Victims are far more likely to be judged mentally ill than their aggressors.

The father realised that the mother and senior worker had begun co-operating together. He saw them occasionally discussing matters, and once overheard them discussing him.


The mother appears to have fed the senior worker a series of lies on the father's behaviour, giving it appears the false idea that he was stalking/annoying her. The senior worker then began abusing the father-calling him names, accusing him of being a monster and other choice epithets. This was a clear case of collusion. My client, the father, went to his MP who intervened.


1) Judgements on mental health are subject to prejudice not science.
2) professional mental health workers construct their own reality from anecdotal evidence or simply prejudice.
3) Professional mental health workers operate within a bullying framework.
4) A professional believes only a fellow professionals insight is authentic.
5) They all engage in the construction of alternative realities.
6) Victims are far more likely to be judged mentally ill than aggressors as professionals tend to be aggressors themselves and it is easier to deal with one person, usually the one lacking in confidence, than several demanding people.
7) professionals scapegoat employing mental health discriptions
8) Difficult prople are silenced using mental health diagnosis.