benefits and alternative forms of treatment especially in cases where the war disagrees with this form of treatment on and on the seat of illinois actually interprets history as the section through petition must be filed so have a proper consent one has to have proper information about the respond if it's an alternative forms of treatment on and you know acceptance  they proceed with that they have to the car he has rights they have to ask the party if you consent to it or not is there any evidence in the record in this case that this guardian consented yet she actually purchased it here right at the trial so you proceed with the hearing occurred and the guardian testified sounds like a good idea to me write in both instances your position years there ought be convincing the record that written notification though there was an absence of the testimony about dosages about to these medications the and the court still order the dosages and the ministry of all the medication  people with mental illness don't want to take the drugs and they've got their lying made up the rock going to take the drugs and oftentimes the doctor testifies they can't understand at this point why the medication would be helpful to them and there is that exception in the code that you have to give them the information to the extent that they can comprehend it basically and in this case this person most recent symptom of how sometimes they are and some cases that don't go to trial sometimes  particular responding it's something that we've already ruled on in fact so we've already found an exception to alfred a j provided writing that yeah we said you know we understand  person is ill they probably need the medication but jump through the hoops hoops were created by the legislature and if it's insulting to even say jump through the hoops because that makes it sound like it really doesn't matter it's just a formality it isn't just a formality it's a procedure gets meant to be followed to guarantee that liberty interests of those less fortunate than us who need the services actually are provided them in appropriate and honest way that meets their liberty interest and meets their human rights so you know i want to cut you off of it since doctor left to never really explain it in this case it was testimony that the risks and benefits were explained several times to through the respondent and that he was given a written list of side effects also there was common law record needed in evidence can be considered evidence but the claim in this fission read along with the testimony i think can lead to a reasonable inference that the respondent like the capacity of th e involuntary ministration was authorized here as for the guardian issue playing language of to one of two states the guardian only needs information if they're seeking if the state is seeking their consent warden and the guardian agree on the medication it's saying that this section is presumably used when a legal guardian has the sole responsibility so whether the recipient should get the medication instead of the recipient cell this is the way the  time using the drug there was testimony that the doctor observed him then responded when he was on drugs and observed how he acted when he wasn't on the pros so i would say i would submit that the if there is no feasible alternative to the proposed treatment there there can be no writing can't make one especially since especially since dr louise testimony based on s you have many more questions for me i think not thank you thank you effects are given and the petition itself said that room information was about the benefits and rest but did not mention any thing about alternative forms of treatment could you address the argument that the guardian to consent to its treatment then you have to give that written notice of the side effects and benefits and alternatives to the card but if it's a consenting guardian and they non consenting responded you have to go  you know and that actually kind of like once the state pointed that out i was like but looking at the whole purpose of the code the carman always has to be reforming the senate for treatment even if the war