The way the public sees all Compulsory Patients, is in
the manner of the way this
20-year-old man is described as having done unconscionable crimes. As not
having the capacity to stand trial and therefore being subjected to a Public
Health Order, for his crime.
Given the man was marginalised
and exploited by psychiatrists, has committed horrific violence, he should be
held accountable for his crimes, instead he’s being denied capacity to stand
trial. There should be Equality before the Law. That the grandparents were
potentially going to call the Crisis Assessment Treatment Team on him and have
him made a Compulsory Patient, is likely. So, instead of being totally
disempowered by others, he attacked and had power over others’ lives, however
fleetingly.
Most people who are sectioned
as Compulsory Patients, don’t commit unconscionable crimes, or any crime at
all, they usually haven’t ever had power over anyone, and experience horrific
violence at the hands of community and the psychiatrists who have legislative
power to make them Compulsory Patients.
No one should be subjected to
forced psychiatry, it is unlawful that Australia forces chemicals and
procedures on anyone. Detention should not be arbitrary, yet this unlawful
legislation is what is written into every State/ Territory.
Under the Victorian Mental Health Act 2014 –
"compulsory
patient" means a person who is subject to—
(a)
an Assessment Order; or
(b)
a Court Assessment Order; or
(c)
a Temporary Treatment Order; or
(d)
a Treatment Order;
"consent",
in relation to health information, has the same meaning as it has in section
3(1) of the Health Records Act 2001 ;
There are people who are Compulsory Patients that have
done nothing more than cry in the corner and refuse to go with a psychiatrist. Then
there are people that have committed offenses that wouldn’t normally result in
a jail term. Then, rarely, there are people that do what the 20-year old
described in the News Daily article did, something unconscionable and violent. What
is common to all the people who are Compulsory Patients – is that they do not
want psychiatrists treating them, because what psychiatrists do to people is
one of the most unconscionable crimes in the world – forcibly experimenting on humans
with cruel, inhuman, degrading intrusive chemicals, procedures that maim and
kill them.
Forced neuroleptics cause
distress; these drugs are dangerous, they cause people to be upset and angry. Neuroleptics
are horrible poisons, with the most horrible effects. No one chooses to take
neuroleptics, because they don’t help with anything, they destroy ability, livelihood,
and health.
A person’s life to end up
being that of a laboratory specimen, and the governing State, enforcing this
with a Public Health Order, usually in the form of a Mental Health Act – is devastating.
Being tortured makes anyone angry, upset, disabled… these forced treatments
cause a massive death rate each year. They do not ‘alleviate suffering’.
When a person stops taking the
neuroleptics, depending if pills or depot (the depot stays in the body for
another 9 months at least, it is a long acting neuroleptic), the withdrawal
from the drug means the person’s nervous system becomes free from being
shut down. The bodily compensation or attempts to combat the neurotoxin may
continue to operate, and that will mean a period of adjustment, where a person usually
needs support in reminding them they’re withdrawing.
Emotionally, one thing a
person or animal does when free from torture, is want to stop ever being
tortured again, and understandably does not want to be threatened with torture
again, does want to do everything possible to stop being tortured again.
Neuroleptics are a horrific torture. How does one stop a government legislating
such a torture? How does one stop friends and family from dobbing them into the
torturers?
We live in a society gone
wrong. A society that places torturing psychiatrists on a wage higher than nearly
anyone else in the country. A society that allows for legislation that forcibly
exploits people for vile, cruel human experimentation, of which psychiatrists
and a coterie of investors profit, while the people forcibly exploited under
Public Health Orders, are used like animals are in laboratories, as a piece of
laboratory equipment, their human voice silenced, as though the person were not
able to communicate, their autonomy taken away, their body violently assaulted.
Yet they’re not even able to say this is assault and battery, if they do,
higher doses and other painful procedures, isolation, deprivation is inflicted.
If the person is not a forensic patient, they are arbitrarily detained and
tortured until they submit to all the psychiatrist demands, even though the
reality is that the treatments don’t assist in any way with anything but the
psychiatrists’ funding, that the treatments cause horrific suffering and damage
to the person is well known, by those who have been behind these whitecoat closed-doors.
The UN CRPD committee has
asked Australia to end forced psychiatry, and remove the legislation that
commits this violation.
Yet State/ Territories have
done nothing to remove forced psychiatry from their legislation. They have
increased their human research budget, and even paid for propaganda to make it
look like all human research is voluntary and helpful.
What psychiatrists do is
bloody murder.
Is the psychiatrist going to
be held to account though? For causing a person such distress? No, because
there’s a get-out-of-jail-free clause written into the legislation for the
authorised – treating psychiatrist.
In
Good Faith rule
77 Urgent medical treatment
s.
77
(1) A health practitioner may perform medical treatment on a
patient without obtaining the informed consent of the patient or a person
specified in section 75 if the health practitioner is satisfied on reasonable
grounds that the medical treatment is necessary, as a matter of urgency—
(a) to save the patient's life; or
(b) to prevent serious damage to the patient's health; or
(c) to prevent the patient from suffering or continuing to
suffer significant pain or distress.
(2) A health practitioner who, in good faith, carries out, or
supervises the carrying out, of medical treatment in the belief on reasonable
grounds that the requirements of this section have been complied with is not—
(a) guilty of assault or battery; or
(b) guilty of professional misconduct or unprofessional
conduct; or
(c) liable in any civil proceedings for assault or battery.
(3) Nothing in this section affects any duty of care owed by a
health practitioner to a patient.
&
231 Protection
from liability
(1) The Commissioner is not personally
liable for any thing done or omitted to be done in good faith—
(a) in the exercise of a power or the
performance of a function under this Act; or
(b) in the reasonable belief that the act
or omission was in the exercise of a power or the performance of a function
under this Act.
(2) Any liability resulting from an act
or omission that, but for subsection (1), would attach to the Commissioner
attaches instead to the State.
Is the body corporate (the Crown, in this case NSW) going to
be held accountable for legislating the poisoning and desperation of this man
persecuted by psychiatrists and his community through legislation – that caused
him to be so desperate he decided that if everyone was going to endorse the
harming of him, he was going to harm them back?
References
·
Victorian Mental Health Act 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment