Managers who will have no direct knowledge of me, and as their primary source of decision-making information, a fair, honest, objective and impartial one ? Or is choice of words indicative of a deliberate 'hatchet job' ? That is, medic intent being to have the decision made the Senior Registrar's way, irrespective of inadequately-informed medic ignorance. Is this straightforwardly, now, a 1-on-1 beat-on situation ? From a position of legal power, already. Am I dealing with someone critically-thinking, of high integrity and conscience ? A pursuer of 'higher level truth', or 'lower level truth' at best ?
-- I have a definite view, in the case of this particular medic, with his six years' of psychiatric specialism. Good to be proud of personal achievements. I don't knock that at all. However, this medic's pride costs me liberty, livelihood and repeated physical assault, hence violence. He needs to take the trouble, actually to get his facts rights. My position is one of ~35+ years' experience in my own broad areas of work and study. And ~35+ years' acquired 'patient' / complainant insight of 'on-going mental back ache'. Mostly just a niggle to be ignored and worked around. However, over the last couple of years, medics who lack insight have become a serious irritant. More than that, a liability. And they are much harder to work around. They have hit me hard financially. And they are variously too arrogant, and / or too blind, to admit or see that.
And psychiatry when practised this way, is an 'always right' business. That might sound great to some, but it sounds terrible to scientists. No way to test. No way to falsify. As this medic asserts that paranoid schizophrenia never goes away, then he can absolutely guarantee that medics never go away, by beating on me, every month, for the rest of my life. If I make a good job of my life, by working around medic-'idiocy'/'stupidity' (defined elsewhere) and just getting the job done anyway, then medics will claim the credit. If medic gas-lighting drives me insane, and / or their repeated forced injections do serious damage -- and they definitely do damage -- then medics will claim justification for their meaningless diagnoses. And for their implicitly assumed, ~35-year, time-location-and-circumstance invariance.
As everything present, is preceded by everything past, how to test for correlation between repeated mob-handed forced depot injections and outcomes ? This is simply not do-able for my single case. I only live one life. Medics can cite some broad 'ensemble' statistics. However, those statistics only apply, if my 'case' is well represented by those statistics. If not, then no valid inference can be drawn. What can be done, is to rate appraisal of 'treatment' (= physical assault) subjectively. My view is 'all damage'. I was at essentially '100% good' before the last forced depot injection. Equally, 'all damage' for being ignored, listened to but not seen or heard, spoken to patronisingly and condescendingly, declared incapable of comprehending or understanding, and judged technically incompetent in my own work and study areas, by those without sufficient general knowledge, or scientific knowledge, to make any such judgement, i.e., to be 'treated' (= physically assaulted) by the inadequately-informed and therefore ignorant.
My opinion is not heard, however. I am judged 'well' when I 'look better' to others. Thus when I work around medic-'idiotic'/'stupid' methodological incompetence, which is of course, 'always right', then I 'vindicate' medics. Psychiatry sounds like a great job. Always right. Except that as the Senior Registrar points out, the mentally ill remain mentally ill for a lifetime. I wonder why ? Sometimes, perhaps, in some part due to simplistic catch-all labels, for many, varied, compound and disparate causes and effects ?
There is no appeal against propagation of falsehoods in the Mental Health Tribunal system. Appeal available only on the basis of 'due process'. Thus post-hearing, falsehoods are simply taken as good. For instance, after tomorrow's hearing, the following will be taken as good '... reports that … He has not provided for the family … because Mr Batty spends all the time on his computer and writing notes about Charlie from chocolate factory, muppets- Mrs Piggy, time travel and earth is round'.
-- Really ?
-- A report of a report. But that report of a report, in the chosen words of the Senior Registrar. So why did he choose the words in that form ?
Today, I have been working on the coiled-tubing, fatigue lifetime data modelling. However, medics also refuse to acknowledge that by forcing me to defend myself in the only remaining way available -- apparently no effective legal recourse under law at all; at least for someone in my financial bracket -- that they waste huge amounts of my time.
17:30, Sun 3 May '20:
Email to my solicitor --
-- -----Original Message-----
...
Subject: Assumed ~35-year time-and-space-invariance in bio-systems is just stupid ... .
Hi **,
I know that I will get no access to the secret thoughts and minds of medics, anytime soon.
-- Though I do believe independent-expert judgement of the correctness or incorrectness of subjective medical opinions and decision-making, should be a legal requirement.
-- Minimal fairness and transparency.
-- Otherwise, nobody knows what medics are thinking, except them.
-- And that should not be allowed legally.
-- The psychiatric system is certainly to assume without firm evidence, or clearly-demonstrated-and-known-to-be-methodologically-sound input.
-- However, such laxity really should not be supported by the legal system.
-- There are straightforward hard facts, in the physical, external mutually accessible world.
-- And who knows what medics think ? For sure, they do not all think the same things or the same way. And for sure, those that I deal with do not think like me.
-- Nobody can know what medics think, if there are no subjective->objective assessments. Everybody else, simply has to 'assume' what medics think.
-- Is the law really that bad ? Apparently, it is.
------
I know you are a hard-nosed lawyer, who works with the law 'as is' (and 'as is' is an 'ass'). However, I will make this key point anyway:
There is just about no subject, other than psychiatry, which would do something as 'stupid' as assume that the explanation for one effect, ~35 years ago, in one geographical location and set of circumstances, was simply the 'same as' (!!) the explanation for another effect, ~35 years later, in a different geographical location and a different set of circumstances.
The total 'idiocy', of assuming with no good justification, that effects and explanations are the same, over such wide time and space distances, is gob-smacking.
Nobody but a psychiatrist would be so 'moronic'. (My terms for those few reasonably smart, well-educated medics, who listen to me but ignore me, and refuse to see or hear me. I define and justify related terms carefully, elsewhere, in my various NHS Complaint, LinkedIn-blogs.)
-- Then they point out, as though it is nothing to do with them, that the mentally ill remain mentally ill for a lifetime.
-- I wonder why that is then ? Maybe we are looking for one, single-phrase, cause and effect, to capture so many individual, full lifetimes, say ?
Umm.
...
As an interesting aside, to me anyway, the question arises, 'where is the person' ? By my own experience, the person is the same over ~35 years. And it is straightforward to 'feel where the person is'. But how to tie down the 'location' ? Bodies develop according to well-known broad expectations. People still recognise each other after such lengths of time. But what proportion of bodily cells are still the same ? I think that most parts of bodies will have regrown many times. Some cell total-replacement is on timescales of days. And if 'self' 'reduces to' (does it ?) time-varying current-voltage, I-V, and electromagnetism, EM, on brain neuron-synapse (ionic) electro-chemistry, before it becomes experience and mind, then what 'proportion' of dynamic I-V and EM propagates reproducibly over ~35 years ? Clearly, 'same person' is due in some large part to continuity of memory, as well as 'expected' development of body, but is there any 'static or capacitive-type' (ionic) memory storage, or does this imply that time-varying dynamic I-V and EM memory is sustainable over ~35 years ? For the reading list ... .
More to the point, I think, from the point of view of 'mental ill health' -- like 'mental back ache', not actually back ache, but like back ache, mostly just a niggle to be ignored, though just now and then, it gets aggravated enough to be a problem for a while -- is to what extent ~35 year old contributing factors, remain in play ~35 years later, in different geographical locations and different circumstances ? What 'proportion' of 'cause and effect' remain the same ? Why assume any significant similarity at all ? As opposed to assuming almost completely different cause and effect ? Are those psychiatrists who pursue science and medicine of mind, actually misled by the persistence of body and person ? This is consistent with their implementation of psychiatry, from my personal observation, more actually as science and medicine of bodies. Then the bad non sequitur would be to assume that cause and effect remained to some large degree, time and space invariant, on ~35 year time-frames, geographical differences the length of a country, and changes in personal circumstance from, say, single and unattached student to long-standing family-man, for instance. Any such position or contention looks extremely simplistic to me. And barely justifiable under many circumstances.
-- Yet medics 'beat on me' repeatedly these days, in large part I believe, as a result of such simplistic and unjustified assumptions on their part.
08:00, Sat 2 May 2020:
Out for a jog with my younger twin sons, aged 12. Brilliant sunshine. Cool breeze. Just started up again, yesterday. Thus, short jogs, so far. Fun to stretch a few muscles. No great effort. And working from home, press-ups in 25's and 20's, during the day. I did read that press-up ability has an excellent correlation to longevity. Correlation, not causation. But some good muscle effort and maybe I capture a couple of the respective causative factors. Enjoy life in grim COVID-19 times.
Last night, 'fights' with the elder members of my family:
(i) Medics have cost me a likely permanent job, thus probably 12 months' permanent salary, so far. And taken ~4 months out of my contractor work time, by repeated, lengthy, emergency forced detentions, for no good-enough reason. I have always been adequately healthy. Never any acute or emergency situation, or significant risk to self or others. Ever. I have reworked the family budget around 'medic-stupid' loss of 12 months + 4 months income. Medics and family do not see it that way ... . I am 'charged' with financial mismanagement. Despite big money through the bank account from other sources. Umm. Perspective is a really big deal !
Question: is locking me up, for weeks and months at a time, for no good-enough reason, in a hostile, noisy and damaging environment, meant to help me get my work done better ? And how can medics be so blase about losing me a permanent job and taking ~4 months out of my working life ? Are they blind to such obvious factors and issues ? Or do they perhaps believe that such considerations are purely my delusion ? And maybe, somehow, do not matter ?
(ii) My LinkedIn-blog articles and Quora answers are good. Carefully thought out. Carefully edited. At a good technical level. Well-justified scientifically and logically. Medics and family do not see it that way ... . Perspective is a really big deal !
As one Consultant Psychiatrist said to me 'that is your perspective'. Obviously a truism. True for everybody in the Universe, about everything in the Universe.
And it is not possible to 'be crazy' for those maybe few dozen NHS medics, nurses, social workers and admin staff who believe that I should be more amenable to their 'mental ill health patient' labelling and 'treatment' (= physical assault). This is the dictionary definition of 'delusion' in one of its several variant forms, 'medic belief in contradiction with complainant reality'. 'Being crazy' for maybe a few dozen people who insist on it, is just not a do-able thing.
The buck stops with medics. -- My family trusts medics, 'they are the experts'. -- Medics have the legal decision-making power. And the legal ability to detain by force for long periods of time, and to assault physically, repeatedly. When medic non knowledge of English language cultural references, like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and The Muppet Show, or general knowledge like the 'Flat-Earth' debate (if there is one), means that medics and nurses declare my LinkedIn-blog articles and my Quora answers, bizarre and making no sense, then that is a problem. An abusive and discriminatory problem. Discrimination on the basis of prior medical record.
Medics have ZERO valid 'nature and degree' criteria for 'judging' my 'mental ill health'. Nothing except subtle errors in comprehension of language, their lack of general and scientific knowledge, and their arrogant and unjustifiably-'superior' assumption, that 'they know better than I do'.
Condescending and patronising medics could simply 'check the facts' and 'get their facts right'. We have a physical Universe. That is do-able readily. However, they refuse to examine their positions critically. They show no adequate due diligence in checking, corroborating, clarifying, correcting or verifying hard facts. They assume and assert, without valid reason. No demonstrably sound methodology at all.
And medics place themselves above criticism or even intelligent human conversation. They treat me as sub-human. They will not have meaningfully two-way conversations with me, like an intelligent, fellow human being. They say instead, things like, 'you have been told that ten times already'. They resort to repeated physical assault, ('soft' force, given my token passive resistance response), hence violence. They refuse to put in writing, any usefully detailed justification of their subjective medical opinions. Subjective to the NHS, means never objective. Always in the minds of NHS medics.
-- And just what goes through those few medics' heads ? What personal issues do they consider ? What personal definitions of concepts and terms do they adopt ? What personal evidences do they weigh ? What personal lines of reasoning do they employ ? And therefore what personal justifications do they claim for their subjective medical opinions ? Only they know. And that is not fair.
-- I have asked for detailed justifications, in writing, in the spirit of 'higher level truth', i.e., directness, two-way conveyance of meaning, not just words, and with the aim of mutual comprehension. If the intent of those few medics is good, honest and fair, then why not ? That would show good will and good intent, personal integrity and good professional practice.
-- Will I receive any such detailed justifications in writing ? Past experience, including ~10+ months' 'slow track' NHS Complaint 'due process', a blatant rubber-stamping whitewash, says not. I find that medics operate mostly 'lower level truth', i.e., merely avoid the direct lie. Deliberately evasive, indirect, misleading and misdirecting. I suspect that this is mostly a matter of control, power and simply 'being right' -- without being critically-thinking, or concerned enough 'actually to get facts right'. Power and control rather than strict fairness and objectivity. It takes serious effort to consider own position critically.
In response to related comments, the Senior Registrar told me that I am not the 'only patient' that they have on their books. Clearly then, a significant workload excuses lack of adequate due diligence in 'just getting facts right' and in fair and objective appraisal of a dispute situation. Too much effort ? Yes. The conversation ran (rough, but reasonably accurate paraphrase): 'Why should I bother, I have other things to do. So no, I will not write you a detailed, carefully justified list of 'nature and degree' criteria. You have been told that ten times already. I already know I am right. You 'lack patient insight' and you can't understand that. I however, as a medic, do understand your 'lack of patient insight'.'
The Senior Registrar also made the obvious point that medics, as responsible and concerned people, do their best to do a good job. And I believe that. So what is going wrong ? What is going wrong is that because 'they are right', medics do not make sufficient effort to see or hear me. They only listen and ignore, because 'I lack patient insight'. They make no conscious and critically-thinking effort at fairness and objectivity. And they absolutely refuse to accept that their scientific and general knowledge, and grasp of the subtleties of the English language, are such that their very few 'nature and degree' criteria are totally bogus. They discriminate against me on the basis that I have a medical history. They absolutely do not get the point that no biological system is invariant on a ~35-year time frame. A diagnosis which might have been relevant ~35 years ago, simply is not relevant now. These days I have a different problem, which refuses to go away -- getting beaten on by medics. Medics gas-light. They are trying to make me dependent. And I refuse to be bullied into becoming dependent, by a few dozen NHS staff who insist that I 'do crazy' for them. An obvious difficulty, is that my 'normal' is their 'crazy'. So they simply will not go away. If they find my work bizarre and nonsense, their ignorance should be their problem. However, they have the legal power. So they repeatedly make their ignorance, my problem, again and again and again, month after month.
Related NHS positions that I encounter, as colloquial representative forms, are: (i) it is me, I am honest, therefore I am right -- and I do not actually need to check any more facts, I have enough evidence already; (ii) we understand you, but you do not understand us; (iii) if you think we are stupid, then you are stupid (but I don't actually think anyone is stupid -- medics are just behaving inexcusably 'stupidly', as they are 'experts'); (iv) 'retarded'; (v) bull-s**t, and (vi) live with it.
-- I push on ... . And I work around 'medic-stupid' obstructions -- as a matter of daily necessity. Are medics stupid ? No they are not. They are reasonably intelligent, well educated and experienced. So they should get it right. However, the few medics with whom I deal, get it wrong every which way. (The Senior Registrar has around 6 years in a psychiatric specialism, as I understand it. And by my direct observation, the new Consultant defers to the Senior Registrar, for list of 'nature and degree' criteria. In that same conversation, the new Consultant also asked me just what I exactly did for a living, i.e., what was my actual day-job.)
-- I should not have to work around 'medic-stupid' obstructions.
Delusion is nothing to do with 'experiencing odd stuff'. Or with 'thinking or believing odd stuff'. Delusion is about contradiction between personal belief, and personal reality and rational argument. No contradiction within own personal frame of reference, no delusion.
In a world of O(8 billion) people, there exists a huge range of very different world views: pagans, white witches, believers in the Norse gods, Catholic church exorcists, and a Pope with a known talking-point of believing in a devil literally a person (though genderless and of spirit form -- I read), and Eastern believers that on the basis of infinite reincarnations, the animals they encounter in their daily lives, really can be their long lost ancestors.
In that context, I do wonder what sound statistics exist, on the favourability of 'patient outcomes', given degree of compatibility between 'assigned medic' and 'patient' world views. I suspect that such compatibility matters a lot. And I would even suggest that all medical staff be interviewed systematically, in methodologically sound fashion, e.g., cognitive psychology, to ascertain the nature of their introspective mindscapes. Particularly to avoid detrimental and damaging incompatibility and mismatch, between 'patient' and 'assigned medic' perspectives.
-- As the direct flip-side question, if a medic holds religious, philosophical, political, …, views of his own -- and who does not ? -- then what likelihood that these personal factors influence that medic's subjective medical opinions ? Just how difficult would it be, to avoid that ? That is, to eschew completely, all implicit world viewism, in professional decision making ? I think nothing close to that, is required of even our highest level courts of law. My personal experience of the few medics with whom I deal, certainly gives me zero reason to believe that those medics operate to sufficiently high standards of impartiality and objectivity, that they would not 'simply' impose their own personal views / beliefs / prejudices / ... on others. And perhaps implicitly, unwittingly and without critical self-examination.
-- Thus, what justification for medics trying to impose their own minority world view, by repeated physical violence, on someone of a different world view, even if a yet more minority view ?
Especially if that person is adequately well by all standard tick-box and external indicators and feels perfectly well himself. And is not problematic in any societal fashion at all. Should an 'ill' person, not feel ill, rather than be told that he/she is ill, by somebody else ?
-- 'Mad as a hatter', happy and productive.
What justification for medic physical assault ? Or attempted imposition of own minority world view by violence ? What justification for medics beating on someone, because they think 'he thinks the wrong way' (colloquially) ?
Resulting human rights violations can be a direct consequence of the holistic psychiatric approach based predominantly on collateral evidence.
-- To a significant degree, sanity is defined by, or commensurate, with 'power': the 'powerful' are sane by dint of being in power.
The above questions and issues are highly relevant to me. As things stand, medics can remove me forcibly and immediately from my own home, in zero acute or emergency situation, and against zero standard tick-box or external indicators of ill health. They can deprive me of my liberty and livelihood for days, weeks and months at a time, or even longer, and assault me physically repeatedly. And all on a cycle re-enactable potentially every month, for the rest of my life.
Fri, 1 May 2020:
My letter to the Consultant Psychiatrist:
-- Aim: two-way conveyance of meaning, mutual comprehension and understanding.
Getting a straight answer from a psychiatrist is not easy. They work with predominantly 'lower level truth', i.e., are knowingly and deliberately evasive, indirect, misleading and misdirecting. They do not work routinely with 'higher level truth', i.e., deliberate directness, intended two-way conveyance of meaning and mutual comprehension.
The medics with whom I deal, treat me as 'less' than an intelligent human being. They instigate repeatedly physical assault, hence violence, and excuse themselves routinely for so-doing. They feel they have no duty at all, to explain carefully and in writing, their subjective medical decision-making to a complainant / (non-)'patient'. Medics do not show adequate due diligence, in simply 'getting their facts right'. NHS Complaints ~10+ month 'slow track' 'due process' refused point-blank to examine repeated propagation of falsehoods by medics, through my medical records. Zero examination of offered documentary evidence.
The buck stops with medics. They are smart, well-educated and experienced. Therefore, they should get it right. They should not be blasé about liberty, livelihood and physical assault. Yet they get it wrong every which way.
And medics have caused me major financial damage. In a redundancy situation, they detained me for no good reason and likely cost me a 'sitter' of a permanent job, local-to-home. They absolutely refused my attendance at an on-site, second job interview. A job for which the employer had rewritten the job spec, to make me the link between the company's maths/algorithms team and its software team. A permanent, local job which I could have worked for a year now. Thus, a year's additional permanent salary. And by repeated, prolonged, forced 'emergency' detentions, always in zero acute or emergency situation, with zero standard tick-box indicators of ill health, always high functionality and generally happy disposition, zero conventional anti-social problems -- except getting 'beaten on' by medics, for (being suspected of) 'thinking the wrong way' -- and zero significant risk to self or others, ever, they have cost me ~4 months' work-time on contract piecework.
-- So just how fair of medics is it, then to deny all responsibility, and to accuse me of financial mis-management ? When I have so far, worked the finances successfully, around all medic-stupid obstructions. How many people could do without a year's permanent salary and ~4-months' contractor level income ?
My detailed narrative of current medic failings and abuse is blogged here:
'Negative/NonValue of Psychiatric Drug Injection With Forced Deprivation of Liberty & 'Physical Assault' : Typical Mind Fallacy & Limitation of Vision'
1 May 2020
Dear Injecting Staff,
You mob-handedly physically assaulted me again, yesterday. Though you deny physical assault.
-- Anywhere except on-ward, the situation would be 100% clear-cut. A single finger laid on anybody … .
Maybe NHS staff salved their consciences by telling themselves that they had persuaded the 'sad looney' (but in appropriate professional language) to comply with medication.
-- They had not. I stated totally clearly verbally, absolute refusal.
-- In response to medic-instigated physical assault, hence violence, the limiting case is murder.
-- Yet staff pushed on, because I chose zero escalation, non-violent token passive resistance.
-- They listened and ignored me as usual. They listened but did not hear or see me.
-- They treated me like a sub-human. Even though I avoided all violence.
-- 'First do no harm'.
-- They did harm.
-- I spelled out very clearly, and at length, that I was at essentially '100% good'. So that the only result of forced injection would be harm. They listened without hearing me. Pushed on and did harm.
-- And I also told them clearly, that the senior medics providing their orders, had not performed adequate due diligence in 'simply getting their facts right'. Those senior medics acted from arrogant, uninformed ignorance, at best.
-- I have asked for a written list of the 'nature and degree' criteria 'judging' me to be mentally ill. And written justification for forced injection, against absolute refusal, in zero acute or emergency situation, and with zero standard tick-box or external indicators of any mental health problems at all. I expect that I will receive no written reply.
Key question: why is that the expected result of my formal request ?
-- All the injectors cited my past history, of which they had zero direct experience, and 'done under orders', to justify their positions.
-- But what about ''No' means 'No'', voiced loudly and clearly by those that decide on zero escalation and do not employ violence in their own self-defence ? Medics instigate physical assault hence violence. The limiting case is then murder.
Maybe there is no way to get a straight answer from a psychiatrist ?
-- I'm not sure even the IMHA acts for me, now that I am no longer on-ward.
I have requested explanations from medics, like an intelligent human being.
-- However, I am treated as ‘less’.
All brick walls and evasiveness. I do wonder why ? Really ?
-- Patient Advice Liaison Service will not forward my direct request for information.
-- My solicitor will not forward my direct request for information.
-- The Ward office will not forward my direct request for information.
-- I think the IMHA will not forward my direct request for information.
-- So where else to go with this ?
And direct observation says that the NHS psychiatric system is a consistently 'lying / cheating / bullying' one, which is patronising, condescending, arrogant and unjustifiably-'superior',
-- and which treats me as sub-human, an animal and 'less'.
Which is a shame because I know that there are mostly decent people in the system.
'Lying' because medics propagate falsehoods with impunity and NHS Complaints 'due process' refuses point-blank to examine that fact, or even to look at the clear documentary evidence.
-- Zero useful replies from PALS, ever. Is that fair and honest ? (At Sat 23 May '20, just one informative answer in ~15 months.)
-- And 'lying' because nurses imply in their written reports that perhaps I do not actually 'do work', e.g., as an IT and Technical Consultant programming my laptop.
-- Instead, nurses flag the word 'work' and write 'work' in quotes, to highlight the uncertainty about whether that is actually my own delusion.
-- And 'lying' because nurses write that I blog 'bizarre things that make no sense' when I blog about things as obvious as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory and The Muppets.
'Cheating' because medics knowingly and deliberately break the rules, by supplying medical records too-late to challenge falsehoods, and by not supplying staff to go through medical records before hearings, when rules state clearly that they should.
-- Thus knowingly leaving the complainant zero chance to defend himself in full, against such falsehoods. Medics are allowed even totally-uninformed opinions. Mental Health Tribunals are inquisitorial with 'balance of probability' decision making. And there exists no MHT appeal on the basis of false information. Only on due process. From a position of legal power already, medics wilfully skew the appeals system to total worthlessness, by refusal of detention papers and too-late supply of medical records. Thus ensuring due process based on false information. And medical decision making based on that same false and effectively unchallengeable information. Within private meetings and the privileged MHT environ, medics can and do 'libel' me with impunity, given common usage of that term, free from all recourse under law. It might be thought that medics with such legal power to detain, deprive of liberty and livelihood, and to assault physically repeatedly, would be under stringent legal requirements to get their facts quite right. They are not. The system is lax and medics are sloppy. They propagate falsehoods with total impunity and skew the system wittingly, by too-late supply of information, to leave no chance of effective challenge or appeal.
'Bullying' because medics employ repeatedly, mob-handed physical assault hence violence, always against zero acute or emergency situation, zero standard tick-box indicators and zero external counter-indicators of mental ill health.
-- And against someone who chooses zero escalation, non-violent token passive resistance as his chosen means of response to repeated, medic-instigated physical assault, hence violence.
-- Repeated mob-hand physical assault which NHS staff excuse themselves. Despite totally clear, verbal, absolute refusal of 'treatment' (= assault and violence). ''No' means 'No''.
-- Medics are thugs and they excuse their own thuggish behaviour, routinely.
Nothing but effective brick walls.
-- No way to get a straight answer from a psychiatrist at all ?
-- Above the law.
-- And above human conversation with complainants who they treat by mob-handed physical assault, hence violently.
-- And a lot of people would not even assault animals physically.
I would appreciate direct answers to direct questions.
-- Understanding things, to mathematical and software precision, is my day-job.
-- I work hard to think things through, accurately and correctly.
Medics treat me with disrespect.
-- I would appreciate:
(a) being treated like an intelligent fellow human being,
(b) not being repeatedly ignored and physically assaulted like a sub-human,
(c) being provided with straight answers to straight questions.
My Questions and Rationale
The scientific position is repeatedly to ask questions, until the issue is understood and resolved.
-- I would like to understand the medic position. I do not. Therefore, I ask questions repeatedly.
*IF* psychiatrist intention is good and fair,
-- then they could talk to me like an intelligent human being and take the trouble and care to explain and justify their position.
-- That is, two-way conveyance of meaning, not just words. With the intention of mutual comprehension.
-- Then we would all understand the position.
In my opinion, minimal fairness and transparency. honesty and integrity, and good professional practice
-- should dictate that they explain and justify their subjective positions.
-- In practice, to date, subjective means 'always in the minds of the NHS', never objective.
-- Never available for independent and objective assessment of the correctness or incorrectness of subjective decision-making.
Implemented like that, the system is discriminatory and unfair.
-- Medics assume the correctness of their positions without ever justifying those assumptions.
There is no way for me to know what is in the minds of medics.
-- It is not fair that they trot out repeatedly 'nature and degree' and 'lack of patient insight', like a mantra.
-- Without ever explaining, carefully, in writing, precisely what they mean.
-- I cannot read minds. Medics act as though they think they can.
-- How else can they be so 'certain' of their positions, when they do not have a clue what is going through my mind ?
-- It is for sure, I can hardly guess what is going through their minds.
Psychiatrists do not do good science.
-- Their arguments to me are not justified from the point of view of methodologically sound statistics, for my particular case.
-- They act like they think they can do 'magic'. Yet psychiatry is notorious for failing to solve mental problems over whole lifetimes.
-- If psychiatry fails people for whole lifetimes, then why is that ?
Dr ** said to me, that such mental problems never go away.
-- Characteristically, he does not recognise that what will not go away, is medics repeatedly forcibly detaining me and physically assaulting me.
-- Medics are the problem. They use repeated violence and therefore cause repeated mental damage.
-- What needs to go away, is repeated medic bullying, from positions of uninformed ignorance, and patronising, condescending, arrogant, unjustifiably-assumed 'superiority'.
I would appreciate it if you would forward these arguments, and the above and below requests, to Dr ** personally.
My aim is understanding and comprehension.
Perhaps a key problem, is that medics believe they have 'information secret from me, that should and will remain, secret from me' ?
-- If so, what justification ? And what information ?
-- If not, then why not be direct ?
-- 'Higher level truth', not mere 'lower level truth'.
-- 'Higher level truth' being direct, with intended two-way conveyance of meaning, not just words. And the intent of mutual comprehension.
-- Not mere retention of power and 'the upper hand'.
Key questions then are: how do medics justify ethics ? morals ? personal integrity ? What is their motivation ? purpose ? intent ?
-- Perhaps, 'First do no harm' ? Or benefit the complainant / 'patient' ? Maybe more obviously, retain medic power and the medic 'upper hand' ?
I would much appreciate answers to the following questions:
(1) An explicit, written statement, listing and explaining in detail, the 'nature and degree' criteria by which I am 'judged' mentally ill ?
-- 'Lack of patient insight' or anything similarly brief and uninformative, will be totally inadequate.
To add further context … I do not read minds and I would like to *understand* the medic position,
-- on the working assumption that medics have an honest and justifiable position,
-- which they can maintain as a matter of personal integrity.
So this becomes a matter of good will and good intent.
-- If the intention is mutual comprehension, then 2-way conveyance of meaning is required.
-- Not just words and not 'you've been told that ten times already'.
If the medics will treat me as an intelligent human being, they can explain to me, just what 'insight' I am missing.
(2) Request for Justification for Mob-Handed Physical Assault, Hence Violence, to Force Injection:
I am told by Dr **, that I will be forcibly injected today, against my will and against my clearly expressed refusal.
-- That refusal on my grounds that I am adequately healthy.
There is no acute or emergency situation in play, of any kind.
I have zero standard tick-box indicators of mental ill health: zero stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment.
I exhibit zero external counter-indicators. That is, I am highly functional and of generally happy disposition.
I exhibit zero conventional anti-social problems.
I am no significant risk to self or others. I have zero history of any such.
I am highly able. I am an IT and Technical Consultant of ~35 years' post-graduate experience, who does engineering maths and software engineering for the day-job.
-- I am firing on all cylinders. In fact, I am taking a break in my C++ programming, to write this email.
-- That software development work is on fatigue lifetime data-modelling, for oil and gas coiled tubing, for a client in Norway.
-- I am a Ltd company contractor.
Thus it is not possible for me to fail the MCA decision specific test.
*Q:* How is it therefore justified to impose forced injection against my absolute and clearly stated refusal ?
-- This implicitly and effectively assumes incapacity to refuse treatment, on my part, to below the level of basic sign language.
*Q:* What justification for medics resorting to physical assault and violence ?
I will put up only non violent token passive resistance, in response to medic-instigated, mob-handed physical assault.
-- I respect the principle of the Hippocratic Oath in the form 'first do no harm', though this is not my occupation.
-- Medics, however, do 'do harm'.
I would appreciate a detailed written response.
-- My rationale is the same as for (1) above, i.e., mutual comprehension and understanding.
-- I cannot learn or understand anything, when medics just keep trotting out 'lack of patient insight' and 'nature and degree'.
-- And keep everything else within their own heads. No explanations at all. Fully subjective. Never objective.
I believe that my treatment is illegal. Human Rights Violation.
-- If it is not illegal, then I believe that it is unethical and immoral. And thus a civil liberties issue.
Key bullet-points addressed to on-ward Consultant Psychiatrist and Senior Registrar, to which I request a considered response,
-- especially the list of ‘nature and degree’ criteria of highlighed points 8 and 9:
1. You have knowingly and wilfully created an on-going trauma situation, by pre-notified, pre-scheduled, mob-handed physical assault, on Thu 30 Apr '20.
2. You knowingly and wilfully ignore the intended protections of the MCA decision specific test.
-- As a normally capable person, it is not possible for me to fail the four basic criteria. The bar is set very low.
-- You therefore deliberately sidestep those MCA protections, by invoking Section 3 MHA.
-- Legal ? Perhaps. But what about the questions of: ethics, morals and personal integrity ?
-- You implicitly assume incapacity on my part, to refuse treatment, so profound as not even to reach the level of basic sign language.
-- You know that that is not an honest position.
3. You violate the MHA first principle, namely minimal intervention, maximal independence:
-- By trying to force me to become dependent on:
(a) drugs, and
(b) the Community Team and NHS.
-- That from a position of independence, visiting my GP just once per year, for an annual check-up. No other medical interaction at all.
-- And medics have cost me financially:
(a) ~4 months' work time on client contract work, by repeated, prolonged, forced detentions, locked on-ward,
(b) permanent employment and a year's permanent salary, by now, by absolutely refusing attendance at a scheduled, second, on-site job interview, for a 'sitter' of a permanent job, local-to-home.
-- This has caused great financial problems. Yet medics, libellously under common usage of the term, blame me for financial mismanagement.
4. You ignore the known consensus, in the well publicised 'usage of psychiatric drugs' debate, which says that drugs should only be prescribed where absolutely essential.
I am threated with mob-handed physical assault to impose depot injection, again, this Thu 30 Apr '20.
-- Against my absolute refusal of such 'treatment' (= repeated assault) on the grounds of my being adequately healthy.
-- And against my prior direct experience, that such depot injections do me direct and immediate harm.
-- Specifically, greatly increased, tinnitus-like 'loud head noise', last time.
-- As well as both known direct, and extra-pyramidal, nasty effects (for which medics 'prescribe' even further drugs):
restlessness, shakes and tremors;
lack of motivation;
tiredness;
difficulty opening eyes in the morning;
'sleeping' far too long, but waking tired
(as opposed to sleeping ~6 hours and waking early and refreshed);
gain of weight;
loss of muscle;
loss of sexual drive and performance;
brain damage risk in the form of loss of grey and white brain tissue and tardive dyskinesia (Parkinson's-like);
increase of dopamine receptor density, thus increased risk of psychosis going forward;
increased sensitivity of dopamine receptors;
possibly increased risk of withdrawal symptoms, as I am making quite clear that I will refuse and discontinue all meds and depots immediately;
5. You adhere dogmatically to the holistic psychiatric viewpoint, which produces whole system medicine without me much in the picture.
-- You attach dominant decision making weight to collateral evidence.
-- You ignore or attach almost zero decision-making weight to my:
(a) zero stress / depression / anxiety / mania / impairment
(b) high functionality, high productivity, generally happy disposition
(c) no conventional anti-social problems -- except 'being beaten on' by medics, repeatedly, for (being suspected of) 'thinking the wrong way'
(d) no significant risk to self or others, no history of such -- except stress to family, which I do not deny, ignore or trivialise; and spurious arguments of risk to self.
-- You declare lack of productivity from a position of ignorance, lack of information, false and unjustified assumptions, and known inability actually to assess my technical work.
-- In fact, from an evidenced position of not even having a very good idea, of just what is my actual day-job.
6. *Key Q:* Do medics and nurses even believe that I have and do a day-job, or do they believe that such a job is my delusion, or a figment of my imagination ?
-- Evidence from Nurse **'s report, suggests she doubts that I actually have such a day-job. She puts 'work' in quotes, when she 'interprets' my being seen on my laptop.
-- And Dr ** 'takes me to task' for writing copious and full day-to-day work-notes.
-- I showed him two recent A4 notebooks of engineering maths and algebra, and C++ programming notes. Plus some daily admin and financial notes.
-- Did he believe that those were productive work on my day-job ?
-- I suspect not. And from his ignorant position of zero relevant technical expertise to make any such judgement.
-- Then Dr **, and by association Dr **, incompetently mis-assess the situation from arrogant and uninformed positions of unjustifiably-assumed 'superiority'.
-- Dr **, Dr ** and Nurse **, are then all deluded on the standard dictionary usage of that term, in this regard.
-- (Not on the medical definition of delusion, which medics merely declare subjectively.)
7. You establish zero meaningful mapping, between medic view of complainant view, and actual complainant view.
-- You incompetently have achieved no meaningfully representative idea at all, of my internal mental state.
-- You show no adequate due diligence in checking, clarifying and correcting 'actual facts'. You assume much and without justification.
-- You adopt no methodologically proven method of establishing any such mapping, known to be accurate and reproducible.
-- In practice, you 'make it up as you go along', in a manner which is neither testable, nor falsifiable.
-- No internal metrics of mind available to you, to assess efficacy of treatment. Complainant judged 'better' when 'looks better to others'.
-- You just do not know what you are doing to the complainant. You do not have a clue.
-- And if you are honest, you know that you do not have a clue, because your methods are not methodologically sound or demonstrated to be sound.
8. You refuse to give any detailed, explicit, written list of 'nature and degree' criteria, for your assessment of my mental ill health.
-- Why ?
-- When that would be an honest and helpful thing to do. Two-way conveyance of meaning, not just words. Mutual comprehension, for the common good.
-- 'Higher level truth' as opposed to 'lower level truth', i.e., merely avoiding the direct lie and being deliberately and knowingly evasive, indirect, misleading and misdirecting.
-- Why not supply such a written, explicit list, as a matter of good will, personal integrity and good professional practice ?
-- If not, why not ? Really ? Honest position ?
9. You do not have the technical expertise, and you know you do not have the technical expertise, to judge the technical work of an IT and Technical Consultant of ~35 years' post-graduate experience, in his own personal areas of work and study.
-- Thus your subjective assessments of: (a) my productivity, and (b) your other (spurious) 'nature and degree' criteria, are simply not justified.
-- And any of your own arguments to the contrary, are variously self-deceiving, dishonest or ingenuous.
-- Thus you have ZERO valid and meaningful 'nature and degree' criteria.
-- If you do not agree, then point 8, immediately above.
10. You ignore the fact that from my own personal, and already clearly stated and recounted, experience:
(a) being on-ward is a hostile, detrimental, unproductive and 'damaging' environment.
(b) depot injections can be followed by immediate worsening of my 'internal world', thus 'damage'.
-- Thus locking me on-ward, in order to prevent deterioration in my mental state is counter-productive.
-- Such forced detention and forced injection instead damages my mental health.
-- There is more to psychology as science of mind, and psychiatry as medicine of mind, than drug physiology of generally unknown and disputed benefits.
-- Ignoring people, treating them as 'less', being arrogant and unjustifiably-superior from uninformed and non comprehending positions, being patronising and condescending, does mental harm.
-- As does repeated mob-handed physical assault. And very obviously so. Pre-scheduled, pre-notified, physical assault is a known trauma situation. Hospital information leaflets document this.
11. You ignore and violate 'First do no harm'.
-- You do, do harm.
-- Repeated emergency locked detention on-ward, and repeated mob-handed forced injection, as response to your spurious and superficial 'risk to self and others' criteria, do harm.
12. You maintain incompetently, a circular situation:
-- Non medic, non expert family express stress and concern (which I do not deny, ignore or trivialise).
-- Medics declare subjective medical opinion of 'lack of patient insight', largely on that basis and without ever defining terms, invoke the MHA and sidestep the intended protections of the MCA.
-- Then medics say 'your family are concerned', and family say 'medics are the experts', and medics say '... '. And around the holistic psychiatric loop, without me much in it.
13. You attempt to impose your own minority world view on me, by repeated forced detention and mob-handed physical assault.
-- That because I hold a different minority world view to your own.
-- What justification ?
-- This point needs thinking about. Not unthinking, non consideration.
14. There is no acute or emergency situation in play. There never has been.
Key Q: Then how is forced drug injection justified, against my absolute refusal of such on my grounds of being adequately healthy, always against zero acute and emergency situation ?
Yours sincerely,
Bill Batty