What is NOT an implication when someone is involuntarily restrained?

When someone is involuntarily restrained, the situation is often complex and fraught with legal and ethical considerations. The idea that it always involves legal justification is misleading. While there may be instances where law enforcement or medical professionals have the authority to restrain someone for safety reasons, this does not mean that every case of involuntary restraint operates within a clear legal framework or that all actions taken are justified under the law.

Involuntary restraint can sometimes occur without proper legal grounds, leading to potential abuse or overreach. Situations may arise where individuals are held against their will without the needed legal authority, and thus, the assertion that it always involves legal justification is inaccurate.

The other implications, such as threats of serious injury, the potential for elements of servitude, and the exposure of the victim to risk, are indeed relevant considerations when discussing the ramifications of involuntary restraint. These implications underline the seriousness and potential consequences of restraining someone without their consent.