section 38: Mother's basement.

If something is a miss and you cannot place your finger on it and this thing is affecting your happiness, then prudence would suggest that you go get this issue seen to for resolve. When the treatment offered is the opposite from what is asked, and you know that you cannot continue forward in the way you would like: then actions speak louder than words? So, are you being selfish by bringing innocent by-standards into the fray, in turn you getting for what was asked from the beginning?

Now sitting on the wrong side of the law because your action certainly spoke louder than your ingenuous request of asking for resolve, but sadly this is the situation you are found to be bound to and now the clock on the wall has no numbers, simply just the hands that are left over- moving you, pushing you, goading you till you crack so they can say that they were right about you all along.

The Mental Health Act was devised from good intentions. Its current failing that has mortal consequences for the customer is derivable to its operators unable to conduct themselves appropriately whilst in office.

The callow behaviour on display is the example set by the staff in these concentration camps- monkey see monkey do and we the patients become sequestered for more years to come.
The adage is you do as I say and not as I do: if we patients follow the example of the behaviours set out by the staff, then you would think that if they have not lost their freedoms with their current display of behaviour and have managed to keep a living/job from this display of behaviour- then why is that when you copy that behaviour set by the staff that you continue to stay incarcerated?

If our behaviour is mirroring that of the staff and our behaviour is deemed unacceptable- then why isn’t the question asked as to how we have learnt to behave in such a manner and look at the operator(s)?