Key legal question
Whether the psychiatric deprivation of liberty met the requirements of Art. 397a CC.
Extracted holding
Yes. On the established facts, the confinement was manifestly compatible with Art. 397a para. 1 CC.
Extracted reasoning
The appellant did not challenge the cantonal findings in a manner meeting the Federal Supreme Court's requirements. Those findings bound the Court and showed a worsening mental disorder, persistent delusions, lack of insight, refusal of all psychiatric care, and a concrete self-harm risk.