For what it is worth - there are legally relevant things for civil commitments (in my jurisdiction) and there are things important to a client that are not legally relevant. If it is not legally relevant, I try to explain why, but either because there is emotion involved or because it does not make sense (that does not always prevent it from being legally relevant) the client does not agree or believe me - and when I don't bring it up the client does not understand why. Also, sometimes if a client gives me 3 pages of stuff - I know I won't be able to go through it all in the time allocated for the hearing and it is usually not helpful for what I really have to prove in order to win. Finally, we had different periods of time for a person to be held against their will - the shorter periods of time (two weeks, a month) are where the court will almost always err on the side of keeping the person because to an outsider - what is two weeks of safety versus the risk of letting someone out too early (no judge wants to be on the front page of the news because the person they released killed themselves or someone else).
And here at least, the bar for the md/hospital/petitioner to win out over an alleged incapacitated person is extremely low.
I am not saying it is right, or fair, or just -but it is the way it goes, here at least.