Immunizations (Homeopathic Prophylaxis) 2

[David Little]

Dear Colleagues,

One of my questions about the application of homeopathic prophylaxis
by some is allowing the uneducated and/or overly fearful parent to make the
final decision about what remedies should be administered. Is it the
responsibility of the professional to assess the true health needs or the
non medically trained guardians? What if there is danger from inherited
dispositions and chronic miasms which the guardian has no understanding?
Should constitutional and anti-miasmatic treatment be delayed for years
because the guardian wants "full immunization" when that will not address
the looming internal disorders? Can we give remedies to prevent the
diseases the patient "might get" while ignoring obvious disease states they
have now? How does one balance the duty of the medical professional to
apply the truth as they understand it and the right of the guardian to
choose what they want for their own reasons?

Should the health care professional bow to the desires of the
guardians when there is statistically no threat? For example, hepatitis B
is transmitted by bodily fluids like blood and semen. The most common
transmission is the sharing needles by intravenous drug users and
unprotected sex. How many new born infants shoot drugs and have sex? If an
uneducated, fearful guardian wants a Hepatitis B "immunization" because the
allopathic hospitals give this immunization to new born infants - should we
give such a nosode based on the ungrounded fear? Is removing fear by doing
what is unnecessary compare with removing fear through proper education of
the true situation?

The first five years are the most important formative period in human
life both psychologically and physically. Patterns set at this time last an
entire lifetime. Should this premier developmental period be spent in
treating inherited predispositions and present disease states or used to
prevent possible risks of infection in the future? What about those giving
remedies for infections that present little or no risk on request? What is
the true responsibility of the homoeopathician in this regard? Is it better
to let the uncooperative persons leave than summit to giving unneeded
remedies while ignoring remedies they do need? What is the proper balance
between the duty of the practitioner to follow their conscience and the
rights of the patient or guardians to request what they want? I find these
ethical questions that should be contemplated.

Sincerely, David Little
---------------
"It is the life-force which cures diseases because a dead man needs no more
medicines."

Samuel Hahnemann

Visit our website on Hahnemannian Homoeopathy and Cyberspace Homoeopathic
Academy at
http://www.simillimum.com
David Little © 2000

[Sheri Nakken]

EXACTLY - thank you.
Sheri

At 05:51 PM 04/20/2004 +0530, David Little wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath
Well Within & Earth Mysteries & Sacred Site Tours (worldwide)
Vaccination Information & Choice Network
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/vaccine.htm
http://www.nccn.net/~wwithin/homeo.htm
homeopathycures@tesco.net
ONLINE Introduction to Homeopathy Classes
ONLINE Introduction to Vaccine Dangers Classes
ANY INFO OBTAINED HERE NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS MEDICAL
OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION TO VACCINATE IS YOURS AND YOURS ALONE
Voicemail US 530-740-0561 UK phone from US 011-44-1874-624-936