Clarification

Reports and updates on Dx Revision Watch site on the Hansen family’s situation are being published as provided by, and in consultation with, Rebecca Hansen, Chairman, ME Foreningen, Danmark (ME Association, Denmark), or edited from reports as provided.

Dx Revision Watch site has no connection with any petitions or initiatives, or with any social media platforms or other platforms set up to promote petitions or initiatives, or to otherwise raise awareness of the Hansen family’s situation.

All enquiries in relation to any petitions or other initiatives, or social media platforms, or any other platforms associated with them should be addressed directly to the organizers, sponsors or owners responsible for them.

For first report (in English) see: Something rotten in the state of Denmark: Karina Hansen’s story: http://wp.me/pKrrB-2Xc

For more information on the ME Association of Denmark’s postcard campaign go here on Facebook

For information on Bodily Distress Syndrome see Part Two of Dx Revision Watch Post: ICD-11 Beta draft and BDD, Per Fink and Bodily Distress Syndrome

Menneskerettighederne nægtet: Noget råddent i staten Danmark: Karina Hansen: Opdater 1: http://wp.me/pKrrB-36e

Human Rights denied: Something rotten in the state of Denmark: Karina Hansen’s story: Update 1: http://wp.me/pKrrB-35o

Ontkenning van mensenrechten: Iets verrot in de staat van Denemarken: Het verhaal van Karina Hansen: Update 1: http://wp.me/pKrrB-35o

Menschenrechtsverstoß: Etwas ist faul in Dänemark: Karina Hansens Geschichte: Update 1: http://wp.me/pKrrB-35o

Droits de l’Homme: Il y a quelque chose de pourri au royaume du Danemark: l’histoire de Karina Hansen: Update 1: http://wp.me/pKrrB-35o

Clarification

Reports and updates on Dx Revision Watch site on the Hansen family’s situation are being published as provided by, and in consultation with, Rebecca Hansen, Chairman, ME Foreningen, Danmark (ME Association, Denmark), or edited from reports as provided by Ms Hansen.

Dx Revision Watch site has no connection with any petitions or initiatives, or with any social media platforms or other platforms set up to promote petitions or initiatives, or to otherwise raise awareness of the Hansen family’s situation. The use of any links to content on Dx Revision Watch does not imply endorsement of, or association with any initiatives other than the ME Foreningen, Danmark (ME Association, Denmark) Postcard to Karina Campaign.

All enquiries in relation to petitions or other initiatives, social media platforms, or any other platforms associated with them should be addressed directly to the organizers, sponsors or owners responsible for them.

Status på Karinas sag – 24.5.13

Af Rebecca Hansen

Følgende tekst er godkendt af familien.

Karina er forsat indlagt på Hammel Neurocenter. Lægen Jens Gyring har givet mundtlig besked til familien om, at indlæggelsen vil forsætte i lang tid – måske et år. Vi har ikke set noget bevis for, at Karina har fået det bedre.

Karinas forældre har en fuldmagt, som giver dem ret til at træffe beslutninger for Karina, også omkring hendes behandling. Denne fuldmagt ignoreres.

Fuldmagten blev oprettet i maj 2012. Karinas praktiserende læge erklærede hende psykisk rask 2 gange i maj 2012.

Sundhedsstyrelsen (SST) påstår, at Karinas advokat ikke er hendes advokat, da de nu mener, at hun ikke var habil, da hun antog advokaten i maj 2012. Advokaten har repræsenteret Karina siden maj 2012 og fik aktindsigt i Karinas sag på dette grundlag. Dernæst oplyser SST, at advokaten havde fuldmagt i 2012 ved første mislykkede forsøg på at få Karina tvangsindlagt (03.05.12) men at fuldmagten ikke er gældende for episoden med hendes endelige tvangsfjernelse og indlæggelse i februar 2013.

Psykiater Nils Balle Christensen skriver, at Karina er voksen og myndig til at træffe ”her og nu beslutninger”, og at de på Hammel Neurocenter ikke gør noget imod hendes vilje. Men samtidig, mener Holstebro Kommune at Karina har brug for en værge og Statsforfatningen Midtjylland har fået til opgave at udpege en værge til hende og hermed umyndiggøre hende.

ME Foreningen kontaktede Patientkontoret den 29. april 2013 for at få navn på Karinas patientrådgiver, idet Foreningen ønsker at bidrage med viden om sygdommen og vil herudover forsøge at skaffe en udenlandsk ME ekspert til landet, der kan tilse Karina. Svaret var at ”sagen er overgivet til Juridisk kontor i Region Midtjylland.”

Karinas forældre og jeg prøvede at besøge Karina den 12. maj, men blev nægtet adgang. Du kan læse om dette på ME Foreningens facebook under noter.

Nils Balle Christensen skriver, at der ikke er besøgsforbud, men Karinas forældre må alligevel fortsat ikke besøge hende. Der gives en mundlig besked til forældrene, at ”juristerne” vil oprette et ”dokument” omkring ”besøgsrestriktionerne”. Denne kan Karinas forældre forvente at få fremsendt i løbet af 7-14 dage.

Vi har ringet til Karinas mobil som hun har med på hospitalet mange gange, men den går direkte på voicemail.

Et besøg hos Karina – et spørgsmål om menneskerettigheder

Af Rebecca Hansen
ME-patient
icerebel62@hotmail.com

Den 12. maj besluttede Karinas forældre og jeg igen at prøve at besøge Karina på Hammel Neurocenter. Karina er en alvorligt syg dansk ME-patient, som er blevet tilbageholdt på Hammel Neurocenter siden den 12. februar 2013, og i denne periode har hendes forældre ikke fået lov til at besøge eller tale med hende.

Karinas advokat har for nylig fået en meget begrænset adgang til nogle af dokumenterne i Karinas sag ved hjælp af offentlig aktindsigt. Af dette materiale fremgik det, at det faktisk ikke er tilladt i Danmark at forhindre pårørende i at besøge deres familie på hospitalet, og at menneskerettighederne har høj prioritet.

Karina forældre var blevet fortalt, at de skulle mødes med Nils Balle Christensen (NBC), en psykiater fra Forskningsklinikken for Funktionelle Lidelser, for at tale om betingelserne for besøg, før de kunne se deres datter. Da Karinas søster, Janni, besøgte Karina i april, fik Janni instruktioner om, hvad hun måtte sige og ikke sige til Karina. Forældrene fik slet ikke lov at komme ind, fordi de fik at vide, at de først skulle mødes med NBC for at afgøre betingelserne for besøg.

Men nu vidste vi, at det ikke er legalt at have sådanne restriktioner på besøg, så vi besluttede at prøve at se Karina søndag den 12. maj – på Mors Dag og den internationale mærkedag for ME.

Før jeg fortæller om besøget, vil jeg fortælle om den kontakt, som NBC har haft med Karina og hendes familie.

Nils Balle Christensen blev involveret i Karinas sag i maj 2012, efter Karinas advokat havde forhindret hendes fjernelse efter psykiatrisk lovgivning. Han blev præsenteret for familien, og hans opgave var at udarbejde en behandlingsplan til Karina. I løbet af sommeren 2012 besøgte NBC Karinas forældre adskillige gange med henblik på at etablere en behandlingsplan. I denne periode ønskede NBC ikke at samarbejde med Karinas advokat, og NBC leverede ikke en skriftlig behandlingsplan. Karinas forældre har aldrig modtaget nogen skriftlige instrukser for Karinas pleje og der var ingen kritik af den pleje, de gav Karina. Jeg var til et møde med NBC og Karinas forældre i 2012, hvor NBC fortalte moderen, at hun gjorde et godt stykke arbejde. NBC kom med et tilbud om at indlægge Karina, men ikke med en plan om hvad der ville ske, når hun blev indlagt. De fik heller ikke nogen forklaring på, hvorfor man ikke kunne behandle Karina i hjemmet. Karinas forældre turde ikke acceptere en ukendt behandling fra en læge, der aldrig før har behandlet (eller set) en alvorlig syg ME-patient. Af mange årsager stolede Karinas forældre ikke på NBC, og kontakten med NBC blev afbrudt i starten af efteråret 2012. Karinas forældre valgte at betale for en privat læge og en diætist til at hjælpe Karina.

Karinas forældre troede, at NBCs involvering med Karina nu var afsluttet. Men den begrænsede adgang, som Karinas advokat nu har opnået ved offentlig aktindsigt afslører, at NBCs engagement langt fra var overstået.

Dokumenterne viser, at der var aktivitet i Karinas sag imellem Sundhedsstyrelsen og henholdsvis Holstebro Kommune, Holstebro politi samt til NBC, efter at hans kontakt til forældrene var stoppet.

Desuden afslører disse papirer, at der var en forespørgsel til Ministeriet for Sundhed og Forebyggelse om retten til at forhindre pårørende i at besøge familiemedlemmer på et hospital. Den 21. december 2012 sendte ministersekretæren for Ministeriet for Sundhed og Forebyggelse et 5-siders svar, der forklarer, at menneskerettighederne har høj prioritet (vejer meget tungt).

Men i NBCs skrivelse af 12. februar 2013 til Karinas forældre står der:

”Det er besluttet, at Karina, pga. sin tilstand, ikke må have besøg de første 14 dage. Det vil herefter blive vurderet, om hun er i stand til at modtage besøg.”

Med disse nye oplysninger om menneskerettighederne i hånden, besluttede Karinas forældre og jeg os den 12. maj for at se, om der stadig var et forbud imod eller begrænsninger på at besøge Karina på Hammel Neurocenter.

Vi ønskede ikke, at personalet skulle føle sig truet af os på nogen måde, så vi havde på forhånd aftalt, at hvis vi fik at vide, vi ikke kunne besøge Karina, ville vi respektere dette, men vi ville stille en masse spørgsmål om, hvorfor dette forbud / denne begrænsning var oprettet.

På Hammel præsenterede Karinas forældre sig for personalet og bad om tilladelse til at se deres datter. Der blev svaret ”nej”, og at det skulle have været aftalt telefonisk med lægen. Jeg spurgte, om der var et besøgsforbud. Det blev der svaret ”nej” til. Så spurgte jeg, om der var restriktioner, men det blev ikke besvaret. I stedet svarede medarbejderen, at hun ville ringe til Jens Gyring, som er overlægen på stedet. De bad os om at vente. Medarbejderne på Hammel Neurocenter var høflige og venlige, men det var tydeligt, at de var beklemte ved vores tilstedeværelse.

Et øjeblik senere vendte sygeplejersken tilbage med svar fra Jens Gyring, at forældrene først skulle have et møde med NBC, inden de kunne se deres datter. Vi diskuterede denne begrænsning, og Karinas forældre bad om en skriftlig forklaring på, hvorfor de skulle have et møde med NBC, før de kunne se deres datter, og hvad hensigten med mødet ville være.

Jeg understregede, at det ikke er lovligt at forhindre forældre i at besøge sit barn og prøvede at vise dem udtalelsen fra Ministeriet for Sundhed og Forebyggelse. En anden medarbejder brød ind og sagde, at denne diskussion skulle tages med lægerne og ikke med dem.

I mellemtiden var Jens Gyring blevet kontaktet igen og havde sagt, at man skulle spørge Karina om hun vil have besøg. En ny sygeplejerske deltog i vores diskussion og sagde: ”Jeg har lige været inde ved Karina og fortalt, at I er her og spurgt om hun vil have besøg, og hun rystede bare på hovedet.”

Meget interessant, at der pludselig ikke var noget besøgsforbud, men at det nu var op til Karina…

Til det svarede jeg, at vi gerne ville have en hel sætning fra Karina for at sikre, at hun forstod spørgsmålet. Vi ønskede at høre hende sige, at hun ikke ville se sin mor og far. Vi kunne ikke rigtig vide, om hun forstod spørgsmålet, eller om hun virkelig troede på, at de var her efter 3 måneder. Desuden bærer Karina normalt ørepropper, så måske hørte hun ikke engang spørgsmålet.

Karinas mor sagde, at hun gerne vil høre ordene fra Karinas egen mund. At hun gerne ville se Karina og høre hendes svar. Og hvis Karina bad hende om at gå, ville hun straks gå igen.

Personalet insisterede på, at Karina havde svaret.

Her skal man huske på, at det sidste Karina sagde til sin mor den 13. februar var, da hun ringede til sin mor og sagde: ”Hvordan kommer jeg ud herfra. Jeg kan ikke klare det.” – Hvad er der sket de sidste 3 måneder? Ønsker Karina virkelig ikke at se sine forældre? Hvis dette er tilfældet, hvad er så årsagen? Hvilken begrundelse har lægerne givet Karina for, at forældrene ikke besøger hende? Vi er overladt til at gætte svarene på disse spørgsmål.

Det var tydeligt, at forældrene ikke ville få lov til at se Karina og selv høre, at Karina ikke ønskede et besøg. Men vi fik de ansatte til at love at få NBC til at sende forældrene en skriftlig erklæring om, hvorfor de skulle have et møde med ham, før de kunne se deres datter, og hvad mødet ville handle om. De lovede også at oplade Karinas mobiltelefon og give den til hende. Så forlod vi Neurocenteret. Karinas mor havde tårer i øjnene og sagde: ”Jeg troede virkelig, at jeg ville få hende at se i dag.”

Efter hjemkomsten skrev Karinas forældre en mail til Nils Balle Christensen og bad igen om på skrift at få at vide, hvorfor de ikke må se Karina, og hvad dagsordenen er for det møde, han kræver, før de kan se hende.

Til dette svarede NBC, at der ikke er besøgsforbud. Og siden Karinas forældre ikke ønsker at mødes med NBC, kan de i stedet mødes med overlæge Jens Gyring: ”hvor der kan laves skriftlige aftaler om fremtidige besøg og telefonkontakt med mere”.

Er det ikke stadig et besøgsforbud, indtil deres betingelser er opfyldt? Hvordan er det forskelligt fra et besøgsforbud, indtil forældrene mødes med NBC? Hvilken ret har de til at stille disse betingelser?

Få dage senere fik Karinas forældre at vide af Jens Gyring, at det ville være op til advokaterne at lave en skriftlig aftale om besøg. Dette kunne tage 2 uger.

I mellemtiden kan vi tænke over, hvad denne situation betyder for andre ME-patienter og deres pårørende i Danmark. En alvorligt syg ME-patient får tilkendt en psykiater, som aldrig før har behandlet en alvorligt syg ME-patient. Psykiateren kommer fra en klinik, der har fravalgt at samarbejde med internationale ME eksperter (brev fra september 2012 og referat fra mødet den 8. oktober 2012). Psykiateren ønsker ikke at samarbejde med patientens advokat eller oplyse noget på skrift om den behandling, han vil give.

Når ME-patienten og de pårørende beslutter, at de ikke ønsker den behandling, som denne psykiater tilbyder, så samarbejder de danske myndigheder for at fjerne ME-patienten fra hjemmet – tydeligt imod hendes vilje – og isolere hende fra hendes pårørende og advokat.

Psykiateren, der har ansvaret for Karina, er også ansvarlig for alle ME-patienter i Danmark – så er det fremtiden for alle ME-patienter og deres familier i Danmark?

Har ME-patienter ikke ret til at vælge, hvilken behandling vi ønsker at modtage? Har vi ikke ret til besøgende, når vi er på hospitalet?

Ja, der er virkelig noget råddent i Danmarks rige.

Hvis jeg har misforstået noget i denne historie, så vil jeg være glad for at høre en forklaring fra de involverede parter.

Rebecca Hansen
ME-patient
Icerebel62@hotmail.com

Clarification notice

Reports and updates on Dx Revision Watch site on the Hansen family’s situation are being published as provided by, and in consultation with, Rebecca Hansen, Chairman, ME Foreningen, Danmark (ME Association, Denmark), or edited from reports as provided by Ms Hansen.

Dx Revision Watch site has no connection with any petitions or initiatives, or with any social media platforms or other platforms set up to promote petitions or initiatives, or to otherwise raise awareness of the Hansen family’s situation. The use of any links to content on Dx Revision Watch does not imply endorsement of, or association with any initiatives other than the ME Foreningen, Danmark (ME Association, Denmark) Postcard to Karina Campaign.

All enquiries in relation to petitions or other initiatives, social media platforms, or any other platforms associated with them should be addressed directly to the organizers, sponsors or owners responsible for them.

Status on Karina’s Case – May 24th, 2013

By Rebecca Hansen
Chairman, ME Foreningen, Danmark (ME Association, Denmark)

The following text has been approved by the family.

Karina is still hospitalized at Hammel Neurocenter. Dr. Jens Gyring gave a verbal message to the family that this could continue for a long time, perhaps a year. We have not seen any evidence that Karina is getting better.

Karina’s parents have a power of attorney that gives them the right to make decisions for Karina, also about her treatment. But this is ignored.

The power of attorney was made in May 2012. Karina’s general practitioner declared her psychologically healthy twice, in May 2012.

The Danish Board of Health claims that Karina’s lawyer is not her lawyer, as they now state that Karina was not competent when she hired her lawyer in May 2012. The lawyer has represented Karina since May 2012 and received access to Karina’s case at that time on the basis that he had authority as her lawyer. Then, The Danish Board of Health informed her lawyer, that it is true that he had authority at the time of the first failed attempt to section Karina (May 3, 2012), but that the power of attorney does not apply to the incident in February 2013, when Karina was forcibly removed and hospitalized.

The psychiatrist, Nils Balle Christensen, writes that Karina is an adult and has the ability to make “here and now decisions” [“her og nu beslutninger”] and that Hammel Neurocenter is doing nothing against her will. But at the same time, Holstebro Kommune believes that Karina needs a guardian and Statsforfatningen Midtjylland has been asked to appoint one for her. This will disempower Karina completely and leave all decisions up to her guardian.

The ME Association, Denmark, contacted the Patient Office on April 19, 2013 to ask for the name of Karina’s patient advisor. We wished to inform the advisor about Karina’s illness and to offer to bring an ME expert to Denmark to examine Karina. The answer from the Patient Office was that “the case is handed over to the Legal Office in Region Midtjylland.”

Karina’s parents and I tried to visit Karina on May 12, 2013, but we were denied access to her. You can read more about our attempt on the ME Association’s Facebook page under Noter.

Nils Balle Christensen writes that there is not a ban on visits, but Karina’s parents are still not allowed to visit her. A verbal message was given to Karina’s parents that  “the laywers” will create a “document” about the “visit restrictions.” Karina’s parents expect to get that in the next 7-14 days.

Karina has her mobile phone at the hospital and we have tried to call it many times, but it always goes directly to voice mail.

A Visit to Karina – a Question of Human Rights

Rebecca Hansen
ME patient
Icerebel62@hotmail.com

On May 12, Karina’s parents and I decided once again try to visit Karina at Hammel Neurocenter. Karina is a severely ill Danish ME patient being held at Hammel Neurocenter since February 12, 2013, during which time her parents have not been allowed to visit or talk to her.

Karina’s lawyer has recently received a very limited access to some of the paperwork in Karina’s case by using the Public Records Act. This revealed that it is actually not permitted in Denmark to prevent relatives from visiting their family members in the hospital and that human rights have priority.

Karina’s parents had been told that they must meet with Nils Balle Christensen (NBC), a psychiatrist from the Research Center for Functional Disorders and Psychosomatics [Aarhus], to talk about the conditions of visitation before they could see their daughter. When Karina’s sister, Janni, visited Karina in April, Janni was given instructions about what she could and could not say to Karina. The parents were not allowed in at all because they were told they first needed to meet with NBC to decide the conditions of visitation.

But now we knew that it is not legal to have this restriction on visits, so we decided to try to see Karina on Sunday May 12 – Mother’s Day and International ME Awareness Day.

Before I tell about the visit, I will tell about the contact NBC has had with Karina and her family.

Nils Balle Christensen became involved with Karina’s case in May 2012 after Karina’s lawyer prevented her removal under a psychiatric law. He was introduced to the family and his job was to help make a treatment plan for Karina. During the summer of 2012, NBC visited the family several times with the purpose of making a treatment plan for Karina. During this time, NBC did not want to cooperate with Karina’s lawyer and NBC did not deliver a written treatment plan. Karina’s parents never received any written instructions for Karina’s care and there was no criticism of the care they were giving Karina.

I was at a meeting with NBC and Karina’s parents in August 2012 where NBC told the mother that she was doing a good job. NBC came with an offer to hospitalize Karina, but not a plan about what would happen when she was hospitalized. They also did not receive an explanation as to why they could not treat Karina at home. Karina’s parents did not dare to agree to an unknown treatment from a doctor who has never before treated (or even seen) a severely ill ME patient. For many reasons, Karina’s parents did not trust NBC and contact with NBC was stopped in the early fall of 2012. Karina’s parents chose to pay for a private doctor and a dietician to help Karina.

Karina’s parents believed that NBC’s involvement with Karina was now over. But the limited access that Karina’s lawyer has now obtained under the Public Records Act reveals that NBC’s involvement was far from over.

The paperwork shows that there was activity in Karina’s case between from the Board of Health to Holstebro county and the Holstebro police, as well as to NBC after his contact with her parents had stopped.

Furthermore, these papers reveal that there was an inquiry to the Ministry for Health and Prevention [Ministeriet for Sundhed og Forebyggelse] about the right to prevent relatives from visiting family members at a hospital. On December 21, 2012, the Minister secretary sent a 5-page answer that explains that human rights have priority (weigh very heavily).

But in NBC’s letter to Karina’s parents on Februay 12, 2013, it says:

“It has been decided that because of Karina’s condition, she may not have visitors the first 14 days. After that, it will be evaluated if she is able to have visits.”

With this new information about human rights in hand, Karina’s parents and I decided on May 12 to see if there was still a ban or restrictions on visitation to Karina at Hammel Neurocenter.

We did not want the staff to feel threatened by us in any way, so we had agreed ahead of time that if we were told we could not visit Karina, we would respect this, but would ask a lot of questions about why this ban/restriction was being made.

At Hammel, Karina’s parents introduced themselves to the staff and asked for permission to see their daughter. The answer was No and we were told that they should have made an appointment with the doctor before coming. I asked if there was a ban on visits and they answered No, not a ban. Then I asked if there were restrictions, but did not receive an answer. Instead, a staff member said that she would call Jens Gyring, the head doctor at the center. They asked us to wait. The staff at Hammel Neurocenter were polite and friendly, but it was obvious that they were not comfortable with us being there.

A few minutes later, the nurse returned and said that Jens Gyring’s answer was that the parents must first have a meeting with NBC before they could see their daughter. We discussed this restriction and Karina’s parents asked for a written explanation as to why they had to have a meeting with NBC before they could see their daughter and what the intent of the meeting would be.

I pointed out that it was not legal to prevent parents from seeing their child and tried to show them the statement from the Ministry of Health and Prevention [Ministeriet for Sundhed og Forebyggelse]. A second staff member broke in to say that this discussion must be taken up with the doctors and not them.

In the meantime, Jens Gyring was contacted again and said that Karina should be asked if she wanted to have a visit. A new nurse joined our discussion and said: “I have just been in with Karina and said you were here and asked if she wanted a visit and she just shook her head.”

Very interesting that suddenly there was no ban, but now it was up to Karina…

To that I said that we would like to have a whole sentence from Karina to make sure she understood the question. We wanted to hear her say that she didn’t want to see her mom and dad. We couldn’t really know if she understood the question or if she really believed they were there after three months. Also, Karina usually wears earplugs, so maybe she did not even hear the question.

Karina’s mom said that she would like to hear the words from Karina’s own mouth. That she would like to see Karina and hear Karina’s answer. And if Karina told her to leave, she would go away immediately.

The staff insisted that Karina has answered.

Remember, the last thing Karina said to her mother was on February 13, when Karina called her mother and said: “How do I get out of here? I can’t take this.” – What has happened in the last three months? Does Karina really not want to see her parents? And if so, why not? What have the doctors told Karina about why her parents are not visiting? We can only guess the answers to these questions.

It was clear that her parents would not be allowed to see Karina and hear for themselves that she didn’t want a visit. But we did get the staff to promise to have NBC send them a written statement about why they had to have a meeting with him before they could see their daughter and what the meeting would be about. They also promised to charge up Karina’s cell phone and give it to her. Then we left the [Hammel] Neurocenter. Her mom had tears in her eyes and said, “I really thought I was going to see her today.”

When her parents got home, they wrote a mail to NBC and once again asked for a written explanation as to why they may not see Karina and what the agenda would be for the meeting that he requires before they can see her.

NBC answered that there is no ban on visits. And since Karina’s parents don’t want to meet with NBC, then they can meet with the head doctor Jens Gyring instead: “where there can be made written agreements about future visits, telephone contact and more.”

Isn’t this still a ban until their conditions are met? How is this any different from a ban on visits until the parents meet with NBC? What right do they have to make this condition?

A few days later, Karina’s parents were told by the doctor Jens Gyring that it would be up to the lawyers to make a written agreement about visitation. This could take two weeks.

In the meantime, we can think about what this situation means for other ME patients and their families in Denmark. A severely ill ME patient is assigned a psychiatrist that has never treated a severely ill ME patient before. The psychiatrist comes from a clinic that has chosen not to work with international ME experts (letter from September 2012 and minutes from our meeting in October 2012).

The psychiatrist does not wish to work with the patient’s lawyer or give any written information about the treatment he will give. When the ME patient and the family decide they do not want the treatment offered by this psychiatrist, then the Danish authorities work together to remove the patient from her home – quite obviously against her will – and isolate her for her family and her lawyer.

The psychiatrists in charge of Karina are also in charge of all ME patients in Denmark – so is this the future for all ME patients and their families in Denmark?

Do ME patients in Denmark not have the right to choose which treatment we want to receive? Do we not have the right to visitors when we are in the hospital?

Yes, something is very rotten in the state of Denmark.

If I have misunderstood something in this story, then I will be happy to hear an explanation from the involved parties.

Rebecca Hansen
ME patient
Icerebel62@hotmail.com