Flying Over Australia’s Cuckoo’s Nest: A Review of “Overprescribing Madness”


At one point, Americans seemed to be unique in a sort of religious-like worship of the American psychiatry industry’s metastasizing ‘bible’ of mental disorders (the ‘DSM-5’), proselytized by Big Pharma and biomedical psychiatry ‘priests’ (with their clinical psychology ‘acolytes’ in tow). Forever in competition and not to be outdone, however, Australia apparently now not only has one of the world’s highest rates of private (individual, household) debt, we are said to have one of the highest rates of antidepressant drug prescriptions and consumption per capita of all OCED countries. Does the sunburnt ‘land down under’ really have a ‘mental health crisis,’ as is being claimed around Australia?

No, not according to an intrepid analysis by Martin Whitely PhD in his 2021 book, Overprescribing Madness: What’s Driving Australia’s Mental Illness Epidemic? Like a cackling kookaburra, Overprescribing Madness flies up over the cuckoo’s nest that it arguably shows Australia’s psychiatry-based mental health industry to be, and gives readers a panoramic view of what might be driving Australia’s ‘mental health crisis’.

Written in a laconic, conversational first person voice, Overprescribing Madness combines research data with Whitely’s own first-hand accounts with journalists, Australian psychiatrists, and individual people and their families who have suffered damage (or death) from psychiatric diagnoses and pharma drugs.

Overprescribing Madness is thus possibly one of the first books of its kind to expose the psychiatry-pharma mental health industry in Australia. Reading at times like a thriller novel, yet based on evidence and facts, Overprescribing Madness reveals the individual psychiatrist political lobbyists and their backers who have convinced the Australian people and our governments, to medicalize our sane social, political-economic distress responses into a mental illness epidemic; a ‘mental health crisis’.

Overprescribing Madness begins by acknowledging the current Covid-19 pandemic and the understandable distress many Australian people have and continue to experience, in response to the pandemic and its management. The book also names those psychiatrists in Australia who for years, have made repeated public cries of a ‘mental health crisis’ and then successfully lobbied (and continue to lobby) left and right-wing Australian governments for billions of public dollars to fund more and more (psychiatry-pharma) ‘mental health’ services.

Whitely explains the lack of consensus in the debate on where and how things need to change in Australia. He critiques the ‘Americanisation,’ and ‘Preventive Psychiatry’ approaches that are being sold by those influential psychiatrists in Australia, as effectively promoting growing rates of (DSM-5 mental disorder) diagnosis and aggressive interventions, which are profitable for Big Pharma and  perhaps also for psychiatrists.

Whitely prefers instead what he calls a ‘Recovery’ approach that he lauds for being ‘consumer’ led. When implemented properly, a ‘Recovery Approach’ is said to respond to the individual, not their diagnosis, with ‘faith’ in their ability to ‘get better’ and thus respecting medicine’s Hippocratic Oath of ‘first do no harm’.

Whitely goes on to explain how non-medical human misery in Australia has been medicalized by our blind following of American psychiatry. As Whitely says, most Australians ‘are completely ignorant about the dominant role American psychiatry plays in contemporary Australia’ due in part to, ‘a combination of slick salesmanship, dishonest and incompetent medical practice (overlooked by timid regulators) and cultural, commercial, and political drivers [that] now see Australians hooked on a cycle of over-diagnosis and over-medication’.

Additionally, he outlines the dubious history behind the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (which is now in its fifth edition; the DSM-5). As most Australian people may be largely unaware of the true origins and questionable basis of all DSM-5 mental disorder diagnoses, Whitely explains it for the Australian reader.

Similarly, he also explains the phenomenon of inflated mental illness diagnoses caused by the DSM-5 when it was published in 2013. Whitely describes the adverse effect of the DSM-5 in Australia like this: ‘the Australian psychiatric profession let a group of American shrinks … define what is acceptable, what is normal…’ According to Whitely, mental health lobby groups and individual Australian psychiatrists dominate what has apparently been a planned strategic push to effectively medicalize non-medical human misery in Australia.

Whitely also addresses the overprescribing of antidepressant drugs for Australia’s teenagers and children, and the arguable failure of Australia’s regulator, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA), to follow the example of the US FDA, which warned about the risk of increased suicidality in young people that might be caused by antidepressant prescription and consumption. He also cites evidence to show how leading psychiatrists and mental health groups in Australia have, at times, inaccurately cited research sources and statistics to rationalise the prescribing of antidepressant drugs to children and teenagers.

Whitely then focuses on the political lobbyist activities of a particularly influential Australian psychiatrist. In Whitely’s opinion, they are arguably the ‘world’s most prominent advocate of Preventive Psychiatry,’ who, despite a lack of objective scientific medical evidence to support their early intervention theory, is apparently devoted to a belief that psychiatrically medicating people before they ever experience a psychotic episode, is warranted.

Further discussion in Overprescribing Madness reflects Whitely’s PhD research specialty: the over-diagnosing and over-drugging of ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) in Australia, particularly among children and especially boys. Whitely is straight to the point when he says, ‘ADHD is big business – very big business’ and further, that ‘when ordinary Australians are shown the diagnostic criteria for ADHD, a common response is, ‘WTF? That is bullshit… fidgeting, disliking homework, playing loudly etc. are all normal childhood behaviours’.

Whitely clarifies that arguing ADHD is a fraud does not mean children are not distressed or not in need of support, because non-biological social/environmental factors are causing some children to feel distressed and hyperactive. Divorce, poverty, parenting styles, sexual abuse, and sleep deprivation are just some examples of what Whitely says do need to be identified and addressed (without ADHD diagnoses and drugs).

In this regard, Whitely cites the real-life Australian case of the late Claire Murray, who at 12 years old was sexually abused/raped at a school camp and then threatened not to tell anyone. Claire’s sudden behavior changes (a distressed response to the sexual abuse she suffered but which she did not disclose) led her parents to take her to an ‘ADHD’ expert.

The expert apparently did not enquire about what might have happened to Claire to cause her sudden behavior changes. Instead, they diagnosed her with ADHD and put her straight onto a high dose of dexamphetamine. That ADHD diagnosis with pharma drugs then put Claire into a state of amphetamine drug addiction which caused liver failure and her eventual death at 24 years old.

The equally, if not more disturbing fact revealed by Whitely’s account of Claire’s heart-breaking case, is the rather mean-spirited blame culture that seems to exist in Australia. This was demonstrated by the callous way some sections of Australia’s mainstream media, presumably unaware of the sexual abuse trauma Claire had suffered, had portrayed Claire as a ‘junkie’ (an ‘addict’ by choice). (There was also some uninformed public ridicule of Claire personally).

Little to no attention was paid, it seems, to enquiring about the actual causes of Claire’s distress and amphetamine addiction: the sexual abuse she suffered as an innocent 12-year-old girl at a school camp, followed immediately by an ADHD diagnosis and dexamphetamine drug prescription by an ‘ADHD expert,’ which forced her into a life-long drug addiction that led to her early death.

Claire’s case was publicized by the 2020 documentary ‘Wild Butterfly.’ Subsequent Australian media interviews have reflected on errors in Australia’s mental health system. As one commentator said, ‘There is evidence to suggest Claire’s PTSD following her rape was misdiagnosed as ADHD, that vital physical evidence regarding her sexual assault was lost, and educators did not act when the family reported Claire’s rape…’

Whitely’s insightful account of Claire Murray’s case, raises serious concerns about whether the Australian ‘mental health’ industry is psychiatrically medicalizing the sane distress responses of trauma and abuse victims.

Overprescribing Madness focuses on another powerful psychiatrist in Australia, by examining their political lobbying of Australian governments and their activities in psychiatry-led organisations and institutes. Whitely indicates that such activities may have been carried out whilst aligned financially with Big Pharma and private health insurance companies.

Whitely then swings a cricket bat at Australia’s national broadcaster, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), giving it the disparaging epithet of ‘Australia’s BioPsychiatry Channel’. The ABC is lambasted for its biased reporting of mental illness diagnosis rates in Australia and its uncritical promotional coverage of the two Australian psychiatrists to whom Overprescribing Madness dedicates whole chapters. A real life account is shared of how these two Australian psychiatrists apparently brought pressure to bear on the ABC to prevent the airing of a media story that contained criticism of them by fellow dissident psychiatrists in Australia.

Whitely also gives accounts of how some ABC journalists in Australia have publicly promoted the use of antidepressant drugs in young children while not reporting the US FDA’s warnings of increased suicidality risk for children on antidepressant drugs. He then goes on to address Australia’s TGA, describing it as a ‘soft-touch regulator’ that has failed to regulate the prescribing and consumption of psychiatric pharma drugs in Australia.

Finally, Whitely offers 15 or so suggested reforms. These reforms include: stopping schools from demanding students be medicated; enforcing Big Pharma public disclosure of safety and efficacy data with heavy penalties for failures to disclose; strengthening consumer medication leaflets; replacing the DSM-5 with the European ICD manual; and banning Big Pharma political donations.


Overprescribing Madness’ author, Martin Whitely, PhD, is a former Australian politician (he was previously an Australian Labor Party member of the Western Australian State Parliament), who has been openly critical against individuals in Australian psychiatry before. In Overprescribing Madness, Whitely gives a direct, conversational account of the individuals, institutions, events, and policies that he considers to be the engine drivers behind Australia’s alleged mental illness epidemic or ‘mental health crisis’. Whitely’s views and opinions are supported by research and data, and are strengthened by what he has witnessed himself.

Who needs to read Overprescribing Madness? First, anyone in Australia with any DSM-5 mental disorder diagnosis may need to read it. Second, every Australian medical doctor, psychologist psy-professional (therapist, counselor, social worker), and arguably all members of judiciaries and tribunals and all politicians (along with their staffers and public servants), ought to perhaps read this book. All Australian parents, school teachers, and anyone who is involved with and/or cares about children sincerely, will want to read this book. From there, anyone around the world who is curious to know another side of what goes on in Australia might wish to read this book.

Australians are distressed; the suffering is real. But Whitely’s book rightly encourages us all to query whether our distress is just an individual biomedical psychiatric mental health disorder inside our brains that needs psychiatric drug mental health ‘treatment’? Or whether instead, Australians are experiencing, en masse, a sane and ordered human distress response to the 24/7 survivalist (narcissistic) competition of neoliberal capitalism?

At times, the core argument in Overprescribing Madness seems somewhat confused. The book uses (perhaps unwittingly), neoliberal capitalist language, such as mental health ‘consumers,’ which seems to contradict its core arguments by, for example, supporting the efforts in Australia to ‘de-stigmatisate’ DSM-5 mental disorder diagnoses. Furthermore, perhaps to ensure the book’s opinions are accurate, balanced, and fair, Overprescribing Madness praises the two Australian psychiatrists who are also the subject of dedicated critique, such as by congratulating them for raising national Australian attention and awareness of the importance of ‘mental health’.

In this regard, Overprescribing Madness approves the appointment of special ‘Mental Health Ministers’ in Australia’s governments, and commends the fact that significant public resources are being given to expanded mental health services across Australia. Yet it is important to consider (as dissident psychiatrists have) whether expanded mental health services that are supported by de-stigmatisation campaigns, might actually keep people victimized, helpless, and dependent on mental health systems.

The conundrum with Overprescribing Madness is that by trying to respect the ‘mental health’ vernacular, it seems to necessarily pull all its punches. For example, the book says rightly at the outset that, ‘extra mental health funding would be entirely logical if the care on offer actually helped people distressed by unemployment, financial hardship and loneliness’, but ‘far too often the mental health care on offer’ (promoted by the Australian psychiatrists who are critiqued in Overprescribing Madness) ‘does more harm than good’. Whitely then claims later, however, that a ‘consumer’-led ‘Recovery’ approach is preferred because it has ‘faith’ in their ability to ‘get better’.

These are somewhat bewildering arguments given that the book’s core premise is that the alleged mental health crisis or mental illness epidemic in Australia is not a medical disease, illness, or sickness at all, but the psychiatric-pharma medicalization of Australian people’s sane social, political, and economic distress. Furthermore, high rates of private household debt, precarious insecure low-paid casual work, and the medicalized drugging of abuse and trauma victims (including children), might be some of the real non-medical causes of human distress in Australia, that alarmist language like ‘mental health crisis,’ ends up concealing.

Few scholars in Australia, whether on the left or the right, seem willing to address the impact that four decades of the competition-obsessed neoliberal capitalist agenda has had on the psyche (the heart, mind, and soul) of Australia’s people. This is perhaps where Overprescribing Madness might have gone further with its critical analysis and suggested reforms.

Another reform might be, therefore, legally mandating all ‘mental health’ services (in Australia), to adopt a professional standard of care that involves what is being referred to in Australia and around the world as a ‘trauma-informed approach.’ Many mental health service providers no doubt have good intentions and strive to do their best for those who contact them for help. However, requiring all psychiatrists, psychologists, and general practitioners (GPs), to ask every adult or child who sees them for emotional distress feelings – ‘what happened to you?’ might prevent unnecessary ‘early interventions,’ questionable DSM-5 mental health diagnoses, and psychiatric drug life sentences for victims of abuse, trauma, poverty and loss.

Nevertheless, Overprescribing Madness is a bold and well-informed book that has perhaps adopted an essential first-step approach for introducing a new channel into Australia’s national conversation. Unlike in the US or the UK and other parts of the world (and apart from Whitely and his few Australian co-authors on other articles), there seems to be little public dissent in Australia about the nature and origins of the ‘mental health’ and ‘wellbeing-wellness’ agenda. This might be due, in part, to the prevalent uncritical daily use of the psychiatric language of ‘mental health’ in Australia’s parliaments, professions, public and private services, in our day-to-day conversations in workplaces, schools, universities, media, and amongst our friends and families.

Overprescribing Madness helps to create a much-needed public platform from which legitimate and evidence-based dissent on the mental health zeitgeist can now be expressed publicly, freely, and openly in Australia. A fascinating, passionate, and well-researched account of how the psychiatry-pharma mental health industry operates in Australia, Whitely’s Overprescribing Madness is a commendable clarion call to citizens in Australia and around the world, to scrutinize urgently the power and influence of DSM-5 psychiatry, in the land down under.

Author’s Note: The opinions and views expressed in this article are the author’s own and are not to be associated or affiliated with any institution, organization, or department, in any way.


Mad in America hosts blogs by a diverse group of writers. These posts are designed to serve as a public forum for a discussion—broadly speaking—of psychiatry and its treatments. The opinions expressed are the writers’ own.


Mad in America has made some changes to the commenting process. You no longer need to login or create an account on our site to comment. The only information needed is your name, email and comment text. Comments made with an account prior to this change will remain visible on the site.


  1. “Whitely’s insightful account of Claire Murray’s case, raises serious concerns about whether the Australian ‘mental health’ industry is psychiatrically medicalizing the sane distress responses of trauma and abuse victims.”

    That’s exactly what the DSM “bible” thumping psychiatric and psychological industries are doing in the US. For goodness sake, “the prevalence of childhood trauma exposure within borderline personality disorder patients has been evidenced to be as high as 92% (Yen et al., 2002). Within individuals diagnosed with psychotic or affective disorders, it reaches 82% (Larsson et al., 2012).”

    And psychologists are just as guilty as psychiatrists.

    And all this child abuse covering up is by DSM design. Since in order to bill to help a child abuse survivor, the “mental health” workers first need to misdiagnose child abuse survivors, with one of the billable DSM disorders.

    And, of course, systemically covering up child abuse does also function to aid, abet, and empower the pedophiles, so America is now a “pedophile empire.”

    I’m not certain whether this was actually the goal of the psychiatric and psychological. But since they’ve apparently been systemic child abuse and rape cover uppers, since Freud’s day, perhaps it was?

    But most definitely, those who worship from the DSM “bible” are members of a systemic child abuse covering up religion.

    And what’s sad is my, formerly Christian, childhood religion has “partnered with” this child abuse covering religion. I’ve had to recommend Robert Whitaker’s “Anatomy” to the parents of a Catholic child abuse survivor, so this is problem for that religion, too. And an ethical pastor of a different Christian religion confessed this societal problem to be “the dirty little secret of the two original educated professions,” implying it might be a problem for most – or all – the religions.

    And I do know they’re now teaching the DSM “bible” in the seminary schools near me. I had previously thought seminary schools were where one goes to learn about the Holy Bible. Which clearly states, “It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.”

    The Holy Bible also states, “No man can serve two masters…” I’m pretty certain that is true about bibles, as well. No man can serve two conflicting bibles.

    Thank you for the book review, Magdalene.

    Report comment

  2. As a former attorney, can you please flesh out the concept of neo laws that drive excessive credit extended to corporations and individualas, who begin to think they are making dollars, whether they hop around within Austrailia or across the oceans? How does law become a living balance of truths, from which the culture of Australia can stand more assertively while respecting those on a walk about? Part of even the issues you advance could be tied into piggy backing onto the film of the Cuckoo’s Nest, which if you pull up and watch but also watch the trailers, then one becomes aware of the image manipulating industry of Hollywood while those of us who have survived, languish for the lack of a reasonable and just way to shape a healthier ecnomomy that is accessible for and by all? How does one read the balance sheet of those elected to office, if there are PAC’s in Austrailia or do those pursuing election, refrain from taking dollars? As increasingly there are those known by the content of their character rather than the size of the campaign coffers tilted by lobbyists? Who ultimately feed into higher levels of surface skimmers who then feed into ? Could you please elaborate more on this process?

    Report comment

  3. There is only way to stop this problem in Australia as in America; end psychiatry and psychology once and for all; for psychiatry and psychiatry is the root (or father) of all evil. At present, both Australia and America are using this “mental illness falsehoods” to hide all the little evils that go on in their countries. And drugging people does quiet them for awhile; until the hospitals begin to fill up with people suffering from the drugs side effects or the body bags of the excessively drugged pile up in the corners as high as Mount Everest. The “reforms” listed would only be short-term; because like all criminals, psychiatry, etc. will resort to their old ways again; unless we end psychiatry and psychology and no longer consider it viable and stop making it visible. Thank you.

    Report comment

  4. Best thing anyone reading here, can do, is warn their family and loved ones and even unloved ones, to stay the hell away from ANYONE that tries to psychiatrize them.
    Of course this means staying away from answering ANY questions from ANYONE that might either now or later have any influence over their personal being.

    I mean it’s what the services do now, for a living. Psychiatrize people. It’s really cool that it took off, but not in the LEAST BIT surprising. It fits perfectly with what we like to do to others, gossip about them.
    And that is all they have going for their slander book called the DSM.

    It’s a “manual”. The “M” in DSM stands for manual LOL. Obviously hilarious and yes it pisses them off that they are shrinks, of course it does.
    Anyone would be pisssed after spending 8 stupid years being hoodwinked.

    Report comment

    • Dear Sam

      Thanks for your insightful comment.

      Are we all ready to ask family, friends, colleagues, acquaintances, and all authority figures (whoever they might be) – not to psychiatrise our normal human feelings, emotions and distress responses, by no longer referring to them as ‘mental health issues’?

      *What has happened in our nations and societies that so many people have agreed to medically psychiatrise their own and each others’ painful life experiences, emotions and feelings – as ‘mental health conditions’?

      When people come to us with their tears, fears, worries and distress, do we give them a listening compassionate ear, a soothing cup of tea, a hug and say ‘tell me what happened to you’?

      Or do we tell them their upset emotions and feelings of worry and distress are ‘mental health’ issues that require the professional help of: talk therapy ‘treatment’, a doctor or a psychiatrist?

      Thanks again, Magdalene

      Report comment

      • It is obvious that we are ALL unique physically and emotionally. Although I hate to use the word “emotionally”, since psychiatry likes to own ALL language.
        If I cannot work a 8 hour shift in the heat of the day, or other physical work, and if I’m just dead tired and sore each day, my body is not ILL, it is simply not equipped to do as required. And if I do continue, it might even shave years off my life.

        Perhaps I was born this way, or perhaps the foods or lack of them aided to make my body not as strong for the work.
        It is not “ILL”, nor “DISORDERED”. The extreme exhaustion of my body would obviously lead to not feeling happy.
        This is also not an illness, it is a physiological response.

        There is not an “illness” process going on and I need an environment that helps my body to feel more in sync.

        The mind works the same. If my mind is exhausted and tired, I need to have environments and conditions that ease the load.

        Psychiatry knows this. It is an embarrassing job to have, (most are embarrassed) to hang slanderous labels on people.

        And I would go so far as to say that it also does not help to ask people “what happened to you”, unless that goes hand in hand to have that enriched environment.

        Just like it does piss all good to ask a body that is not as rustic and able “what happened to you”, yet keep him working on the railroad.

        And sure it’s “idealistic” to think we can provide what everyone needs, but indeed in our western countries it is possible.

        I think what our governments are saying is “to bad so sad”. This is the mainstream and the ones who can’t keep up, make jobs for the ones that sit in wait.

        It’s really historical, part of animal life and so there is nothing “superior” in the human species.

        Report comment

        • Please see my comment on the article about “rights and social inclusion in mental health…” It addresses the same thing and in my opinion, it causes probably many of the issues in our society now. Thank you.

          Report comment

  5. Dear Magdalene, you wrote: “The conundrum with Overprescribing Madness is that by trying to respect the ‘mental health’ vernacular, it seems to necessarily pull all its punches.” While Martin Whitely wrote: “This is just one example of many of 21st century mental health interventions massively over-promising and under-delivering. Unfortunately, given the current medicalised momentum of mental health policy in Australia, it appears likely we are about to see history repeat.”

    Why does history repeat? What is the human conundrum? Why is humanity sleepwalking towards apocalypses of its own making, like the estimated 3 billion animals that died during Australia’s worst bush-fire season on record? Are we entering the era of R. D. Laing’s mental health prophecy when humanity needs to confront its illusions of reality? The subjective illusions we are all raised with, through a word reification fallacy? Please consider:

    Reification (also known as concretism, hypostatization, or the fallacy of misplaced concreteness) is a fallacy of ambiguity, when an abstraction (abstract belief or hypothetical construct) is treated as if it were a concrete real event or physical entity.[1][2] In other words, it is the error of treating something that is not concrete, such as an idea, as a concrete thing. A common case of reification is the confusion of a model with reality: “the map is not the territory”.

    As an Australian survivor of 28 years trying to appease family, friends and the experiential blindness of nonempathic people, I’m surprised your critique didn’t hit the nail on the head with the undeniable fact that there is still no pathology test to confirm the subjective diagnosis of any category of so-called mental illness. Although the ‘subjectivity’ issue the global mental health crisis points towards will most like turn on the way ‘fitness beats truth,’ as Hoffman points out in his book The Case Against Reality.

    How we prefer to ignore unpalatable truths like no pathology tests for diagnostic verification because ‘fitting’ into our social environment is more important than facing truths about the nature of reality? For example, during the three years I spent in Thailand learning how to ’embody’ the latest map of the unseen territory of my nervous system (aka The Polyvagal Theory & its impact on trauma informed care) I incorporated the sage Buddhist advice “words are not reality & only experience reveals the nature of Being.” Confirming my intuition of my own reification fallacy after stumbling on Alan N Schore’s groundbreaking, Affect Regulation & the Origins of the Self, in 2007.

    Hence, I suggest the current ‘meta-crisis’ of global humanity has more to do with a ground of being paradox, cryptically spelt out in ancient sayings like “wisdom is more excellent for those who see the sun?” A saying that points directly to the reification fallacy we all suffer from, while time will tell if this well-considered prophecy comes true:

    “If the human race survives, future men will, I suspect, look back on our enlightened epoch as a veritable Age of Darkness… They will see that what was considered ‘schizophrenic’ was one of the forms in which, often through quite ordinary people, the light began to break into our all-too-closed minds.” — R. D. Laing

    Copied from, A CONVERSATION WITH JOHN WEIR PERRY • MICHAEL O’CALLAGHAN,John%20Weir,Interview%20by%20M.O%20Callaghan.pdf

    Report comment

    • Well they are looking for those “tests”, and if they make up a qualifier for tests, they will use them, even if the rest of the population has the same or similar “test” results lol.
      So no, we don’t want “tests”. Nothing psych has done has ever been honest.

      And it would still remain that this person is “defective”.
      No physical tests means you are “defective” as a person. WHICH they are trying to substantiate. Stigma is psychiatry.
      No cancer scan, leaves the doc thinking you are defective, or disordered.
      It does not cause you to lose all credibility.

      Report comment

    • “What is a critic but one who reads quickly but never wisely?” – David Mitchell, Cloud Atlas. With all due respect to your well-educated intelligence, Magdalene did you see the verification fallacy reference or note Hoffman’s ‘fitness beats truth’ comment on humanity’s false sense of reality?

      As Plato pointed out long ago in his Sophist dialogue, we all suffer from a susceptibility of definitions, confusing the ‘descriptive’ nature of language as definitions of reality. The cognitive confusion that leads people like yourself to dismiss the experiential perspective of people like me with superficial remarks like: “I see that you have had painful experiences in Australia.”

      Thanks so much for your depth of insight & understanding.

      Report comment

    • “Why do so many, agree to ‘appease’ authority figures in this way?
      Where do many people first learn to appease authority figures, by suppressing , repressing and denying their rightful and sane, painful emotions and feelings?”

      Good question.

      I note the arbitrary detentions being enabled by our Mental Health Acts (label someone an “outpatient” and then call police to provide assistance in having them ‘comply’ with treatment)

      seems to mirror the tactics of the Gestapo; ie terrorise the public and be brutal about it. ( I wonder how many people who refuse the ‘help’ get treated like this as a result? Especially when the Community Nurse can simply lie to police and call anyone their “outpatient” and “edit” the documents later. Flip the script and make them a ‘police referral’ for their colleagues once the citizen has been convinced to ‘confess’ to their illness. ie ‘verbal’ them and then utter with the fraudulent statutory declaration)

      As you would be aware Magdalene, the Police are totally unaccountable in Australia (see the comments by Senator Marshall re the Corrina Horvath case and the ignoring of ANY recommendations by Royal Commissions) and thus such a situation provides those charged with ensuring our communities are “mental healthy” carte blanche. How many time do we need to hear that there is “insufficient evidence” after Police refuse to take the proof of offences by ‘Party Members’, and are openly being allowed to pervert the course of justice and undermine totally our mythical rule of law?

      Simply have police provide you with unaccountability by using them as your go to when a ‘citizens’ political beliefs are deviating from ‘community standards’ (ie those of the Morality Police). So a Private Clinic psychologist calls a Community Nurse to have a citizen snatched form their home and delivered for ‘forced treatment’ by having the Community Nurse lie to Police and ‘detain’ the target as in the video above.

      “Why do so many, agree to ‘appease’ authority figures in this way?”

      Because if you don’t, the State will fuking destroy you (and your family).

      We point fingers at Chinas “Vocational Training Centres” and their “students” who are receiving “voluntary re education” and call them human rights abuses. But how many people are prepared to actually look at these “mental hospitals” and their “patients” and really see what is actually occurring with “informed consent”? But we have no concerns about the “unintended negative outcomes” occurring while police refuse to take evidence of the criminal conduct of doctors? (a joint enterprise? If only Police had a copy of the Criminal Code, and Australians really valued a rule of law)

      A brief look at history with a critical eye will reveal that following the US isn’t actually the problem. The ‘problem’ appears to lie in the regression to a place where there are people who are unaccountable, can arbitrarily detain and force drug and electro shock (and call it medicine), can “edit” documents to conceal human rights abuses (and I note are provided assistance in that process of fraud and slander by legal ‘advocates’), and can simply ignore the truth and claim there is “insufficient evidence” due to their own criminal negligence.

      I’d be looking at a history of the laws in National Socialist Germany for clues as to where we are heading. A ‘gestapo’ is forming, and is being accepted by the community based on their fears (One psychologist telling me after he was threatened by Police that he was afraid for his family, and thus what he knew to be true “never happened”) A group of people who are unaccountable to the law, who are literally snatching people from their homes and subjecting them to incarceration and torture, and who when faced with facts simply “edit” the reality and then start uttering with that fraud.

      And worst of all are the hypocrites. Those who claim to despise such conduct (those nasty Nazis) and who then turn their backs on the victims while they are loaded into the ‘showers’. Words issuing from their mouths such as “well, you must have done something wrong” or “they wouldn’t do that [but I won’t check just in case they did. Woops, shouldn’t have looked]”

      Closet Nazis seem to be the real problem, not taking on the ‘American model’. In a free market the guy in the video wouldn’t need to have his head stomped to get him to buy the ‘product’. I can only assume that the guys “distress and fear” was a result of his chemically unbalanced brain and nothing to do with the ‘concerning aspects’ of his detention? (which of course can simply be ignored even when the Professional Standards Committee investigates. Police simply tell them to Argo)

      Report comment

        • “Would you say that psychiatry-mental health, are part of an authoritarian political order in society today?”

          I think you may be surprised at my long answer to that question. My short answer is whatever the ‘verballing’ Community Nurse wants it to be lol. I mean he is being allowed to torture people to complete fraudulent statutory declarations for the authorities to utter with, and conceal his human rights abuses so……. I say whatever I am told to say by the voices that come from the locked ward lol.

          Strangely after much soul searching and trying to understand who are the ‘good guys’ and the ‘bad guys’ I have come to realise that there is a battle occurring within psychiatry between those that would have it as an authoritarian political tool, and then those who realise the dangers of that occurring.

          i consider the people who were arranging to have me ‘snuffed’ to conceal their wrongdoing in the E.D. the former, and those who ‘don’t have the stomach for it’ and interrupted the ‘unintended negative outcome’ the latter.

          There are of course those who consider themselves clever enough to fool the authorities into committing offences for them. Imagine being able to get a corrupt Community Nurse (Authorised Mental Health Practitioner) to procure the services of police to enable the torture and kidnapping of citizens after you have arranged to have them ‘spiked’ and plant items for police to find and provide a referral source post hoc? (simply tell Police the target is your “Outpatient” and then conceal that from your colleagues making the target look like a police referral. Come on Constable, you found the knife and the bong right? So can I use you as my referral source? Thanks. I still get searched for the knife they have me as having a ‘history’ for, and risk being shot every time I have an interaction with police for a knife that was ‘planted’ on me to enable them to make what appeared to be a lawful referral.) It really is pretty clever, and the Police then find themselves providing material support to organised criminals by proxy (even having to commit offences because applying for search warrants to retrieve documented proof of their being ‘stooged’ becomes more important than the victims, who can of course now be ‘treated’ for their truth speaking.
          Claiming to have been interrogated for 7 hours whilst drugged with a date rape drug without your knowledge a ‘paranoid delusion’ should the State wish to “edit” the documented reality, and have a doctor sign a prescription AFTER the police and Community Nurse have subjected a citizen to acts of torture.

          But having watched as these people were ‘tested’ by something that they clearly do not understand, I get the feeling that there is someone with a sense of humour watching and laughing at their feeble attempts to conceal the truth when they know what it is. Perhaps that person or persons is a psychiatrist with a knowledge of the prophesies, and knows just which strings to pull and when?

          We are close to Eid al Adha which of course relates to the testing of Abraham. Would these people have gone through with their planned evil actions, and if so we thus know what was in their hearts. Information not readily available except to those who know the tests to be applied. (see Harut and Marut).

          I do however have concerns about the corruption within mental health services, and within the Police. And of course having witnessed their corruption first hand (and had my family and life “fuking destroyed” by the State for daring to complain about it [see the Operations Manager who investigated the matters and then “edited” the documents for others to utter with and had my family threatened]) I know that they have demonstrated mens rea as a direct result of their concealment of their offending. Of course their usual victims tend to end up with a rope round their necks or a chemically unbalanced brain due to a small lead pill. The stigma that can be generated by these corrupt individuals, and the ability to have police provide material support in their offending put the victims at a distinct disadvantage (or so they think te he).

          I guess what I am saying is that mental health services could be used in such a manner. In much the same way a knife could be used to prepare your evening meal, or to murder. I just don’t want to be making it too easy for people who plunge carving knives into peoples chests to be able to say ‘i’m a doctor, and therefore it’s medicine’. Mind you, maybe they would prefer ending up in jail when they finally become aware of how these matters are dealt with (the look on their faces when they finally realise they were being watched the whole time lol. I understand now the reason it is best to not look into their eyes. It’s positively intoxicating).

          One of my heroes is a man called Bilal ibn Rabah (as) who was tortured by his slave master, and who I will rely on for my answer to your question. There is only ONE authority in my life. Ahad. And I will not recant that truth despite the tortures I have been subjected to. Bow down to people who are nothing more than demonstrable hypocrites, frauds and slanderers? No thanks, and I am glad that there was a community of people who recognised the truth, and acted on that truth to ensure that no further harm came to anyone else in this community.

          We hear a lot about the large sums of money that are to be allocated to ‘mental health’ in this Nation. You can’t buy good deeds, they are done by people who know the true meaning of charity. And I get the feeling that once God leads people astray, little can be done other than warn them. Something that they sometime would prefer to say they never heard, and thus attack the messenger rather than alter their own conduct (Oh the power the Operations Manager must feel every time one of her gaslighting victims kills themselves. I am reminded of the track Dogs by Pink Floyd on Animals. “After a while, you can work on points for style….”)

          Are there people sitting around conspiring over these matters? You bet your life there are, though if you can label one of them “patient” it is no longer conspiring but considered ‘help’. Imagine being able to make people into “patients” post hoc. Care to see how that’s done? And care to see how those charged with defending the community from such conduct respond to such acts? Not how you would imagine.

          I wonder how you (and others) feel about the way that man was treated by police. It reminds me of footage I have seen of Jews being dragged from their homes during Hitlers time. The ‘stigma’ being the driving force, which in my case was done with one simple lie to the police. And the people doing it fully aware of the consequences of what they were doing. refuse to talk to us so we can ‘verbal’ you. You can refuse to talk to police, but they can kick your head in if you refuse to talk to a Community Nurse? Wow, and our Politicians have worked so hard to protect us? Yeah right.

          We need to be aware of the Josef Hartingers and not allow these people to create legal loopholes to be exploited (imagine the ability to “edit” documents to conceal criminal conduct in regard our new Euthanasia Laws? can’t have the lawyers looking at those documents so here’s some we prepared earlier).

          Still, when the Chief Psychiatrist who provides “expert legal advice to the Minister” doesn’t even recognise a burden of proof (suspect on reasonable grounds. And who gave him the ability to remove legal protections from the Law anyway? care to see the letter the Law Centre didn’t have time to read?) before having people snatched from their beds for ‘treatment’ for an ‘illness’ made up on the spot by a Community Nurse, we can hardly go pointing fingers at China.

          But don’t ask me, ask my wife or the witnesses….. oh that’s right, they have a right to silence (and will maintain that silence due to being threatened by Public Officers). I get spiked with benzos and subjected to an ‘acute stress reaction’ (see the head stomping) before being interrogated for 7 hours, and then that gets called medical care because I was slandered as being an “Outpatient” and my medical records tampered with before being released. That “editing” is so disgraceful I still feel like vomiting when I realised what the intention of releasing that confidential information was about. I’d be very careful what you tell these people, because whilst the person you speak to may be acting in good faith when documenting the reasons for your ‘pain’, the Operations Manager isn’t so nice when it comes to “editing” those documents and slandering you to your legal representatives to have them assist in concealing acts of torture and human rights abuses.

          Report comment

        • “Would you say that psychiatry-mental health, are part of an authoritarian political order in society today?”

          “A terrorist is not just someone with a gun or a bomb, but also someone who spreads ideas that are contrary to Western and Christian civilization.”

          — Jorge Rafael Videla

          ie someone who holds ideas contrary to established medical beliefs such as anti psychiatrists. So I understand the need to silence me, and this is something others who hold similar beliefs need to be made aware of (ie that the State is allowing such political beliefs to be redefined as an ‘illness’ and ‘treated’ by force if necessary. Call the Police and request assistance with your “Outpatient”).

          Of course there are times when the facts contradict existing ‘medical advice’, and so there needs to be political means to ensure that the choir is singing the same song.

          How ironic that he died of an infection that came from a beating in a mental institution? Almost as ironic as a Premier whose TicToc video shows him removing his mask (strip tease fashion) to the tune of Thus Spake Zarathustra? The irony lost on a public who worship their Safe and Strong Leader. Ubermensch anyone? lol

          [from a government that failed to pass Forced Sterilisation without Parental Consent Laws, but succeeded with a Euthanasia Act]

          Report comment

        • “Would you say that psychiatry-mental health, are part of an authoritarian political order in society today?”

          I’ll take the opposite approach to Boans’ and answer that with a simple “yes.”

          What brings you back to these parts Boans? Sorry we’ve been out of touch, it’s a long miserable summer here.

          Report comment

        • Referring back to the video of the man who left the hospital because he had been waiting for 24 hours.

          Look carefully and consider that the hospital has asked police to induce an “acute stress reaction” in this man to have him comply with the nurses wishes. This is something that is being done on a regular basis in my State.

          Here’s another example of what happen if you refuse to speak to your ‘doctor’.

          Two points I would make.

          (1) I wasn’t actually anyone’s “patient” but this doesn’t seem to be an issue because our Chief Psychiatrist doesn’t recognise ANY protections from being arbitrarily detained. A Community Nurse has the power to make any citizen into his “Outpatient” based on a telephone call from a ‘concerned citizen’ (read someone who doesn’t like what another is saying).
          (2) Given that acts of torture are being redefined using the euphemism of “acute stress reaction” (ie the hospital staff are fully aware that police can be used to induce such reactions with head stomping etc) and that in order to ‘enhance’ this practice, targets can be ‘spiked’ with date rape drugs which can be concealed later by having a doctor sign a prescription for the ’emergency treatment’, why is there not a Form to request such a response from Police?

          So the Community Nurse wants a citizen who will likely refuse to speak to him subjected to an “acute stress reaction” and has arranged to have them ‘spiked’ with benzos calls police and requests assistance with his “Outpatient”. Police then stomp on the targets head a few times (variety of options here, we could get really creative) and now they are quite willing to talk, and can easily be ‘verballed’ on the statutory declarations. These fraudulent documents now become a rock solid defense against the acts of torture and kidnapping (and with the ability to “edit” documents for the targets legal representatives?)…… this is just too easy if you ask me.

          So given the bureaucratic nature of our State, where’s the request Form for the “acute stress reactions”? Oh wait, I see it, it’s listed as being a “Job Number” provided by Police to the Community Nurse when he called them and LIED about me being his “Outpatient”. One formal request for a head stomping to ensure he has the opportunity to ‘verbal’ someone and conceal his criminal conspiracy to torture and kidnap. (and consider that the Senior Constable has ‘discretionary powers’ over such serious offences. Nothing that can’t be “insufficient evidenced” away at a later time).

          “What brings you back to these parts Boans? Sorry we’ve been out of touch, it’s a long miserable summer here.”

          I remember seeing Doc Whitely in a waiting room of a hospital with a young man who was obviously being abused by a psychiatrist. I got the impression that he was going to advocate for the man to try and have at least some of his human right returned. It impressed me because as you can see, in my State daring to say anything out of order can get you ‘snuffed’ (“edit” to documents and Police will ensure witnesses are threatened and proof retrieved. I know, I know, :it never happened” and “they wouldn’t do that” and that narrative can be maintained if no one ever looks :)).

          I was replying to another much older article and saw this review, sooooo.

          Report comment

        • I guess what is different about the situation with the man whose brain chemicals were unbalanced by a police officers boot, and the man who was dragged from his home to check his welfare [“we’re concerned for your welfare” are words you do not want to hear from police here. They are rightly concerned because they know they are going to kick the shit out of you once they get their hands on you] because his psychologist was concerned about him not wishing to speak to him/her, is that I wasn’t actually a “patient”.

          The requirement that the person be a “patient” before they are subjected to the inducing of an “acute stress reaction” a legal requirement. In both cases this requirement appears to have been met. The first man had asked for assistance in an Emergency Dept, and the second was we are led to believe had spoken to a psychologist within the previous 48 hours. This “Time Limit” (s. 32. Time Limit for referral under s. 29 ) on lawful referral necessary before the psychologist can have the ‘treatment’ administered by police to the mans legs and face.

          This issue in my instance became a problem because the psychologist who was claiming to be MY psychologist didn’t actually have a referral for me, and was therefore NOT my psychologist, and I was NOT a “patient” by definition of the Mental Health Act. Easily remedied, just have the victim sign something making them into a patient, and thus remove any and all of their human rights. Failing that, just “edit” the documents for their legal representatives and tell them to look the other way on this one and they can be rewarded with extra State funding next time around.

          Better do it quick though, because someone might notice that she was using her position to have people tortured and kidnapped. Police can only pretentd they haven’t got a copy of the Criminal Code for so long. And providing resources to retrieve documents showing the crimes is awfully tricky, because getting their family members to commit the offences (Compound and Conceal Evidence, Conspire to Pervert the Course of Justice) and using your ‘discretionary’ is always a bit dodgy. Well, not really but ……

          So consider that what is done to the “patients” in the above videos is being authorised by our Chief Psychiatrist as being lawful for any citizen when he writes that the Authorised Mental Health Practitioner “need only ‘suspect’, on grounds they believe to be reasonable that the person requires an examination by a psychiatrist” rather than the s. 29 standard of “suspect on reasonable grounds that the person should be an involuntary patient [and thus meet the criteria of s. 26 of the Act]”. Logic and reason removed and therefore authorising arbitrary detentions, and the changing of the belief that the person (who MUST HAVE a mental illness, not be suspected of having) requires being an involuntary patient to a nice little chat with a psychiatrist.

          All minor details that can be “edited” and threaten anyone who dares suggest that anything was done wrong. Police can ensure that the victim is arrested and referred should they turn up in a police station (a practice called ‘stitching’ here. A bit like putting kittens into a bag and stitching the sack closed before throwing it into a pond. See the young woman who escaped the serial killers Katherine and David Burnie who was nearly ‘stitched’ after attending a police station when she finally broke free of her captives who had kidnapped, raped and murdered a number of women already. ‘Stitching’. I note that people tend to feel empathy for the kittens, not so much for the ‘mental patients’ being bashed by police? Might explain why our laws are stacked the way they are protecting animals but not ‘mental patients’?)

          Point being, watch the videos of the inducing of “acute stress reactions” to assist mental health professionals have citizens who do not recognise that they need to have their wallets emptied for damaging their brains with chemicals and electricity (ie refusing to consent) and why the method is so effective in having them consent. I understand that the law allows such conduct when the target has been defined as “patient”, but what if all that was done was that a Community Nurse simply lied to Police and said “patient” to enable the citizen to be ‘verballed’?

          This is of course the very definition of arbitrary detentions. And what interests me most is the way the authorities charged with ensuring that the community is protected go about ensuring that they can simply ignore citizens who have been tortured and kidnapped, and simply refer them for ‘treatment’ should they complain. But it sure is a great way to ensure that human rights abuses are concealed, especially when the legal representatives of the victims can be used to slander the victims should they seek effective legal representation elsewhere. Uttering with the fraud prepared by the hospital, and claiming ‘plausible deniability’. Of course such people never go to prison for such conspiring to pervert etc. Our prisons are full of aboriginals who stole a packet of pencils from Piggly Wiggly (well maybe in Tasmania there is room in the prisons because they don’t have any Aboriginals left to imprison. Did you see what the Chinese are doing in Xinjiang to Uighers? “Australia should get on the right side of history” Charlie Pickering tells us. We have a long ‘history’ of such conduct that goes back a long way on such behaviour, and the hypocrisy of ‘getting on the right side of history’ might be noticed. Though I note the anosognosia emanating from our Parliaments regarding such conduct).

          And well, the truth is such matters can be delayed, frustrated and obstructed for years. ‘Insufficient evidence’ after police send emails that never arrive and then close matters when you don’t respond. There is insufficient evidence, when you assist in the retrieval of the evidence and then refuse to accept it because it exposes the fraud and uttering by Public Officers. (and I feel certain the Senior Constable who threatened to arrest me for having my medical records showing that I had been ‘spiked’ with benzos before being interrogated for 7 hours would drop the charges before it got to court [stitching]. Or that his failed attempt to refer me to the people who arranged my ‘spiking’ for “hallucinating” about being drugged without my knowledge [not a hallucination if you have documented proof] “never happened” once the witnesses had been contacted and informed of the danger their families now found themselves in. Just following the orders on the police system, don’t take the proof of the torture and kidnapping if this guy turns up in a police station, were running with a false narrative that he is a “patient” until we can arrange an ‘unintended negative outcome’. So like Jamal Kashoggi they simply ‘flag’ victims and ensure they are silenced with assistance form the Police should they try and make a compliant about the criminal conduct. Warm up the ECT machine would you nurse, i’d like to extract some Medicare money from this ‘patient’ before they are outcomed.

          Report comment

  6. If what Jorge Rafael Videla said is true, “A terrorist is not just someone with a gun or a bomb, but also spreads ideas contrary to Western and Christianity civilization.” and I believe it is; it would be logically and morally impossible to be “anti-psychiatry” or work to end psychiatry and be considered a “terrorist.” This is because both Western and Christian civilization are the absolute, exact opposite of psychiatry; which is nothing but pure evil. Thank you.

    Report comment

    • “If what Jorge Rafael Videla said is true”

      Trouble is it isn’t true. It was a justification for ‘disappearing’ (these days called ‘treatment’) anyone who was a threat to his leadership.

      “terrorists”, like ‘mental patients’ need to be defined in such a way that makes what ‘we’ do ‘good’ and what ‘they’ do, bad. So a Catholic Priest who was also a Senior Medical Officer at the hospital where I was tortured and kidnapped gets to call me ‘mentally ill’ as a direct result of his own paranoid delusions [aren’t ALL Muslims a threat to Christianity?] (ie he writes that I had “potential for violence but no clear intent or actual history”. Consider that comment carefully, his paranoid delusion becomes my symptom of an ‘illness’. Because based on this he authorised a ‘snow job’ list of chemicals to be administered. See the above video regarding the ‘induced coma’ [or ask Someone Else about how ‘snow jobs’ operate).

      And consider the changes to the laws brought about as a result of the investigation by Josef Hartinger at Dachau. That was the point at which the National Socialists moved to a ‘pre emptive’ means of dealing with their political opponents. Himmler had a problem in that he wanted to continue with the killings, but knew they were unlawful. But what if you could do it based on someone having ‘potential’? They were a ‘potential threat’ to the National Socialist’s State?

      A quote from my verballed Form 1.

      “Potential for damage to reputation and meaningful relationships”

      Written by a man who has arranged to have police drag me from my bed, subject me to acts of torture, slander me and then have me kidnapped. I am then placed up against a Police van parked on my mother and father in laws garden, and then thrown into the back of the Police van whilst they watch. Good news is that when they wondered what I was being arrested for, they could be told I wasn’t actually being arrested but taken to the locked ward of a mental institution for my potential to do damage to my reputation and meaningful relationships. We call this “healthcare”, and when I asked for some form of documentation he provided me with a “With Compliments” slip. He’s a funny guy huh? I wonder how many other lives he has destroyed in this manner for no other reason than someone asked him to?

      Hey, did you hear that people are being arbitrarily detained in Hong Kong by police who are stopping them from throwing petrol bombs and exercising their human rights to protest peacefully? Bloody human rights abusing Chinese huh?

      “This is because both Western and Christian civilization are the absolute, exact opposite of psychiatry; which is nothing but pure evil.”

      This got me thinking about the Catholic Priest who used to be a psychiatrist (working in the role of Senior Medical Officer and pretending to be a psychiatrist the day I met him. made it easy to claim I had provided consent when asked to remove my clothes and allow him to insert objects into my mouth. Well, my comment about me knowing he wasn’t a psychiatrist and that if he did he would be assaulting me of no concern when your victims are at such a disadvantage. (Under s. 36 of the act I was considered a ‘referred person’, and had lost my right to liberty but significantly NOT my right to consent. [though he knew I had been ‘spiked’ with a date rape drug, and I didn’t] Exercising the right to detain beyond the statutory requirement not a problem when you can ‘chemically restrain’ anyone who wishes to leave your control. Sure would be handy if victims of Institutional abuse turned up telling inconvenient truths about your colleagues too right? Might go some way to explaining how some of these Priests racked up more than 300 victims without anyone ‘noticing’)

      Report comment

  7. A point that needs correcting.

    Above I refer to myself as meeting the standard of being a “referred person” under the Mental Health Act, and NOT an “Outpatient”. This is incorrect as on closer examination of the documents it is noted that under the section where it requires a “Referral Source” the answer is written as “Unknown”.

    The whole point of my wife and the Private Clinic Psychologist discussing what items needed to be ‘planted’ on me (to meet the requirements of s. 68 e of the Criminal Code [in possession of a weapon and illicit drugs]) once I was incapacitated with the ‘spiking’ with benzos was to provide police with justification to make a referral post hoc (ie once I had been ‘verballed’ on the statutory declaration).

    THEY DID NOT DO THIS. And thus the Community Nurse was simply going to need to run with the lie that I was his “outpatient” and create the appearance that I was a Police referral (under s. 196 of the MHA) for his colleagues when police delivered me to the locked ward.

    So if I wasn’t an “outpatient”, and I wasn’t a “referred person” what was I? Well, and I know this is a little inconvenient for some people, I was actually being kidnapped after being tortured. A victim of crimes, but it just didn’t look like it (which is kind of clever really).

    Now one of the problems I am faced with is that I wanted to get a divorce, and was concerned about the lawyers providing the fraudulent set of documents to the Federal Court. I mean I get it that they find it easy to “edit” the legal narrative and fool me (and of course by threatening the lawyers and witnesses, they are quite happy to look the other way) but …… a Federal Court judge might just notice. I doubt they would appreciate being put in such a compromising situation myself. But nice move on the part of the hospital to get others to utter with their fraud, and leave a trail back to the Clinical Director of the hospital who I believe was unaware that he had authorised the fraud to be distributed (it’s not really “editing” when you change legal narrative to conceal such serious offences is it?).

    One other point I should note for anyone following up on the Josef Hartinger ‘link’. Consider the situation when a doctor went into a police station here and admitted killing a terminally ill patient (the State being responsible for any corrupt actions by it’s officers. see Corrina Horvath comments by the U.N.). What would Himmler do? well, we were told that more than 90% of the public wanted Euthanasia Laws (no proof of the figure provided. And if were going to pass laws based on public support, more people actually support Capital Punishment, but I don’t see that being promoted by Politicians in the media) and the laws were pushed through Parliament with little ‘opposition’ (one guy I think, the rest went to the football while the matter was ‘debated’. See Facebook photos of the party). [still no answer on the ability to “edit” documents relating to the ‘treating’ of patients wishing to access this legislation]. However, the laws have now been passed and killing is a form of treatment for the terminally ill (amendments soon to follow allowing access for the mentally ill no doubt).

    A question I have is; Do they swab the persons arm with alcohol to ensure that they do not get an infection from the lethal injection? And would they be neglecting their duty of care if they didn’t?

    Report comment