> That night 13 years ago, I did hospitalize my patient who thought he was a prophet, and he received treatment that he had not consented to. I never found out

> That night 13 years ago, I did hospitalize my patient who thought he was a prophet, and he received treatment that he had not consented to. I never found out what happened to him. I think about him often; I question my decision each time I do. Regardless of whether she was right to commit the person to treatment -- how did she not follow up on this? That shouldn't be the end of the article. Why didn't she follow up? If she thinks about it she was obviously interested on some level. Was she legally prevented from following up? Shouldn't follow up be required?