Sunday, June 3, 2018

Poisoned person does unconscionable crimes

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?

·         Victorian Mental Health Act 2014

No comments:

Post a Comment