It is useless having any type of dialogue with you because you change your original post by exaggerating the facts and respond to me by adding facts that are contrary to the original post. So yes, sir the facts changed.

If you want empathy don't title a post "suing a psychiatrist." People will REASONABLY think you want an opinion on whether you have a case. Not only do you not have a case, no lawyer in their right mind would take the case for fear they would be reprimanded for filing a frivolous law suit. You somehow forgot, that you are the only one who gets to present evidence. The doctor has the nurses and psych techs on his side. In addition everything is documented. Who do you think a jury will believe an angry patient or a respected doctor? Also the lawyer will note inconsistencies and outright lies in your stories when he tells you that is not enough to make a claim just like you did when I explained why your case was a loser.

Everyone knows there is a power differential between a client and a psychiatrist. It is absurd to think that the power differential is greater for you. Nor does this have any relevance to the winnability of your case but you can delude yourself into thinking so.

Winnability has nothing to do with your experience. You can delude yourself into thinking that you are only aggrieved if you can win a case, but that's not true.

I don't really care how you perceive my post or if it was useful. You wanted details on why I thought you had a losing case and I gave it to you. If you want empathy for something that is a bit of an overreaction on your part title the post I want empathy and not opinions because the only opinions that matter are mind.