case it's mentioned endeavor b which then provides they actually guidance to the trial court i would also argue that lisa p earlier decision by this court also provides guidance on suffering i obviously that runs for a trial sessions so again those are specifically designed to ready her individual problems certainly the individual counseling is individual items to so it's not just general group things that everyone gets to and again if she's doing the individual sessions with any of those three in you know that is specific to her but we do we know when she was provided including the doctor says you're given it when you can get it which is also the appropriate time to that is when they are offering those alternatives to medication so now how would the alternatives be don't they have to be tailored to the medication and that she is being given what they recommend for her always to be meaningful the alternatives have to be tailored to her specific mental health needs and those are addressed in the beginning with the less or less restrictive alternatives and then when those fail to be effective she's still there after considerable period of time of trying to do those and she's only accepting them or not on a regular basis so basis well excuse me but once the petition this far out asking that she be medicated in one or several fashions how does it say where she's given anything that says this medication is only given in alternatives to this this this this and this and that's why we gave you that printed pamphlet when you arrived is it explained that way or  does it simply say as i think it might you need medication because the response did not raise the issue of the written materials regarding the medications so i did not study that as thoroughly as i did the documentation that was actually provided to her here we have just testimony in the nothing in the record will we have dr the doctor's testimony that the written materials was given to her the statute is somehow we have no judicial notice of you know as evidence at the hearing this court could not consider it if you were adding their requirement you are adding something to the legislation that the legislature has not done they don't have a written requirement for those written materials or they all had prior has that those written materials be included now they do have or quite a bit of the power of attorney if it exists be included so clearly the medications but that it's going on for years the legislature has never amended the statute the right choir in this sort of written information be provided on the record they require the doctors testimony here we have the doctors this particular petition to be filed alone and i believe it's the fact that she had been there for a considerable period of time i don't i can't remember how close the two incidents where she was require the less restrictive alternatives on so then let's go back to just to see us question and then it is if that's what triggered the it in recollection that's what triggered the petition why wouldn't  there be a discussion with her in materials in writing and something she can see that indicates this is why we are persevering being these alternatives because you have not used the and there should be some information to her what the side effects would be and the only way we're going from all it says is we're going from this today to different doses in the doses go up rather significantly sufficiency of the written materials for the medications i know in prior court cases they have rejected where they just give the defendant earth sorry the respondents you know the drug you mr the manufacturers description because they said it's not specific enough and can treat several conditions so since the respondent did not raise this issue i have to and i think it's a reasonable inference for all of us that those written materials regarding this i tried the medications were sufficient and again i already knew that the information regarding the less restricted is in compliance with the state of cheat the doctor said he gave her the and benefits my point is the risk in benefits language usually is used when you're talking about medication the risks to taking a particular medication and the benefits from taking a medication that language issues really different then saying that these are alternatives to the medication so i would submit based on what you've read now certainly go back and reread that i'm not sure what he was talking about there when he said it was that terminology in the prior hinges i think since the doctor had already listed what the less restrictive kinds of treatments that medication were and that's the judge's turn that phrasing of that question on seventy three then since the actual services are listed then to complete that information you need then of course there's always the opportunity to cross examine and a good while this is the respondent you know operating pro se and never the cases mention respondent the first date and asks to proceed pro se the trial judge continues today she can consult with your attorney which is exactly what is supposed to happen they come back on the second day which  going to do her direct in cross examination and if the respondent wanted to call her in his case in her case he would do so that day so that she minutes when those first witness is home she goes along towards the conclusion of that first witnesses testimony she starts have some problem with objections  sorry ok i'll try to do it from memory this is blake offers do you want me to represent you and ms beverly response is if you will listen to what needs to to be going forward so it datapoint barely this plea come back the trial judge asked beverly do you have any more questions for this witness beverly says no the it not incumbent on the judge at their particular time to inquire of the responded as to what her desires are with respect so i think that's explained in the judge's comment a little further on page where exactly and she is not sure hesitation in requesting counsel she did that the first couple days at the conclusion when she is being advised to the rates on appeal she has no hesitation in asking for counsel on appeal so she's clearly capable and aware of the act she can use less money so yes yes and the judge gave her as gras an invitation as i have ever seen with that the judge who knows the history and he'll get questions for about self representation and that goes on for several pages she gets and she wants to represent herself even more telling when she is cool when she is getting ready to testify on her own behalf the trial judge asked mrs blake if she has discussed her testimony with the respondent there are some fifth amendment concerns because of ever since this lady has talked to the respondent she has wanted to represent herself i think that's very telling all the way along she is wanting to replace an inner self and in the trial judge has you know obviously she she passed her fitness classes this is so it gets to be a mess in the facts in this case because we got two different we got a criminal case go on outside of this with the mental health case going  to represent me if you listen to my comments or you listen to my questions and isn't it likely that this what she would have sent to the judge yes i want this break to represent me as long as she listens to me now from everything that we know from this record she wanted them to ask me different questions than they were willing to ask and thence is that a suspicion on them or is it just that this is the way she wanted the case to proceed i