Edit: To those finding this comment needlessly antagonistic, there's a danger in sugarcoating that this is the wrong place for people in immediate psychological distress. If a critically wounded patient turned up at a GP's office, it would be actively damaging to say "you've come to the right place, we'll treat you here". Without labelling the parent poster as such, would you as part of an internet community want to assume responsility for someone at risk of self-harm, or at risk of suffering further psychological trauma? If not, you've got to tell them in no unclear terms.

And precisely where in this analogy does the GP have a moral responsibility to compare himself hyperbolically to a benevolent Nigerian prince for the purpose of sarcastically dismissing the patients self assessment of intelligence?

I put it to you that any perception that you were being needlessly antagonistic is related to the parts of your comment that are not the careful referral to a more appropriate venue for treatment. In fact, you seem to have used a subverted 'sandwich technique'. You open with some antagonism, sneak in the appropriate message then follow up with some more needless antagonism.

(I actually didn't vote down the parent until I saw this edit. This justification attempt is appalling, oblivious, pretentious and various other negative labels related to me thinking it is bad.)