#3 Search psychological disorder diagnosis methodology reliability
#8 Search blind study mental health
#7 Search blind validation studies mental health diagnosis
#5 Search blind study mental health diagnosis

I have yet to scratch the surface of the recommended citations, but using the above phrasing, PubMED has so far found none, no blind study that validates the distinguishing of healthy individuals from psychotic individuals.

I found one study correlating clinical diagnosis with diagnosis per a certain patient questionnaire. [And those Phds called .34 to .56 a "moderate to high correlation" - Ha!]

No: I want a *written* test that can be administered then graded and assessed by ANY certified INDEPENDENT scientific facility/lab -- a test that will VOUCH UNEQUIVOCALLY that the person (depending on which variant test(s) are performed) can distinguish Right from Wrong, and/or has unimpaired mental acuity, knowledge, wits. But of course such a test cannot necessarily identify disorders and is not intended to... but it can be used for an *objective* measure as to whether a full-blooded American has the right to publicly defend himself before a jury of his peers against heedless and unfounded allegations. We can ill afford to allow the shrinks' PERSONAL biases & vendettas to taint that process, as they INEVITABLY would (NOT to mention the psychotherapists' SEXUAL leanings)!

Anyone who deigns to argue against the word "inevitably" in that last sentence is, I swear, on a fool's mission. Tell it to Catholic choir boys!

[edit] Shrinks owe it ALL to Darkness. If they ever had to prove their allegations of mental illness to a jury, in the light of hard evidence, they'd be hard pressed to make a case and have it stick. Shrinks's so-called 'success'? they owe it 100% to Darkness, to black-balling, to a single sheet of paper, withered from decades of aging, but revered nevertheless -- revered above all else and revered beyond all rationality. The CHEAT-SHEET: that's the entire ball game.