Improper Interview Techniques by Psychiatrist
Section 1: List of Improper Questions by the Psychiatrist
No.
1
Excerpt from Doctor’s
Question
“My report says your father
committed suicide.” “You
touched your son’s genitals.
That’s what the prosecutor
accused you of.”
2 “Did you hear the voice of
God?”
3 “The medication helped you,
right?”
4 “Is your son dead?”
“That’s not possible.”
5
(repeated 3 times in response
to the patient’s claims of
unlawful long-term
confinement)
6 “We assess that you have had
schizophrenia since 2013.”
7
8
“You have been admitted to a
psychiatric hospital. That’s
a fact.”
“You have to understand,
nobody ends up in a
psychiatric hospital unless
they need help.”
Explanation of Impropriety
Artificially linking two unrelated
statements to suggest a psychological
or hereditary connection, creating
bias and violating the principle of
neutrality in assessments.
A baseless and abrupt question without
clinical background or symptom
indication, clearly attempting to
categorize the person as
schizophrenic.
Assumes the use and effectiveness of
medication without confirming whether
the patient took any, leading to a
misleading and biased conclusion.
A cruel and unfounded question that
conflates loss of custody with death,
demonstrating manipulative and
unethical intent.
Subjectively dismisses the patient’s
testimony without reviewing supporting
documents, violating the principle of
objective medical investigation.
Declares a diagnosis without citing
criteria or presenting clinical
evidence, lacking a step-by-step
professional diagnostic process.
Uses the mere fact of hospitalization
as proof of illness, ignoring the
reasons, external factors, and
context, violating principles of
causal analysis.
Shows institutional bias and a
presumption of guilt, dismissing the
possibility of wrongful admission or
systemic error.
No.
Explanation of Impropriety
Excerpt from Doctor’s
Question
9
10
11
“I didn’t detain you. I’m
just repeating what they
wrote.”
“Are you aware that your
statements sound completely
unrealistic?”
“You always believe you’re
being persecuted, don’t
you?”
12 “You’ve changed your story
many times.”
13
“You say you were wrongly
detained, but professionals
made those decisions.”
14 “You’re not angry at your son
for what happened?”
15
“Wouldn’t a mother who loved
her child behave
differently?”
Relies solely on institutional reports
without independent judgment,
violating ethical duties to
cross-check with the patient’s own
account.
Implies a predetermined judgment of
delusion or unreliability, without
investigating the factual basis of the
patient’s statements, violating
impartiality.
A leading and accusatory question that
imposes a psychiatric label (paranoia)
without context or open-ended inquiry,
indicating bias.
Declares inconsistency without
evidence, undermines credibility
without offering the patient a chance
to explain discrepancies, violating
fair assessment standards.
Defends the system instead of assessing
facts independently, denying the
possibility of systemic errors or
wrongful hospitalization.
Attempts to provoke negative emotions
or manipulate the narrative toward
dysfunction, which may distort the
actual parent-child relationship.
Emotionally manipulative and
judgmental, suggesting there is only
one acceptable model of maternal
behavior, culturally insensitive and
unethical.
Section 2: Rational Statements Made by the Patient During Psychiatric Assessment
Original Chinese
Statement
我每次住院的原因
是因为我的孩
English Translation
Each time I was
hospitalized, it was
What This Reveals /
Indicates
Demonstrates clear memory
of hospitalization
English Translation
Original Chinese
Statement
子……医生的第一
个问题都是“发生
了什么”，这是重
点。
because of my child… The
doctor’s first question is
always “What happened?”
That’s the key point.
I don’t have
我不是精神分裂
症，我是因为打击
太大，有应急反应。
schizophrenia. It’s
because I suffered a great
blow — it’s a stress
response.
我的医生说我状态
很好，应该在一周
内出院，但我被关
了半年，我什么都
不知道。
四个妇女中心给我
写信说已经准备好
接收我，我也是后
来才在病历中看
到。
我相信医生会帮助
所有人，这个想法
后来证明是错误
的。
我是中国人，我不
了解丹麦法律，我
只是知道我没有做
错什么，这是我唯
一知道的，但是我
不知道如何让所有
的人，都了解我的
情况。
我不是精神分裂
症，我是应急性心
My doctor said I was in good
condition and should be
discharged within a week —
but I was kept there for six
months, and I knew nothing.
Four women’s shelters sent
me letters saying they were
ready to take me in — I only
discovered this later in my
medical records.
I believed doctors would
help everyone — that idea
turned out to be wrong.
I am Chinese. I don’t
understand Danish law. All I
know is that I didn’t do
anything wrong — that’s
the only thing I’m sure of.
But I don’t know how to make
people understand my
situation.
I do not have schizophrenia
— I have reactive
What This Reveals /
Indicates
triggers; emphasizes life
events (not psychiatric
illness) as the cause,
which is consistent with
stress-related responses.
Clearly differentiates
between schizophrenia and
trauma-based stress
reactions; shows insight
and a reasoned
understanding of personal
mental state.
Highlights systemic
detention issues; raises
concerns about
institutional abuse;
patient demonstrates
awareness of time and
sequence of events.
Reveals omission or
suppression of critical
external support
information; patient
provides logical,
evidence-based claims of
institutional negligence.
Expresses disappointment
without paranoia; shows
capacity for reality
testing and emotional
reflection.
Demonstrates cultural and
language barriers rather
than psychiatric delusion;
reveals rational
self-awareness and
communication challenges.
Uses psychological
terminology to explain her
English Translation
Original Chinese
Statement
理障碍，我可以解
释我为什么是应急
性心理障碍。
你可以读我的病历
来证实我是自愿住
院的……我也认为
这是非法的，这是
非法囚禁我在医
院。
What This Reveals /
Indicates
psychological stress
disorder. I can explain why
it is reactive
psychological stress.
You can read my medical
records and confirm that I
was hospitalized
voluntarily… And I
believe this was illegal —
it was unlawful detention in
a hospital.
condition; shows
understanding of diagnosis
and capacity for
reflective reasoning.
Demonstrates awareness of
medical procedures and
legal concerns; makes a
reasoned argument
supported by
documentation, reflecting
clear logic and reality
orientation.