the principle that a patient is just a patient, regardless of possible legal measures against him. With mutual tolerance, we can carry out all the therapeutic activities that are necessary in the ward (therapeutic communities, occupational therapy, recreational activities, contacts of the patients with their relatives, free exits, etc.), although we have to agree to the closed-door system and the fact that the approval and consent of the court is required for the permanent discharge of the patient. The partial restriction of freedom therefore applies not only to patients, but also to the therapeutic team. This is a reality that must be considered" (Kondža 1976, 59). As Kondža and Kobal (2014) pointed out, the collection “Challenges in forensic psychiatry” was published in 2014, which completely ignored the long-term practice, experience and successes of the DFSP, "which worked for over 30 years at high humane, social and professional level". To conclude with, dr. Žagar (2023) said: “In our society, everything in retrospect, even what was positive, is forgotten, and we start all over again.” Literature: • Kobal, M., & Žagar, D. (1994). An open forensic psychiatry ward organised as a therapeutic community. Therapeutic Communities, 15(4), 265–272. • Kondža, J. (1976). Svoboda in nesvoboda na oddelku za forenzično in socialno psihiatrijo. Zdravstveni obzornik, 1976 (1): 58–59. Available at: file:///C:/Users/Uporabnik/Downloads/martina-kocbek-usergroup-1976-1-589.pdf • Kondža, J., Kobal, M. (2014), Resnica o oddelku za forenzično in socialno psihiatrijo (ODSP) psihiatrične klinike v Ljubljani, not published. • Kobal, M. (1998) Trideset let oddelka za dorenzično in socialno psihiatrijo Psihiatrične klinike v Ljubljani. Revija za kriminalistiko in kriminologijo 1998 (3): 304-306. 69