Acute vs Constitutional was emergency over...

[healthinfo6]

you really don't need constitutional for an acute.

Using Acute Intercurrent Remedies
Modern homeopaths no longer understand how to use an acute intercurrent remedy. These remedies have been called everything from drainage remedies and tandem remedies to support and lesional remedies.
Too many so-called masters, who claim to be constitutional prescribers (homeopaths who say they do chronic “layer” prescribing), totally forbid the use of acute intercurrent remedies and misinform others by saying that the use of acute remedies during the administration of a chronic remedy is suppressive. These individuals always try to find one remedy that goes throughout the chronic case history, no matter what the patient’s present acute disease state may be. They use this “constitutional” remedy for everything, no matter what disease state arises! This limited view is too extreme for the general practitioner of homeopathic healing.
Why does this very rarely work? We only have to refer to Aphorisms 36-40 of the Organon on similar and dissimilar diseases. In Aphorism 38, Hahnemann tells us that the stronger and dissimilar acute disease will postpone or suspend the old chronic and weaker disease. Thus, administering the constitutional/chronic remedy during emergencies such as dangerous pathological crises, severe traumas, overexposure, serious injuries, and virulent acute miasms, is a serious mistake as it runs the risk of disrupting the natural symptom pattern and causing unproductive aggravations as well as accessory symptoms of the chronic remedy!
During an acute crisis the remedy of choice is the acute intercurrent! This acute illness shows a different clinical picture from the chronic natural disease. How could a dissimilar remedy correct this situation? That would fly in the face of our most sacred principle: Like cures like. A homeopath must have the tools to prevent and cure dangerous epidemic diseases, treat emergencies, crises, and acute virulent miasms. The acute remedy must be chosen according to the causal or exciting factor and its active symptoms (von Boenninghausen [VB] method), not according to the chronic case history! The desired middle path is the class of homeopaths who find a balance between those who treat in layers and those who use the grand constitutional remedy for everything. Turning this subject into absolutes will only help create opposing extremist views.
No doubt, the closer the remedy is to the simillimum the deeper and more all encompassing its action will be on the Vital Force (VF). This is a very subtle aspect of the single remedy and minimal dose and is a wonder to perceive. The goal is always to use the minimum number of remedies, the smallest amount of medicine, and the fewest repetitions. Since the simillimum addresses the soil on which acute and chronic diseases grow, it can sometimes cure both acute and chronic manifestations as well as acting as a prophylactic. Especially with the use of Hahnemann’s medicinal solutions (5th and 6th Edition of the Organon), we often find that the adjustment of the succussions or size of the dose will keep the remedy working.
More at http://www.drluc.com/acute.html
Susan

[Jean Doherty]

I did not intend my suggestion to be the approach for an acute. The child already was in orthodox care. Jean