My question to you Daphne. Do you acknowledge that persons with mental health problem are not by default absolved of their moral/social/state obligations?

I see. I thought he was charged for attacking you.

Could also check out (for some more education on the subject)

http://www.liv.ac.uk/eviprg/root/the%20european%20violence%20in%20psychiatry%20research%20group/introduction/index.htm

The net result was that the attempt to have me “dismissed” from the police failed but I was none the less compulsorily retired from the Police Force “on grounds of public(!) interest” where I remained for twelve years until I was reinstated because my compulsory retirement was declared to be a “miscarriage of justice”.

Not necessarily – Dr. Filletti is doing what is expected of him i.e. to defend his client but it’s now up to the court to investigate and seek the opinion of a mental health professional who is qualified to establish if this was really the case. That’s exactly what the court proceedings are expected to find out and what this case rests on.

Very well said, Joe. Usually, when the aggression takes place within the context of a true psychotic attack the authorities don’t usually take action and it rarely proceeds to be investigated in court.

I disagree Daphne, the soldier vs nurse example is nonsensical and inappropriate – for the reasons given below:

Its not at all like becoming a soldier, who is trained (equipped) and expected to defend themselves (counterattack) and the interest of their country if attacked. No one would blame a soldier for defending themselves if attacked, they would be hailed as heros. Soldiers are pre-warned about the dangers they may face in the context of active combat

The difference is an entirely different professional ethos and code of professional ethics

Nursing, on the other hand is a caring profession and nurses, no matter what happens to them is NEVER expected to retaliate because its simply not within the ethos of the profession – in fact they could also get into trouble for defending themselves from attack sometimes!

Nowhere in the nurses’ terms and conditions of employment or job description can one find such a a warning about being assaulted. The only thing that is mentioned is the employer’s Zero Tolerance policy toward violence and it is on that basis that nurses are assigned to work at a mental hospital

Your view, in this respect is entirely wrong Daphne if it equates mental ill health with violence and if it automatically assumes this in defining the role description of a psychiatric nurse or any other mental health professional

Also Daphne, if I were you I would also be careful when saying that she was having a schizophrenic episode – I would check out my facts first.

[Daphne – That would be to accuse her defence lawyer of lying in court.]

How long have you worked at such a hospital? To be able to say what – “nurses who work in a mental hospital are fully trained and qualified to deal with”

Since you seem to know what happened so well:

Could you please clarify what sort of ‘fit’ she had?

And whether she just ‘knocked her glasses off’ or whether there was more to it”?

How well do you know her to be able to state ‘She’s probably seen a lot worse’?

“patients with shaky mental health can be violent as a result of their illness”

These are the sort of comments which perpetrate stigma and discrimination (by society) when these patients are well enough to be discharged and have to face the tough task of reconstructing their life. Contrary to what some seem to believe, violence occurs due to a variety of reasons and very rarely does it occur ‘as a result of mental ill health’, even in hospitals!

What do you mean by ‘real possibility’?

Only a VERY SMALL MINORITY of people with mental health problems are aggressive and an EVEN SMALLER NUMBER are physically violent. An EVEN SMALLER NUMBER still are violent as a result of (usually psychotic) symptoms (where one is experiencing certain symptoms leading to the person becoming detached from reality) where it would become comprehensible for the ‘diminished responsibility’ card to be used in these court cases – only if the above condition (in most cases lasting only a small fraction of the time one spends in hospital) can be proven beyond reasonable doubt to have coincided precisely with the time of the attack!