sleepless Garnuft Here is a scenario for you. My father has a form of dementia, in that he was slowing down. He did have a fall, brought on by a urinary infection, which he got when he fell in the bath, mother knowing he wasn't very well didn't bother going to the doctors as its 'not worth it, people like that deteriorate'. He had another serious fall hospitalised with a blood infection taboot! My father's dementia was slight! - he had shakes - worsened with the constant talking at him and around him that he was incapable to the point that he got submissive and believed it. BUT when in the company of someone for any length of time that supported him, his trembles stopped, he became assertive and was more capable than he was 2 weeks beforehand. So, what if, the diagnosis of my father is based on the findings of my mother and siblings? to them he is a vegetable! BUT I and hubby see a different person. And we are the bad guys! So, scenario and medical treatment phase. WHO hurts him the most, those exagerating, or those telling the truth? Forget family politics, this is a persons life. one side know the truth, the other side is exagerating for their own purposes. We know we are telling the truth! So medicate ------- The vegetable? - or the side that have coherent conversations that are pushed to one side as the mental capacity act,and whom it is there to protect, can be overidden in 'certain quarters' by 'close knit communities'. Medicate! - There in lies the problem. Because every medic/ nurse is stating differing forms of dementia, based on a one sided input. There are always 2 sides and the side which has coherent talks is dismissed!