Richard Shannon wrote:
How do you know that?
I saw a "homeopath" here locally who gave me something without telling
me the contents even though I asked.
I said thank you, took it home, and flushed it.
She does not know I did not take it.
I think any patient who will take an unknown substance needs their head
read!
Whether allopathic or homeopathic!
I would support it being illegal.
I don't use placebos.
Hypochondria is treatable.
Nobody does that. You misread what I wrote. The energy is a nice little
unspoken demo to show the remedy has to do with energy rather than
chemistry - an educational aspect - not a healing aspect:-)
Now that's a cop-out!
I think we owe it to our clients, and it is standard in my work. After
all if you use repertorizing - and I hope you do - you DID write or
record the rubrics somewhere - all you need do is cut and paste them (or
photocopy them) - add your blurb on repertorizing - and hit print.
NOBODY gives the sputum from an infected TB patient.
What a cop-out!
You are giving the energy of something.
There's no sputum of a Tb patient in the remedy you give unless you are
using TB sputum tincture which I doubt!
- SHAME on you for even suggesting that!
No wonder the general public is so full of nonsense about what
homeopathic remedies contain!
Folks like you believe it and propagate it!
Nor does allopathy - but that does not mean that the medicine used needs
to be a secret - what a paternal load of nonsense.
The client has a right to know what they are getting - and WHY.
It's nothing to do with belief systems - and everything to do with
taking responsibility.
I had hoped we were past the dark ages when healers hide the medicine
from patients, treating them as if they are too useless to know what's
good for them and participate in their own health care - and must
kow-tow to a paternalistic system wherein the patient is a nonentity
while the healer struts their ego as superior being.
Gimme a break. Just because you know more about homeopathy than the
client is not an excuse to treat them as a brainless doll.
Such approach can come back to bite you both. The client needs to
take responsibility for what medicines they use. They need to be able to
tell the next homeopath too for example, especially if it turns out the
previous remedy caused serious proving symptoms. Your hogging the name
to yourself is perhaps your way of forcing the client to come back to
YOU with aggravations (Assuming you are there which you can NOT predict)
- but that's not ethical in my book. Clients should have a right to a
choice - and by withholding the remedy name, you withhold their options.
(Other than tossing it and feeling like they wasted their money - which
is not a good option anyway.)
Namaste,
IRene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."
)