Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
Nope. The decision to grant AD is based on a release plan between patient, psychiatrist and the Review Board. Part of that decision is based on the agreement to follow precautions and medical advice - as needed - to be released into the community without having to report to the Review Board. If the patient shows noncompliance or isn't in agreement, a conditional discharge with more control might be more appropriate instead.
You are treating the AD decision like it's a black or white test you with pass or fail. It's not like that whatsoever. It's a case and analysis review, and done collaboratively with medical staff and the patient.
|
I’m not sure how you can start that sentence with NOPE.
You just stated that any CTO would be voluntary if one exists. Also there would be no requirement that a CTO continue past the moment of discharge. And you just stated that the CTO wouldn’t be a requirement of the absolute discharge instead you said a person likely wouldn’ get a discharge if the didn’t agree to ongoing treatment. That’s a significant difference in order of operations. Also still waiting for any evidence that LI had a non voluntary CTO as part of his discharge or a CTO at all or if he just chose to continue with monitoring like everyone while healthy would.
I agree that the person likely would maintain treatment. My arguement is there is no legal requirement to maintain treatment.