[gusopol3]

desparate attempt to undermine my credibility

you do more than enough to undermine you own credibilty, including posting this schlock article, then putting out an unsolicited ping to have every one come running. When obvious lies are pointed out to you in the article, you disavow what you post as being of great urgency to read. I'd suggest a change in you tag-line " I just post 'em , I don't read 'em."

[bdeaner]

There are no lies in the article. I simply pointed out that you misattributed a statement to me rather than attributing it to the appropriate source, the author of the article. BR> Nurses, under doctors orders, often administer medication during involuntary commitment of a patient, which is why they make anti-psychotics in a form that can be injected. This can be done legally, depending on the state. It can be done, for example, in Massachusetts, Florida, and New York--if a court orders that the patient in incapable of making the decision him- or herself. These laws open the door to potentially unnecessary restriction of a patient's liberty.

So far I'm the only person on this list who has made evidence-based, factual stataments as opposed to statement of mere subjective opinion. So, I will let the readers decide who is credible.

[bdeaner]

Also, consider the fact that this article was written and published in the UK (a different version of it appears in The Guardian) -- a slightly different situation than the U.S. Patients have more rights here, for one, although I don't think informed consent is typically the case in the treatment of mental illness. There may be consent, but it is usually not very informed.

But don't believe me. Again, turn to the research literature. Brown, Billcliff, and McCabe (2001) report on informed consent in long-term psychiatric in-patients in Scotland. Here is what they say:

We wished to ascertain to what extent patients had given informed consent to their medications. Therefore, 68 long-term psychiatric in-patients were interviewed about their knowledge and attitudes towards their medications...Two-thirds of patients did not know the purpose of their medication; one-tenth knew about the side-effects. Longer length of stay, older age and voluntary status were associated with less knowledge. Despite poor knowledge, most patients accepted their treatment. However, few realised that they had any choice....The prevalence of true informed consent is low among this group and raises issues about patients' rights.

The facts speak for themselves. The article is correct.