they're a bit loopy about the methods (?)

I once went with a psych tech friend to his 'place of work'. As I wandered about, noticing the interactions - had a few conversations with folks, some of whom were 'inmates' and others allegedly caretakers.

I know this is a cliche. Yet verily I say unto thee; several times over a period of several hours, I had to look up my friend and ask him if so-and-so was an inmate or a 'care'taker. (They purposely did not dress in any special uniform - nor for obvious reasons.. could I 'ask directly').

Naturally I had too little information or experience of the individuals - to imagine how several of these persons might behave on the outside. But two of the ones I thought least likely to cope -- were indeed not 'inmates'. My friend only mildly chuckled.. it wasn't the first time this had come up.

My view is that chance plays a much larger part in who is to be incarcerated than.. anything like a reasonable litmus for reasonableness. Any *one* might be stuck there (at least ~10 yrs. ago when I visited), given just a few improbable events and personalities doing the "interviewing".

..and so it goes, according to Kurt V.


Ashton

Two shrinks pass on the street.. One says, you're fine; how am I?