Gemma not taking enforced retirement too well

PhoneMain · 13-11-2020 11:47AM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

if she put her hand to his face and removed his mask that is definitely assault.

Assault. So we involuntarily detain anyone whos thrown a punch on a night out? Get a grip.

PhoneMain · 13-11-2020 11:52AM

TaurenDruid wrote: »

Yeah, cos that's been suggested on here... bit of a slippery slope argument, there, really.

Absolutely, you're correct, none of us can formally diagnose her.

But when someone is posting videos on the internet claiming that there's something up with the sky, chemtrails are there to control us, council workers cleaning the streets and traffic wardens are agents of fascism, "Muslim curry", and the IRA was really MI5 (to name just a few bat**** pronouncements!) then the only reasonable conclusion is yes, there's something up.

When those pronouncements result in real harm to completely innocent bystanders (and she has absolutely fomented hate against completely innocent bystanders, including children) then you might understand why people want something done! Within the law, obviously.

We dont know if her family hasnt engaged in all these things.
Someone might think that Diabetes is a scam and that all diabetes medications dont do anything. We cant force them to take medications.

Sardonicat · 13-11-2020 11:57AM

PhoneMain wrote: »

Assault. So we involuntarily detain anyone whos thrown a punch on a night out? Get a grip.

No one is saying that. Get a grip. But you involuntary admit to hospital someone, who due to detiorating mental health, has behaviours that pose a serious risk of harm to themselves or others. Now please tell me how handling a face mask you've removed from an individual's face doesn't pose a risk to that person. Your fingers all over it and they then put it back on. You are saying that doesn't pose a risk? If someone came up to you and removed your mask you'd be cool with that, would you? If the person doing it did so because they believe COVID is a lie you wouldn't think that behaviour might require some sort of intervention? Just let her off to destroy her life s bit more.

Sardonicat · 13-11-2020 11:58AM

PhoneMain wrote: »

We dont know if her family hasnt engaged in all these things.
Someone might think that Diabetes is a scam and that all diabetes medications dont do anything. We cant force them to take medications.

If they thought that due to delusional thinking caused by a psychiatric disorder you'd let them die and not treat the psychiatric disorder?

Hotblack Desiato · 13-11-2020 12:03PM

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

she also has a hoard of minions that follow her around to protest, all without masks, all not social distancing...

She incites hatred and sooner or later that will inevitably lead to violence.

PhoneMain · 13-11-2020 12:26PM

Sardonicat wrote: »

Not to mention the harm this is doing to the woman herself. Really, if a friend or even a patient told you that she noticed most of the net curtains in a particular town displayed hidden symbols and indicated that the residents of that town pose a threat to the general population would you not at least gently suggest that she might want to talk to someone qualified to help her get to the bottom of why she believes that? One or two odd beliefs is one thing. Beliefs that have caused a rift with your family, rendered you unemployable and lead you to publicly incite hatred to others indicate someone who is drowning mentally. How sick does someone have to get before they get help?

A family feud can cause you to drift from your family, render you unemployable and lead you to public incite hatred against another person.....doesnt warrant locking them up tho.

PhoneMain · 13-11-2020 12:28PM

Sardonicat wrote: »

If they thought that due to delusional thinking caused by a psychiatric disorder you'd let them die and not treat the psychiatric disorder?

did I say Gemma has a psychiatric disorder? Did you diagnose her? Fair play to you if you did but you're breaking patient confidentiality.

ancapailldorcha · 13-11-2020 12:30PM

I don't think she's mentally ill. I just think she's a vile human being who thinks only of herself.

Sardonicat · 13-11-2020 12:42PM

PhoneMain wrote: »

did I say Gemma has a psychiatric disorder? Did you diagnose her? Fair play to you if you did but you're breaking patient confidentiality.

Would you care to answer the question about the diabetic who had weird beliefs about insulin? You are the person who gave it as an example and it only requires a yes or no answer.
Diabetic has a breakdown and develops paranoid beliefs about insulin resulting in them refusing to use it and putting them at grave risk of death. Do you respect their belief and let them die or do you attempt to treat the psychiatric condition that's putting them at risk and administer insulin against their will to save their life?

Sardonicat · 13-11-2020 12:46PM

PhoneMain wrote: »

A family feud can cause you to drift from your family, render you unemployable and lead you to public incite hatred against another person.....doesnt warrant locking them up tho.

But if it's a mental illness? If someone is showing paranoid and delusional thinking that had caused that to happen, that is what we are talking about here and you know it. You are just shifting the goal posts .

Some people starve themselves to death as a form of protest. Some people starve themselves to death because they have a mental illness. Do we not treat the latter because of the former?

PhoneMain · 13-11-2020 12:56PM

Sardonicat wrote: »

Would you care to answer the question about the diabetic who had weird beliefs about insulin? You are the person who gave it as an example and it only requires a yes or no answer.
Diabetic has a breakdown and develops paranoid beliefs about insulin resulting in them refusing to use it and putting them at grave risk of death. Do you respect their belief and let them die or do you attempt to treat the psychiatric condition that's putting them at risk and administer insulin against their will to save their life?

You're looking for a simple yes or no answer. Believe me, in the real world, if a situation like this arose, you would have a hell of a lot more than 1 doctor making this decision. You would need full mdt input and a lot of evaluation with the patient. It would need diagnosis from psychiatry which wouldnt be done by general medical doctors/endocrinologists and would need a lot of careful consideration.

I was involved in a situation slightly similiar to this and it still stays with me years later - I will not be discussing further only that it was a horrible situation with a lot of emotions on all sides, including patient family members.

Anyway, I think ye think that I'm a Gemma supporter or being deliberately obstructive. the initial point I was trying to make it that it's ridiculously difficult for me to have someone involuntarily admitted and that it's even harder to keep them in hospital. You may not agree with it and have your own feelings on how she may be treated but there's countless hours of research gone into developing these laws.

PhoneMain · 13-11-2020 02:08PM

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

It's completely unacceptable in the middle of a pandemic. I wouldn't be averse to considering it a form of assault. Why you're defending this is beyond me frankly.

If its assault then its a matter for An Garda Siochana.

Penfailed · 13-11-2020 06:52PM

Sardonicat wrote: »

No one is saying that. Get a grip. But you involuntary admit to hospital someone, who due to detiorating mental health, has behaviours that pose a serious risk of harm to themselves or others. Now please tell me how handling a face mask you've removed from an individual's face doesn't pose a risk to that person. Your fingers all over it and they then put it back on. You are saying that doesn't pose a risk? If someone came up to you and removed your mask you'd be cool with that, would you? If the person doing it did so because they believe COVID is a lie you wouldn't think that behaviour might require some sort of intervention? Just let her off to destroy her life s bit more.

She didn't remove the mask and have her fingers all over it. You should watch the unedited video for the whole story. It puts a slightly different spin on it.

knucklehead6 · 13-11-2020 08:02PM

Penfailed wrote: »

She didn't remove the mask and have her fingers all over it. You should watch the unedited video for the whole story. It puts a slightly different spin on it.

What slightly different spin is there?

Question. Did she bully an elderly man into taking his mask off during a pandemic?

Answer. Yes she did. Simple.

Question. Has she been engaging in social distancing, socially responsible behaviour or mask wearing while in public?

Answer. No she hasn’t.

Question. Was she putting that elderly man in harms way?

Answer. Yes she has.

There’s no spin that makes her come out well here, so stop trying.

Piehead · 13-11-2020 11:28PM

Muscles Schultz wrote: »

https://twitter.com/vmax_14/status/1265070624105549824?s=21

This lunatic has been quiet of late.

Beholders · 14-11-2020 03:06AM

Penfailed wrote: »

She didn't remove the mask and have her fingers all over it. You should watch the unedited video for the whole story. It puts a slightly different spin on it.

I watched the video, she did ask in a very threating way, why he was wearing a mask, then we got insight that he might actually need a carer, and she conjorald, the fact she need to take a step back and ask him to sing a song is evidents enough she over stepped that mark in her head.

But firstly she had no right to ask the man why he was wearing a mask, regards of anything.

She has no right to ask butcher why they aren't selling pork,

She has no right to state that unicorns(generally kids love fanasty, i would consider Harry Potter an easier place to actack) are part of the LGBTQ

She has a right to an Oppion, and everyone has that right to their oppions, but not when you violently say things and act in her manor.

Lucy8080 · 14-11-2020 08:14AM

PhoneMain wrote: »

I was saying that in the context of the point I was making - that people on here with no medical or psychiatric experience is diagnosing someone they've never met with a condition they know very little about and talking about dealing with them in ways that has very serious consequences. Sure feck it, we will throw electro convulsive therapy at Gemma as well, for the craic like.

That post you made has a good and valid point.

Yet , as far back as 2016/17 I was reading about the narcissistic tendencies of Trump. I was reading of those tendencies in Accredited journals.

There is a poster here who quoted the play -book (with link) to how such a person would play out the loss of power.

It is almost Prophetic!

Edit: You are over emphasizing your understanding of what constitutes ethics on the personal level versus the national/world level. There is a difference.

It would be my wish that you could explain it back to us.

B.T.W. I have not mentioned any Irish national or international , nor Irish Male/Female name here.

That maybe ethical.

It could be also viewed as un-ethical, by those who would be worried about not calling such (powerful/influential) people out.

I would prefer to work our way down from those who actually have power (A president for the sake of argument) .

From there, we go to those who we may need to have some space or intervention for( because if we fail, they might end up having power too) .

Penfailed · 14-11-2020 10:28AM

knucklehead6 wrote: »

What slightly different spin is there?

Question. Did she bully an elderly man into taking his mask off during a pandemic?

Answer. Yes she did. Simple.

Question. Has she been engaging in social distancing, socially responsible behaviour or mask wearing while in public?

Answer. No she hasn’t.

Question. Was she putting that elderly man in harms way?

Answer. Yes she has.

There’s no spin that makes her come out well here, so stop trying.

You've just asked a pile of questions that are unrelated to the post l was responding to. The OP said that she removed the mask, had her fingers all over it and then put it back on. That didn't happen.

knucklehead6 · 14-11-2020 11:23AM

Penfailed wrote: »

You've just asked a pile of questions that are unrelated to the post l was responding to. The OP said that she removed the mask, had her fingers all over it and then put it back on. That didn't happen.

The post you were responding to is related to the video of her bullying an elderly man into removing his mask.

Those questions are about the video of her bullying an elderly man into removing his mask.

Now, unless there are lots of videos of Queen Cnut bullying elderly men into removing their masks this is the same incident.

And if there are many videos of Queen Cnut bullying elderly men into removing their masks, well then i think you and the rest of the spinnys have a bigger problem than trying to put them in a positive light

Guy:Incognito · 14-11-2020 11:59AM

PhoneMain wrote: »

Well then we should lock up Donald Trump so.

.

Agreed

humberklog · 14-11-2020 01:42PM

knucklehead6 wrote: »

The post you were responding to is related to the video of her bullying an elderly man into removing his mask.

Those questions are about the video of her bullying an elderly man into removing his mask.

Now, unless there are lots of videos of Queen Cnut bullying elderly men into removing their masks this is the same incident.

And if there are many videos of Queen Cnut bullying elderly men into removing their masks, well then i think you and the rest of the spinnys have a bigger problem than trying to put them in a positive light

I'm a bit lost and confused about the recent discussion and I'm only quoting your post to try keep it relevant to my question-

Wasn't all the recent chat here sparked from a poster's point of view that Gemma's behaviour and actions are enough for an intervention by the state on her (and the public's) behalf to commit her for psychiatric treatment?

And then a doctor pointed out that that wouldn't and shouldn't happen (to which I agree) and then we're here in the discussion?

Just trying to keep up.

knucklehead6 · 14-11-2020 03:10PM

humberklog wrote: »

I'm a bit lost and confused about the recent discussion and I'm only quoting your post to try keep it relevant to my question-

Wasn't all the recent chat here sparked from a poster's point of view that Gemma's behaviour and actions are enough for an intervention by the state on her (and the public's) behalf to commit her for psychiatric treatment?

And then a doctor pointed out that that wouldn't and shouldn't happen (to which I agree) and then we're here in the discussion?

Just trying to keep up.

Yup, I think that's a roughly fair summation of things.
I think I'm the one that made the video chat resurface as I disagreed with the Dr Phonemain that she wasn't putting others in harms way, and I used the video as an example of that.

Penfailed · 14-11-2020 06:42PM

knucklehead6 wrote: »

The post you were responding to is related to the video of her bullying an elderly man into removing his mask.

Those questions are about the video of her bullying an elderly man into removing his mask.

Now, unless there are lots of videos of Queen Cnut bullying elderly men into removing their masks this is the same incident.

And if there are many videos of Queen Cnut bullying elderly men into removing their masks, well then i think you and the rest of the spinnys have a bigger problem than trying to put them in a positive light

Sorry, where was I trying to put her in a positive light? She's an abhorrent woman.

knucklehead6 · 15-11-2020 06:18PM

Penfailed wrote: »

Sorry, where was I trying to put her in a positive light? She's an abhorrent woman.

I must've picked you up wrongly so, when you were suggesting that watching the full video of her bullying an elderly man into taking off his mask has a different spin than the edited version posted here.

My apologies.

ohnonotgmail · 15-11-2020 08:14PM

Article in the latest Phoenix magazine about Gemma and one of her british chums. He spoke when she was having her protest outside google. His name is Paul Rimmer and he is formerly of the british national party. He did a video about the history of the british empire in Ireland where he says

The Irish have got to be grateful for what we did there

Gemma does choose some odd friends

Nokia6230i · 15-11-2020 10:54PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Article in the latest Phoenix magazine about Gemma and one of her british chums. He spoke when she was having her protest outside google. His name is Paul Rimmer and he is formerly of the british national party. He did a video about the history of the british empire in Ireland where he says

Gemma does choose some odd friends

Her right hand Dolores was on one of her Periscope TV Broadcasts recently (last week sometime; sadly she doesn't categorise them under topics so you've to go through them & it's excruciating listening on a "good" day...) totally denying this; Comical Ali stuff!

Think she was maintaining that he just happened to be in the area on a tour or something and they didn't actually meet etc.

Birneybau · 15-11-2020 11:07PM

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Article in the latest Phoenix magazine about Gemma and one of her british chums. He spoke when she was having her protest outside google. His name is Paul Rimmer and he is formerly of the british national party. He did a video about the history of the british empire in Ireland where he says

Gemma does choose some odd friends

Sure, Tan Torino is Irish and JOINED the British Army. Grifter.

AngryHippie · 16-11-2020 03:11AM

PhoneMain wrote: »

And by the way, I'm a doctor and I'm not willing to diagnose her based on her public utterances, nor am I willing to speculate about it........because it's unethical. Maybe you have more psychiatry experience than me.....which if you do, also makes it unethical for you to speculate about her mental health unless you've assessed/treated her.......which is even more unethical!!!!

I didn't take any oaths or sign any code of conduct or ethical charter.

Its pretty obvious that the lady is not 100%. Not just from her public utterances, but from her behavior, from the people she surrounds herself with, the people she targets, the absolute nonsense that she tries to legitimize and give platforms to.

In consideration of her history, she has spiralled from being a respected journalist in a national paper to a fringe leader of a tinfoil hat brigade that can't even survive on media platforms with VERY lax terms and conditions.

To say that its unethical to speculate that she might be struggling with a mental health issue is of course your role as a mental health professional.
The dog on the street can something is amiss and that she probably needs help with it.

(Yes, I'm aware that help won't work unless she wants help and that the probable nature of what she is dealing with would more or less require a complete mental breakdown before she would acknowledge a problem or accept help)
I think this is a significant problem with both the provision of mental health services and the current legislation that there isn't any mechanism of help, advice or intervention short of going nuclear after an incident.

PhoneMain · 16-11-2020 10:57AM

AngryHippie wrote: »

I didn't take any oaths or sign any code of conduct or ethical charter.

Its pretty obvious that the lady is not 100%. Not just from her public utterances, but from her behavior, from the people she surrounds herself with, the people she targets, the absolute nonsense that she tries to legitimize and give platforms to.

In consideration of her history, she has spiralled from being a respected journalist in a national paper to a fringe leader of a tinfoil hat brigade that can't even survive on media platforms with VERY lax terms and conditions.

To say that its unethical to speculate that she might be struggling with a mental health issue is of course your role as a mental health professional.
The dog on the street can something is amiss and that she probably needs help with it.

(Yes, I'm aware that help won't work unless she wants help and that the probable nature of what she is dealing with would more or less require a complete mental breakdown before she would acknowledge a problem or accept help)
I think this is a significant problem with both the provision of mental health services and the current legislation that there isn't any mechanism of help, advice or intervention short of going nuclear after an incident.

Its derived from the UN Human Rights Charter. If someone doesnt want to do something, they are perfectly within their rights to not do that. This can include life saving treatment. Just because you deem her to have mental health issues does not give you the right to force treatment on her. This is nothing to do with provision of mental health services and all about people and their human rights.

ohnonotgmail · 16-11-2020 11:01AM

PhoneMain wrote: »

Its derived from the UN Human Rights Charter. If someone doesnt want to do something, they are perfectly within their rights to not do that. This can include life saving treatment. Just because you deem her to have mental health issues does not give you the right to force treatment on her. This is nothing to do with provision of mental health services and all about people and their human rights.

The only people who have the right to force treatment on her are medical professionals. we all know that. Nobody is suggesting that a member of the public commit her.

Gemma not taking enforced retirement too well

Comments