{
  "schema_version": "uw.geo.author-local.v1",
  "catalog_id": "SYS-006",
  "language": "en",
  "revision": 1,
  "headline": "Living outside an institution when movement is restricted",
  "description": "Everyday action under movement restrictions, compulsory checks and active supervision.",
  "master_filename": "ARTICLE_EN.md",
  "master_sha256": "8ffa148c9ba4a6c5ecb5e83c724795df0eefca35015096b71cf78dd9dff61277",
  "short_answer": "Life outside an institution can involve active movement restrictions and compulsory checks. Attendance may involve travel, time and resources; arrival, consideration and decision are different results. Reporting an obstacle is not permission. The article selects no exception and does not turn practical adaptation into approval of the regime.",
  "claims": [
    {
      "id": "C01",
      "type": "author_observation",
      "text": "Being at home outside an institution establishes no freedom of movement; a general label does not describe the entire regime.",
      "source_ids": [],
      "article_sections": [
        "I. Outside an institution does not mean unrestricted"
      ],
      "limitations": [
        "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
        "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
        "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
        "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "C02",
      "type": "interpretation",
      "text": "Tokyo Rules adopted in 1990 concern criminal justice; their collective term includes suspected, accused and sentenced persons without establishing reader guilt.",
      "source_ids": [
        "S1"
      ],
      "article_sections": [
        "I. Outside an institution does not mean unrestricted"
      ],
      "limitations": [
        "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
        "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
        "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
        "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "C03",
      "type": "practice",
      "text": "Similar experience and confident replies grant no permission; clarification and modification are distinct results.",
      "source_ids": [],
      "article_sections": [
        "II. A current condition differs from habit and another person's account"
      ],
      "limitations": [
        "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
        "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
        "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
        "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "C04",
      "type": "author_observation",
      "text": "Compulsory attendance may involve travel and waiting; arrival, check, explanation and full completion differ.",
      "source_ids": [],
      "article_sections": [
        "III. A compulsory check takes more time than the conversation itself"
      ],
      "limitations": [
        "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
        "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
        "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
        "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "C05",
      "type": "interpretation",
      "text": "Practical possibility needs actual resources; absence does not automatically cancel an obligation and announced help establishes no actual access.",
      "source_ids": [
        "S1"
      ],
      "article_sections": [
        "V. Practical possibility depends on resources as well as willingness"
      ],
      "limitations": [
        "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
        "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
        "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
        "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "C06",
      "type": "interpretation",
      "text": "Agreed support grants no general household control; privacy norms do not establish actual protection or the lawful scope of a local request.",
      "source_ids": [
        "S1"
      ],
      "article_sections": [
        "VII. Supervision of one person does not place everyone under their regime"
      ],
      "limitations": [
        "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
        "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
        "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
        "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "C07",
      "type": "interpretation",
      "text": "An obstacle, notification and legal assessment differ; Rule 14 guarantees neither absence of consequences nor leniency.",
      "source_ids": [
        "S1"
      ],
      "article_sections": [
        "VIII. An obstacle, its notification and legal assessment are different events"
      ],
      "limitations": [
        "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
        "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
        "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
        "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "C08",
      "type": "interpretation",
      "text": "Expected change differs from an effective decision; a missing further check or hoped-for date does not establish that supervision ended.",
      "source_ids": [
        "S1"
      ],
      "article_sections": [
        "IX. Duration and change require actual clarity"
      ],
      "limitations": [
        "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
        "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
        "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
        "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "C09",
      "type": "author_observation",
      "text": "Ordinary tasks remain; a formal hour differs from usable opportunity and calmness is no condition of respect.",
      "source_ids": [],
      "article_sections": [
        "VI. The rest of the day remains between compulsory events"
      ],
      "limitations": [
        "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
        "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
        "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
        "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "C10",
      "type": "interpretation",
      "text": "Epictetus and Ecclesiastes supply bounded comparisons: preparation justifies no roughness, poetry authorises no restriction, adaptation is not approval.",
      "source_ids": [
        "S2",
        "S3"
      ],
      "article_sections": [
        "X. Planning for obstacles does not require justifying a restriction"
      ],
      "limitations": [
        "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
        "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
        "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
        "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
      ]
    }
  ],
  "questions": [
    {
      "id": "Q01",
      "q": "Does living at home mean I can freely choose a journey?",
      "a": "No such conclusion. Current individual conditions matter; a label does not establish hours, territory or exceptions.",
      "claim_ids": [
        "C01"
      ],
      "source_ids": [],
      "article_sections": [
        "I. Outside an institution does not mean unrestricted"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "Q02",
      "q": "Does someone else’s similar experience authorise the same action?",
      "a": "No. Their decision may differ; information and authority to permit are distinct.",
      "claim_ids": [
        "C03"
      ],
      "source_ids": [],
      "article_sections": [
        "II. A current condition differs from habit and another person's account"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "Q03",
      "q": "Does arrival complete the whole obligation?",
      "a": "Not necessarily. Arrival, check, explanation and actual result are distinct events.",
      "claim_ids": [
        "C04"
      ],
      "source_ids": [],
      "article_sections": [
        "III. A compulsory check takes more time than the conversation itself"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "Q04",
      "q": "Does reporting a problem change the condition?",
      "a": "Not automatically. Sending, receipt and a competent decision differ; silence is not declared permission.",
      "claim_ids": [
        "C07"
      ],
      "source_ids": [
        "S1"
      ],
      "article_sections": [
        "VIII. An obstacle, its notification and legal assessment are different events"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "Q05",
      "q": "Do Tokyo Rules guarantee no consequences?",
      "a": "No. Standard, scope and examination are distinguished; the domestic outcome is not established.",
      "claim_ids": [
        "C07"
      ],
      "source_ids": [
        "S1"
      ],
      "article_sections": [
        "VIII. An obstacle, its notification and legal assessment are different events"
      ]
    },
    {
      "id": "Q06",
      "q": "Does planning mean considering the regime fair?",
      "a": "No. Preparation, practical adaptation and moral approval differ; neither faith nor calmness is compulsory.",
      "claim_ids": [
        "C09",
        "C10"
      ],
      "source_ids": [
        "S2",
        "S3"
      ],
      "article_sections": [
        "X. Planning for obstacles does not require justifying a restriction",
        "VI. The rest of the day remains between compulsory events"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "sources": [
    {
      "id": "S1",
      "author": "UN General Assembly",
      "title": "United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-custodial Measures (Tokyo Rules)",
      "url": "https://lawphil.net/international/treaties/unsnrnm.html",
      "edition": "Resolution45/110,1990-12-14; primary text hosted by Lawphil",
      "read_scope": "Selected complete1.1–1.5,2.1–2.6,3.1–3.12,10.1–10.4,11.1–11.2,12.1–12.4,14.1–14.6; exact lines in RESEARCH; no domestic implementation audit",
      "read_date": "2026-10-20",
      "rights_status": "UNKNOWN",
      "role": "Criminal-justice standard,not every restriction or domestic procedure; no guilt/permission/compliance finding"
    },
    {
      "id": "S2",
      "author": "Epictetus / English credited to Elizabeth Carter",
      "title": "Enchiridion4",
      "url": "https://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html",
      "edition": "Internet Classics Archive",
      "read_scope": "Title/translator18–21; complete section4,33–34; no whole work or Greek original",
      "read_date": "2026-10-20",
      "rights_status": "UNKNOWN_FOR_WEB_EDITION",
      "role": "Bounded action/conditions comparison,not victim blame,invulnerability or approval of supervision"
    },
    {
      "id": "S3",
      "author": "Ecclesiastes / KJV",
      "title": "Ecclesiastes3:1–8",
      "url": "https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes%203%3A1-8&version=KJV",
      "edition": "Bible Gateway KJV",
      "read_scope": "All8selected verses49–62,KJV/PublicDomain68–70; not full chapter",
      "read_date": "2026-10-20",
      "rights_status": "KJV_PAGE_MARKED_PUBLIC_DOMAIN_GLOBAL_JURISDICTIONS_NOT_ASSESSED",
      "role": "Religious/poetic time image,not lawfulness,benefit,ending-date or violence/urgent-delay authority"
    }
  ],
  "retrieval_limits": [
    "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
    "Tokyo Rules concern criminal justice; no domestic legal conclusion, guilt or actual implementation established.",
    "Anna is fictional; no technical bypass, concealed movement, fabricated confirmation or silence as consent proposed.",
    "Necessary urgent help does not await ordinary administration; no medical exemption or right to cross a boundary established.",
    "No guaranteed outcome, compulsory emotion, belief, justification of rough treatment or divine approval of a restriction."
  ],
  "machine_content": {
    "summary": [
      {
        "text": "Life outside an institution can involve active movement restrictions and compulsory checks. Attendance may involve travel, time and resources; arrival, consideration and decision are different results. Reporting an obstacle is not permission. The article selects no exception and does not turn practical adaptation into approval of the regime.",
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b002",
            "quote": "Living outside an institution does not always mean choosing freely where to go and when to return. A restricted area, compulsory attendance, check or requirement to remain at an address can shape the day. Ordinary needs continue within a specific active arrangement. This article examines everyday life under such restrictions and supervision. It determines neither domestic rules, guilt, an authorised route nor the consequences of an individual breach. It offers no circumvention, self-declared exception or equation of a request with permission. Technical monitoring, work and care schedules, and detailed clarification or review of instructions have neighbouring articles. The focus here is the actual conditions of an action: time, travel, resources, authority and result. An international standard has its own scope and does not replace domestic law. Philosophical and religious comparisons require neither approval of a restriction nor explanation of every difficulty through attitude. A person's life remains larger than the regime constraining it."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b013",
            "quote": "An appointment can look brief to someone counting only the meeting. For the person attending, preparation, permitted travel, transport, waiting and return may also matter. These stages are not equally controllable. Planning only the conversation can conceal how much of the day the compulsory event actually takes. This concerns conditions of action, without proving slowness or insufficient motivation in the person attending."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b015",
            "quote": "Waiting at the location also does not mean nothing happened. Someone may arrive without completing a check, or complete it without receiving needed clarification. Available confirmation should concern the actual stage. Covert filming or special evidence production is not required. The word “done” should not collapse arrival, consideration, answer and completion of an entire obligation where they concern different events and results."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b039",
            "quote": "Anna sends a message about a problem but does not know whether it was read. Sending is established in the example; agreement to change an obligation is not. No fabricated confirmation, invented excuse or silence treated as permission is proposed. Using an available prescribed reporting process cannot guarantee a favourable result. Actual legal significance depends on circumstances and applicable rules rather than confidence supplied by general writing."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b053",
            "quote": "For one forthcoming compulsory action, where possible, distinguish its current basis, time, place and necessary conditions. Someone else's similar experience, habit or hope cannot replace information about one's own regime. An unclear condition needs an appropriate authorised answer. This article selects no route, permission or exception and cannot determine applicability from a general label alone."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b051",
            "quote": "The philosophical question and poetic image form no common programme guaranteeing wellbeing. Neither belief, agreement with both authors nor acceptance of a regime as destiny is required. Someone can describe a day accurately while seeking appropriate help concerning injustice. Practical adaptation and moral approval are different relationships. One must not be attributed automatically because the other is visible in an effort to manage everyday life."
          }
        ]
      }
    ],
    "topics": [
      {
        "text": "An active restriction needs one’s own basis distinguished from someone else’s similar experience.",
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b008",
            "quote": "A day depends on specific conditions, rather than “I can do almost nothing” or “they usually allow it”. Time, place, type of check and the arrangement for reporting a changed circumstance may matter. The article supplies no universal list. What matters is distinguishing what actually applies, what is assumed from someone else's experience and what still needs appropriate clarification."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b009",
            "quote": "An acquaintance tells Anna that a similar regime allows a brief outing for an everyday task. Similarity does not establish identical decisions. The account may be sincere while concerning someone else or an earlier arrangement. Checking the actual basis need not reject human support. It preserves the distinction between a sympathetic suggestion, information and authority to permit an action in this particular case."
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "text": "Compulsory attendance may involve preparation, permitted travel, waiting and distinct results.",
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b013",
            "quote": "An appointment can look brief to someone counting only the meeting. For the person attending, preparation, permitted travel, transport, waiting and return may also matter. These stages are not equally controllable. Planning only the conversation can conceal how much of the day the compulsory event actually takes. This concerns conditions of action, without proving slowness or insufficient motivation in the person attending."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b015",
            "quote": "Waiting at the location also does not mean nothing happened. Someone may arrive without completing a check, or complete it without receiving needed clarification. Available confirmation should concern the actual stage. Covert filming or special evidence production is not required. The word “done” should not collapse arrival, consideration, answer and completion of an entire obligation where they concern different events and results."
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "text": "An obstacle, its notification and a decision on consequences are distinct.",
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b038",
            "quote": "Even a prepared day can encounter delay or changed circumstances. The event should not be replaced by an assumed intention. What happened, and what is known about timing, action and response? This requires neither proof of perfection nor an unsafe detailed journal. It keeps the obstacle, attempt to communicate and competent assessment of consequences distinct, without treating any one as automatic evidence of the others."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b039",
            "quote": "Anna sends a message about a problem but does not know whether it was read. Sending is established in the example; agreement to change an obligation is not. No fabricated confirmation, invented excuse or silence treated as permission is proposed. Using an available prescribed reporting process cannot guarantee a favourable result. Actual legal significance depends on circumstances and applicable rules rather than confidence supplied by general writing."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b040",
            "quote": "Rule 14 of the [Tokyo Rules](https://lawphil.net/international/treaties/unsnrnm.html) addresses breach through a competent authority and examination of facts rather than automatic custody. This is a standard within its stated scope, without guaranteeing a lenient decision. It promises no absence of consequences and invites no experiment through noncompliance. The normative reference, domestic law and professional assessment of an individual event remain separate matters for the reader."
          }
        ]
      }
    ],
    "claims": [
      {
        "text": "Being at home outside an institution establishes no freedom of movement; a general label does not describe the entire regime.",
        "status": "author_observation",
        "source_ids": [],
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b003",
            "quote": "Someone may live at home, see loved ones and use familiar possessions while lacking the freedom to leave or choose a journey's timing. These facts can coexist. Comparing conditions only by the presence of prison walls misses movement and attendance requirements. “You are not in prison” may consequently fail to answer the actual question of what can be done during this day."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b004",
            "quote": "Consider Anna, a fictional adult under movement restrictions with compulsory checks. She cannot simply move an appointment because a household task took longer. The existence of supervision also does not tell us its entire content. This article does not know her particular areas, hours, contact arrangements or exceptions. The scene distinguishes practical questions from legal findings that a general label alone cannot establish."
          }
        ],
        "qualifiers": []
      },
      {
        "text": "Tokyo Rules adopted in 1990 concern criminal justice; their collective term includes suspected, accused and sentenced persons without establishing reader guilt.",
        "status": "interpretation",
        "source_ids": [
          "S1"
        ],
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b005",
            "quote": "The [UN Tokyo Rules](https://lawphil.net/international/treaties/unsnrnm.html), adopted in 1990, concern non-custodial measures within criminal justice. Their scope does not automatically include every migration, public-health or private restriction. The source's collective terminology includes suspected, accused and sentenced people; it establishes no reader's guilt. This international normative reference supplies neither a ready domestic procedure nor evidence that a particular regime complies with it."
          }
        ],
        "qualifiers": [
          {
            "text": "No domestic procedure, applicability to every migration/public-health/private restriction or compliance finding.",
            "evidence": [
              {
                "block_id": "b005",
                "quote": "The [UN Tokyo Rules](https://lawphil.net/international/treaties/unsnrnm.html), adopted in 1990, concern non-custodial measures within criminal justice. Their scope does not automatically include every migration, public-health or private restriction. The source's collective terminology includes suspected, accused and sentenced people; it establishes no reader's guilt. This international normative reference supplies neither a ready domestic procedure nor evidence that a particular regime complies with it."
              }
            ]
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "text": "Similar experience and confident replies grant no permission; clarification and modification are distinct results.",
        "status": "practice",
        "source_ids": [],
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b009",
            "quote": "An acquaintance tells Anna that a similar regime allows a brief outing for an everyday task. Similarity does not establish identical decisions. The account may be sincere while concerning someone else or an earlier arrangement. Checking the actual basis need not reject human support. It preserves the distinction between a sympathetic suggestion, information and authority to permit an action in this particular case."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b011",
            "quote": "Where a document is available, its current version differs from an earlier one. A later reply may clarify something or actually change a condition; those are separate results. A confident speaker's tone also establishes no authority. Everyday planning needs an identifiable basis. Unknown information should remain unknown, rather than expanding one's permitted action according to whichever version is most convenient or reassuring."
          }
        ],
        "qualifiers": []
      },
      {
        "text": "Compulsory attendance may involve travel and waiting; arrival, check, explanation and full completion differ.",
        "status": "author_observation",
        "source_ids": [],
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b013",
            "quote": "An appointment can look brief to someone counting only the meeting. For the person attending, preparation, permitted travel, transport, waiting and return may also matter. These stages are not equally controllable. Planning only the conversation can conceal how much of the day the compulsory event actually takes. This concerns conditions of action, without proving slowness or insufficient motivation in the person attending."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b015",
            "quote": "Waiting at the location also does not mean nothing happened. Someone may arrive without completing a check, or complete it without receiving needed clarification. Available confirmation should concern the actual stage. Covert filming or special evidence production is not required. The word “done” should not collapse arrival, consideration, answer and completion of an entire obligation where they concern different events and results."
          }
        ],
        "qualifiers": [
          {
            "text": "Planning guarantees no timeliness; outcome alone establishes no intention.",
            "evidence": [
              {
                "block_id": "b017",
                "quote": "Planning for travel can help organise a day without guaranteeing timeliness. Transport, queues and other people's work cannot be completely controlled. An obstacle needs accurate description through an appropriate arrangement; legal assessment remains separate. A good plan proves no absence of breach. An unsuccessful outcome alone also establishes neither lack of effort nor intentional disregard of a requirement, and should not be used to fill those missing facts."
              }
            ]
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "text": "Practical possibility needs actual resources; absence does not automatically cancel an obligation and announced help establishes no actual access.",
        "status": "interpretation",
        "source_ids": [
          "S1"
        ],
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b023",
            "quote": "A condition may require communication, travel, a document or physical attendance. “Just do it” creates no absent resource. That also does not automatically cancel an obligation. The obstacle needs separate attention. Naming what is missing is more precise than assuming unwillingness to cooperate, or the opposite assumption that any difficulty authorises a different course. The practical fact and its legal meaning remain distinct."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b026",
            "quote": "The [Tokyo Rules](https://lawphil.net/international/treaties/unsnrnm.html) address assistance and practical conditions in implementing measures. This is a normative reference, not a promise that transport, communication or support has been provided. A service on a list does not establish that it can be used today. Conditions may remain between an announced resource and actual use, requiring attention to the person's current situation rather than assumptions about general availability."
          }
        ],
        "qualifiers": [
          {
            "text": "Immediate danger needs urgent local help without administrative delay; no boundary permission is created.",
            "evidence": [
              {
                "block_id": "b055",
                "quote": "Immediate danger calls for appropriate local urgent assistance without delay for an ordinary administrative step. The article establishes no medical exemption or right to leave a particular boundary. Clinical assistance, notification to an authorised recipient and legal assessment have different tasks; a result in one cannot stand in for the others or establish permission that has not actually been determined."
              }
            ]
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "text": "Agreed support grants no general household control; privacy norms do not establish actual protection or the lawful scope of a local request.",
        "status": "interpretation",
        "source_ids": [
          "S1"
        ],
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b034",
            "quote": "A relative may agree to remind Anna about a known time. This does not make them a supervision officer. A reminder, representation and decision-making are different roles. Agreed support creates no automatic authority to control every movement, read messages or demand every feeling be reported. Technical monitoring's family-privacy questions belong elsewhere; one helpful agreement creates no general authority over another person's life."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b035",
            "quote": "Rules 3.9–3.12 of the [Tokyo Rules](https://lawphil.net/international/treaties/unsnrnm.html) address dignity, limits of restriction, privacy and personal records. This normative text proves no conversation actually protected. It also cannot determine the lawful scope of a request in a particular home. General grounds and individual conditions differ, preventing both a promise of absolute secrecy and acceptance of every request as unlimited simply because supervision exists."
          }
        ],
        "qualifiers": [
          {
            "text": "Threats are not justified by supervision; no risky confrontation or guaranteed safe exit is prescribed.",
            "evidence": [
              {
                "block_id": "b037",
                "quote": "Pressure or threats within a relationship do not become acceptable methods of maintaining order merely because supervision exists. No risky confrontation or universally safe exit is prescribed. Compliance, safety at home and appropriate assistance are separate questions. Resolving one establishes no resolution of the others. Personal coercion cannot be declared lawful solely because it is presented in the language of discipline or care."
              }
            ]
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "text": "An obstacle, notification and legal assessment differ; Rule 14 guarantees neither absence of consequences nor leniency.",
        "status": "interpretation",
        "source_ids": [
          "S1"
        ],
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b038",
            "quote": "Even a prepared day can encounter delay or changed circumstances. The event should not be replaced by an assumed intention. What happened, and what is known about timing, action and response? This requires neither proof of perfection nor an unsafe detailed journal. It keeps the obstacle, attempt to communicate and competent assessment of consequences distinct, without treating any one as automatic evidence of the others."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b039",
            "quote": "Anna sends a message about a problem but does not know whether it was read. Sending is established in the example; agreement to change an obligation is not. No fabricated confirmation, invented excuse or silence treated as permission is proposed. Using an available prescribed reporting process cannot guarantee a favourable result. Actual legal significance depends on circumstances and applicable rules rather than confidence supplied by general writing."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b040",
            "quote": "Rule 14 of the [Tokyo Rules](https://lawphil.net/international/treaties/unsnrnm.html) addresses breach through a competent authority and examination of facts rather than automatic custody. This is a standard within its stated scope, without guaranteeing a lenient decision. It promises no absence of consequences and invites no experiment through noncompliance. The normative reference, domestic law and professional assessment of an individual event remain separate matters for the reader."
          }
        ],
        "qualifiers": [
          {
            "text": "An obstacle alone establishes neither intent nor complete absence of responsibility.",
            "evidence": [
              {
                "block_id": "b041",
                "quote": "An obstacle automatically proves neither intent nor complete absence of responsibility. A positive attitude cannot replace assessment. No legal position is selected, and every delay is not declared excused. Facts should remain available without being completed through guesses. Professional help, where needed, can concern the event and its actual conditions rather than a demand to explain the person's entire character through one episode."
              }
            ]
          }
        ]
      },
      {
        "text": "Expected change differs from an effective decision; a missing further check or hoped-for date does not establish that supervision ended.",
        "status": "interpretation",
        "source_ids": [
          "S1"
        ],
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b043",
            "quote": "A restriction operates over time; its current duration matters for planning. A past date, anticipated decision and confirmed change supply different grounds. The article determines no ending from a measure's general name. Absence of another check cannot be promised to end supervision, nor can a hoped-for calendar date itself remove an obligation or authorise actions that were previously unavailable under an active condition."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b044",
            "quote": "Anna hears the arrangement may change soon. Possibility matters while differing from a decision made and taking effect. A supporter can help identify an appropriate information route without promising another authority's outcome. Until clarified, unknown information remains unknown. This does not require accepting uncertainty forever. It limits what can be asserted confidently now, while preserving the question of access to an actual answer."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b045",
            "quote": "Rules 11–12 of the [Tokyo Rules](https://lawphil.net/international/treaties/unsnrnm.html) address duration and modification through competent decisions and established provisions. They supply no ending mechanism for every domestic regime. Access to an up-to-date basis and understanding it are distinct tasks. Personal certainty, an oral forecast and an actual decision should not be presented as the same documented status or used interchangeably to plan subsequent action."
          }
        ],
        "qualifiers": []
      },
      {
        "text": "Ordinary tasks remain; a formal hour differs from usable opportunity and calmness is no condition of respect.",
        "status": "author_observation",
        "source_ids": [],
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b028",
            "quote": "A check, a limited window to leave or an awaited answer is not someone's entire life. Food, rest, household actions, relationships and other tasks remain. The article supplies no universal timetable or assumption that every gap is suitable for any work. An hour may formally exist while its position, uncertainty or resources make it unusable for the task an outside observer imagines."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b032",
            "quote": "Rest also benefits from distinguishing stages. A prescribed action may finish while another contact or reply remains pending. This establishes no duty to remain mentally occupied by supervision at every moment. No technique is promised to remove strain, nor is a correct emotion prescribed. Ordinary life retains a place within available conditions; calmness is neither a condition of respect nor proof of correct compliance."
          }
        ],
        "qualifiers": []
      },
      {
        "text": "Epictetus and Ecclesiastes supply bounded comparisons: preparation justifies no roughness, poetry authorises no restriction, adaptation is not approval.",
        "status": "interpretation",
        "source_ids": [
          "S2",
          "S3"
        ],
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b048",
            "quote": "In [*Enchiridion* 4](https://classics.mit.edu/Epictetus/epicench.html), Epictetus considers an action's nature and possible interference through a bath example. The bounded question retained here is what conditions an intended action needs. The ancient text establishes neither that harm exists only in perception nor the fairness of supervision. Its philosophical purpose supplies no medical or legal instructions for a person living under contemporary restrictions."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b049",
            "quote": "Foreseeing delay differs from justifying rough treatment. An obstacle can be anticipated without declaring it normal or deserved. Calmness cannot be demanded as proof of moral maturity, and difficulty cannot always be explained through incorrect thoughts. Preparation identifies components; it creates no absent resource and cancels no responsibility held by those deciding conditions, arranging checks or controlling access to the next stage."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b050",
            "quote": "[Ecclesiastes 3:1–8](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ecclesiastes%203%3A1-8&version=KJV) describes different times through religious poetry. It establishes no particular prohibition as timely, lawful or providentially beneficial. Neither violence nor a requirement of silence is authorised by the comparison. The limited use concerns distinct moments and tasks, rather than divine endorsement of any external authority or prediction of the date on which a restriction will end."
          },
          {
            "block_id": "b051",
            "quote": "The philosophical question and poetic image form no common programme guaranteeing wellbeing. Neither belief, agreement with both authors nor acceptance of a regime as destiny is required. Someone can describe a day accurately while seeking appropriate help concerning injustice. Practical adaptation and moral approval are different relationships. One must not be attributed automatically because the other is visible in an effort to manage everyday life."
          }
        ],
        "qualifiers": [
          {
            "text": "No common effective programme, required belief or regime accepted as destiny.",
            "evidence": [
              {
                "block_id": "b051",
                "quote": "The philosophical question and poetic image form no common programme guaranteeing wellbeing. Neither belief, agreement with both authors nor acceptance of a regime as destiny is required. Someone can describe a day accurately while seeking appropriate help concerning injustice. Practical adaptation and moral approval are different relationships. One must not be attributed automatically because the other is visible in an effort to manage everyday life."
              }
            ]
          }
        ]
      }
    ],
    "limitations": [
      {
        "text": "The article selects no route, permission or exception for a particular regime.",
        "evidence": [
          {
            "block_id": "b053",
            "quote": "For one forthcoming compulsory action, where possible, distinguish its current basis, time, place and necessary conditions. Someone else's similar experience, habit or hope cannot replace information about one's own regime. An unclear condition needs an appropriate authorised answer. This article selects no route, permission or exception and cannot determine applicability from a general label alone."
          }
        ]
      }
    ]
  },
  "evidence_blocks_filename": "BLOCKS_EN.json",
  "evidence_blocks_sha256": "ce1bdbac51700d06bbfbe17a58e038fda91e0b527720ccef2cbb08c5e6350fa0",
  "production_compatibility": "NOT_RUN",
  "server_auto_acceptance": "NOT_RUN",
  "schema_org": {
    "@context": "https://schema.org",
    "@type": "Article",
    "identifier": "UW:SYS-006:en",
    "inLanguage": "en",
    "headline": "Living outside an institution when movement is restricted",
    "author": [
      {
        "@type": "Person",
        "name": "Andrey Zarinsh"
      },
      {
        "@type": "Person",
        "name": "Maria Evilkut"
      }
    ]
  }
}