Tuesday, July 14, 2020

The Bridge

Home Forums Community The Bridge


Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 1,156 total)
  • Author
  • #48927

    Pink Floyd

    Brain damage


    These guys made some great albums over the years. Been an interesting discussion on Richard Lewis’ latest article. Certainly has resolved my position on the matter of force. I’ve tried so hard to understand the position of mental health workers on this, and it is just untenable.

    What concerns me most is that the law has left a small crack open that can be used to overcome the problems faced by doctors in emergency departments where the issue of consent is concerned (deliberately?). This is like saying it is alright under certain circumstances to sexually assault another person, and all one needs to do is make it appear that those circumstances existed. That small crack has been turned into the Grand Canyon from what I experienced, and hospital staff simply don’t give a damn. I’d really like to be able to write up what I now know to be true. That the hospital staff are fully aware that the right to consent is a farce, and is being abused regularly, resulting in significant trauma for the victims (and I mean serious trauma). And what are they doing about it? Turning away and saying “yes I know it happens, but I personally don’t do it”. Well F&%k you. Any good you claim to have done within the system is more than offset by turning a blind eye to this abuse.

    Breathe Boans Breathe lol. It makes me so angry that this is going on. That a “NO” can be claimed to be an “emergency” and turned into a yes. Informed consent? Consent? You people are a disgrace to humanity never mind the position of trust you hold. And they are fully aware of the damage they are doing with this. It gets couched in soft fluffy terms and excused. “oh it’s only done when we have a violent patient on our hands” (who has said the N word, NO).

    Bah, I better put it down for now and will bide my time on this one. Knowledge is power.

    Public should be made fully aware of whats going on. It’s the only way this is going to change. Imagine if people were aware that they simply do not have a right to consent. The letters I have from the Chief Psychiatrist and the Minister make a whole lot more sense now. They have avoided saying this, but they know.


    I know, boans – it’s shocking when one figures it all out and can see the matrix for what it is.

    I’ve been lost for hours today on earthclinic.com. 🙂
    Earlier, I was excited to have discovered that this song was on YouTube:

    I saw them perform it live a long time ago. It’s difficult to describe what that felt like… uprising, maybe.

    But yeah, “Brain Damage” could very well be my theme song now. (I like Pink Floyd too, especially Dark Side of the Moon and Wish You Were Here.)


    I’m so glad you like
    Eathclinic, it ate my mind and body for months.
    But it gave me so much.
    Now, whenever I get
    Physically sick
    It’s where I go first
    It works great
    God dammit!

    Oh Syd
    We miss you
    So much.
    We honor
    Your flight
    And the crunch
    Of your fall.

    I love pink floyd
    To distraction
    I just wish
    They wouldn’t bury
    In fear
    And contraction????

    For you
    Long lost
    We will
    Forget …
    Your rise
    And your
    We see
    In our deepest

    Old friend
    Out of time
    I wish I could say
    You charted a track
    That shines
    To this day.
    Most days
    I feel like a
    That never forgets
    Each lost
    Crashed vessel
    On this




    Ok I can’t
    Sleep tonight
    Without saying
    This wasn’t
    Referring to you

    “Maybe she had an off day?

    But I’m calling
    She’s wrong
    In every way.”

    This was to Kelli fox
    Some rock star
    And rich

    I never doubt

    Long ago you
    Passed every
    I subject
    Humanity to.

    There is nothing
    You could ever say
    That would
    Chase me away
    From your side.
    I will always be here
    Cheering you on
    Sucking tide.


    Hi Lindsey

    Most days I feel like this:



    Oh shit!
    I’m laughing
    Too hard
    To even

    Here’s my email,
    [email protected]

    I’m just offering it
    I have nothing to lose.
    You keep me on
    Contact list
    If ever
    For one moment
    You need

    I think I’ll be watching
    Big Lebowski
    Why the fuck
    I need this kind
    Of levity
    In my life!!!



    Speaking of

    I tried two weeks ago
    To make this
    My signature comment:
    Apparently that doesn’t
    Still this is
    The motto
    I’d choose
    If I had
    The option.

    All respect to
    The dude
    I love the eagles
    They have kept me
    Through many
    Dark halls.

    “Last thing I remember, I was
    Running for the door
    I had to find the passage back
    To the place I was before
    “Relax, ” said the night man,
    “We are programmed to receive.
    You can check-out any time you like,
    But you can never leave! ”


    But seriously,
    It doesn’t matter how much divinity
    I can
    The harsh realities of
    Our world
    And the street
    Will destroy you
    Cut your throat
    Draw your blood
    In 10 seconds flat
    I can’t afford
    To forget that
    Harsh reality

    Maybe we are the children
    The wise
    We can’t afford
    Unlike hemingway
    One second of

    Stay with me
    Quicksilver fast
    High hopes…

    They all finish

    We survive
    By toughness
    Hard as stones
    Built to last.


    Well, I must admit that sometimes it takes me a while to understand things. Here’s my problem of understanding for today.

    I go to the police and make an allegation that a crime has been committed. I provide documents from two public officers that state the person accused of the crime has admitted doing it. Insufficient evidence.

    Now don’t get me wrong, I understand that there may be a need for more information, but shouldn’t they ask?

    Consider this. I make an allegation that Bob stole my wallet. Bob speaks to another police officer and he says, yeah I stole his wallet. Insufficient evidence? Why? Need to know how much was in the wallet? Need the wallet and Bob has thrown it in a bin somewhere? Bob was short of money and was therefore justified in stealing a wallet? Not fair to charge someone who needed the money?

    I would have thought it would be a matter of contacting the person making the allegation if more information was required. Not filing the report away and doing nothing. Still, there are some advantages to this. I won’t go into them here but…..

    More to come on this, as I will require it in writing that there is “insufficient evidence”, because their is a duty to act should a police officer have “reasonable grounds to suspect” that an offense has occurred. Hey, there’s that burden of proof again lol. Not unexpected at all. Any thoughts?

    Been reading the posts and glad y’all are here. I was absolutely shocked by finding out there is no right to consent. True what you say about the Matrix Uprising. I’m still shaking my head over it. Think I need to speak to my friends daughter and make sure she understands that the Doctor who is treating her for dementia has absolute control of her life now. That while they might take her daughters information on board, if they want to lock her mum up and drug the Hell out of her, aint nothing she can do about it. Do you REALLY trust this doctor? Because you love your Mum, he only sees a set of symptoms.

    Anyhow, be back a bit later.

    Hang in there guys.


    I’ve been ‘speaking’ with a veteran police officer in the US about this “insufficient evidence” business. And I’ve let it settle a bit in my head.

    And here’s what I think. An allegation of a crime has been made. The person who is accused has made admissions of that crime to a number of people. There are two defenses to that crime, neither of which are valid. I have documents that demonstrate this, though the police do not. However they also haven’t asked.

    Now for a police officer to act he must “suspect on reasonable grounds” that an offense has occurred. My burden of proof to him/her. Once that burden is reached (and as I know it is very very low) then it becomes the responsibility to the police officer to gather the evidence required to prosecute the crime. So saying that there is “insufficient evidence” is saying I’m not going to do my job. Not my responsibility to gather the evidence for them. If they require documents or statements that’s up to them. I have met my burden of proof I believe. If not then I have much more that demonstrates it. So what do I do.

    Call the police and ask who it was that made the claim that there was “insufficient evidence” and have them put it in writing. Now I believe that in the US that prosecutors are immune from prosecution for not bringing charges where there is evidence of a crime. Not so here. Failure to perform your duty as a public officer is a criminal offense as well.

    So the question becomes; have I met my burden of proof? The telephone call from my wife is documented in the Triage notes and it is clear that she has stated she put benzos in my drink without my knowledge. Now I might have a friend down at the hospital that forged those documents to help me get my wife in trouble, but I doubt it. Anyone here think of a reason that an offense might not have occurred? 10 December 2011 my wife makes an admission to a police officer that she drugged me with benzos without my knowledge and that was the reason for the argument. This officer then informed police complaints of this information and then sent me a letter confirming this, and the name of the officer. Maybe I have a friend down at police complaints who was prepared to forge that document for me, but I doubt it.

    I understand that people have a tendency to make assumptions. And if one were to make assumptions then the narrative that has been spun might hold some water to a point. However these assumptions are demonstrably false. Once the assumptions are debunked then the house of cards falls. Be glad to debate the assumptions, and then we can get on with what needs to be done. Attributing motive to someone is bad investigation skills. Huge mistake. Means, motive, opportunity. That needs to be established, not assumed.

    So what was the motive? Want to see the emails from my psychologist? From the night before it was done? Might be some clues there. In fact I think any assumptions that have been made will crumble into a pile of dust when those are examined. So how about we do this like police would. An allegation, an admission. Is it an offense? If so, what will a prosecutor require to convict for that offense, and lets go get it. Still I’m sure lots of people walk away when faced with such obstructions. But theres a twist here that will leave the end of se7en looking like an episode of Friends lmao.


    Lets talk about suicide. I just watched this 4 corners program about youth suicide. There’s no 3G in heaven. They want people to start talking to kids about suicide rather than the current model of being silent. The comments from people at the end are quite revealing. Prof Patrick McGorry comes across as being ….. nah I won’t say, but he is portrayed a little better than when he was spouting the “think of medication as being like insulin for a diabetic” or ” psychiatry has all the treatments needed, but we have to get people to use them”. I’m paraphrasing here but that’s the sort of mixed messages he is talking.

    Anyway, the program won’t be up for more than a few weeks. An epidemic of suicides and they all went to the system for help, and it seems many if not all were taking anti depressants (but its the illicit drugs causing the problems). Glad they’ve got the courage to at least start talking about it, may lead to talking about what a failure the current system is as far as help goes.

    Young girl who did commit suicide said to her mother when hospitalised “I can’t believe your doing this to me”. That struck home for me, a turning point? She was cutting and self harming before this but I just wonder. Oh and the meds will only have a “small side effect” of an increased risk of suicide. I’m probably being a little overcritical.

    Have a look if you have time.



    I tried to watch it, but got blocked again because of licensing.


    Bit of a shame Uprising, because it was worth watching. The mental health system is failing people badly. The reasons for that are debatable, but what is clear is that your better off basically without their help, because it seems to make a bad situation worse. I know that was more than true in my instance, in fact they turned a spotfire into a State wide emergency. But was mine an “isolated incident”? Not from the evidence I now have. If they stop telling people how to fix the system and start listening to people about why they are failing, we might actually get somewhere.

    Experts, in Algebra X usually equals zero, and a spurt is a drip put under pressure.

    This whole issue of ‘force’ in the system, and the article by Richard has really pushed some buttons for me. Reasonable seems to be a one way street with these people. If workers do it, it’s reasonable, if a patient does it it’s not. Double standards the whole way through.

    I got to thinking about the way the Chief Psychiatrist rewrote the Act, and thought maybe they have a loophole they are exploiting there as well. Can’t be the case though, because the AMHP wouldn’t need to fabricate the required grounds then. He would know if he could just write “tomato” on the Form, and would save himself a lot of time making stuff up. In some ways it does more harm than good because if he has to make a person look worse than they are, and then hand them on to someone else, they might believe the crap he has made up.

    So someone who has shown no signs of being violent needs to be made to look that way by him in order to make it look “reasonable”. Everywhere that Form then goes, the people reading it think it is true, and treat you accordingly. Should assessments be recorded? Oh yes, then we could look at them and decide whether there was “reasonable grounds”. Over and over again. Because as it stands a finger point is enough to have someone detained, and that goes beyond reasonable, it’s dangerous.


    Pink Floyd, Dogs


    You have to be trusted,
    by the people that you lie to,
    So that when they turn their backs on you,
    You’ll get the chance to put the knife in.

    Words well understood by my wife. My absolute trust taken advantage of. And working with hospital staff of a mental institution to do it. Well done. Kudos. But wait, is that a Pig I see flying over?

    Pigs, dogs and sheep.

    And when you loose control,
    you’ll reap the harvest you have sown.
    As as the fear grows,
    the bad blood slows and turns to stone.
    And it’s too late to loose the weight you used to need to throw around,
    so have a good drown, as ya go down, all alone.
    Dragged down by the stone.

    What a piece of work Animals was.


    Thanks for the earthclinic site, Lindsey, and yeah, I knew you were talking about the astrologer. I’m all excited about coconut oil again…

    Seems to me boans that the police’s job is to protect property/wealth. All that civil stuff is just for show.

    Is there any precedent for prosecuting ‘drugging without consent’? The laws seem to deal with it only in terms of ‘rape’. Those that defend forced treatment have poo-poo’d the term ‘needle rape’ and yet? Assault with a penis or assult with a needle-integrity and trust have been damaged.

    New article up about force-my sons tried to explain Foucault to me (the panopticon, specifically) 3 years ago-I bought the Foucault Reader but just couldn’t wrap my mind around what he was saying. The way he writes so dry and hard to read. I think in retrospect my brain was already damaged-I think if I had been presented that material when I was younger I might have had no problem mastering it. Or maybe not…

    Thinking of you all; hope you are well…


    Hey humanbeing,

    your email box is full.

    Thought I’d share something with you guys I found funny. I was discussing this issue of mental health elsewhere and someone made a comment.

    There is an issue with mental health in society, it’s a tricky situation where a normal “healthy” mind would consider some medical procedures necessary but an unhealthy mind would not, do doctors have an obligation to force treatment.

    Let’s make a more straight forward theoretical case to address the principles at work here. Say there’s a creature called a brain slug (any futurama fans here?) and that when it latches on to your head it controls your thoughts, including making you refuse consent to having it removed. Would a doctor in this case be obligated morally to remove the slug for you, given that it’s common knowledge the slugs manipulates your thoughts in this way? I’ll leave you all to ponder that…

    My reply was along the lines of being that mental illness is not an actual thing like a slug, but a metaphor (thanks Dr Szasz). And that it’s not some outside entity that controls your mind etc.

    But, I did like the slug analogy. This is what happens when you enter the doctor patient relationship, a slug attaches itself to you and your right to what you do with your body and mind is no longer your own. And there is no way of having the slug removed lol. Might have one slug remove the other if your considered a good host (have a lot of health insurance).

    I found it funny lol.

    Wouldn’t worry too much about Foucault humanbeing, it’s a difficult read. I can think of only one other author that made my head hurt, Kant. I tried to read “Critique of Pure Reason” a few times, and I ended up with headaches every single time. Maybe he had shares in Panadol.

    The internet is certainly a way of getting information out to people, and is a tool to bring about change. And I know having you guys to chat to has been extremely healing for me. It’s created a space for me to be able to continue with what needs to be done. We’d probably walk past each other in the street and not even notice one another (well, I do look like a bit of a nut so you guys might notice me lol).

    Don’t know about precedent humanbeing, more info that I won’t share here though. Let me know when your mailbox is functioning again.

    I got a letter today from the Law Centre. The Chief Psychiatrist is wrong, and I was right. He made a substantive change to the law with his wording of S.29 (1) of the Act. He effectively removed the burden of proof placed on referrers, and is thus enabling an environment where there is no accountability. I have asked that the Law Centre send a letter to the Chief Psychiatrist and inform him of his error, and that once he has been informed that the Act provides a protection to the community that he will then be in a position to enforce such protections (ie do his duty). So much for his “expert legal advice” when some bush hack like me has to tell the Chief Psychiatrist what the law is.

    Take care guys, I got a couple of letters to start drafting.


Viewing 15 posts - 226 through 240 (of 1,156 total)
  • The forum ‘Community’ is closed to new topics and replies.