Minutus

Fran, you are providing valid and reasonable responses in this discussion.
As a former college teacher, as I watch this discussion evolve, it's reminding me of the "consumer mentality" one so often encounters these days in college classrooms -- i.e., if a student doesn't get an "A" or a top rating, s/he then is prone to complain about not getting value for money spent,regardless of variables such as effort, time on task, and yes, even ability.
When you said, Fran, that the client is not buying a cure but the time of the practitioner in helping to find workable solutions, that's the appropriate paradigm. Too often, if people spend a lot of money for a famous name, they at least subconsciously assume that they're buyng assurance of a cure. Anyone who has sat in on seminars with clinic sections with any "famous practitioner" knows that their patients, too, sometimes respond well and sometimes don't, and that some of their cases are anything but clear, just like those of everyone else. But of course patients haven't benefitted from this experience as have students.
It makes sense after a certain number of unsuccessful attempts with a patient to discuss the situation, admit that results so far have been disappointing, talk over what information may still be needed to create a different perception of the case,make a plan for obtaining this information (asking family members, for instance, for more information on past health history, in a search for unacknowledged causative turning points), and decide in conjunction with the patient whether and how to continue working together, and what process and limitations to follow.
Rosemary

I have always thought that there are two kinds of people who make good livings out of homeopathy. There are those who stay in one place and build up a busy practice over the years - seeing generations families through their lives and maybe doing local teaching and there are those who lecture (internationally) and write. The latter tend to be always on the move and it is hard to see how they can undertake long term case management; they will have relatively few patients who pay a lot for a couple of appointments. The first type in my [perhaps limited] experience tend to be pretty affordable, often with relatively short appointment times - but they make their money by being very busy and having a loyal patient base. They have to come up with the goods consistently and long term to succeed. Hard work and not for the tubercular but potentially very profitable.
However,if you want to charge at the top end of market prices from an economic standpoint you have to be selling something perceived to be in short supply (in service terms that means creating a niche for yourself where you are perceived as unique in some way) and/or you have to target a specific wealthy clientele. Are the hairdressers who do Posh and Beck's hair necessarily as much better than all other hairdressers as their prices would suggest? Probably not. But I expect they have charm, charisma and business acumen and have managed to persuade a moneyed section of the community that they are special,
If you want to create this kind of profitable niche for yourself as an international homeopath the easiest way is to find a new idea, methodology, remedy, proving, system etc , write about it and then get invited to all the well paid seminars and conferences to expound on it. Charging a few patients a lot of money is nice bonus.
The real downside of this, though , is the effect on homeopathic thinking and education.
It creates an economic bias towards change and novelty for their own sakes which can have quite a confidence-sapping, demoralising effect on new practitioners in particular. As soon as you learn one thing you are told that it is inadequate 'for today' and off you can go on this perpetual rollercoaster of spending all your money on seminars and never doing anything one way long enough to learn how to do it properly!
Well them's my Sunday afternoon thoughts on the subject.
Theresa

Well said, Theresa. Rosemary

Wow, how impressive. You have the years of experience, complete
training and full knowledge of the experience, training, practice and
history of an individual practitioner to pass such judgements in
public. Amazing. If you are making these statements based on your
years of study of this mans methods, personally intervewing hundreds
(or even tens) of past clients, and your vast training and experience
as a practitioner - that perhaps is one thing. If you are making
these statements based on the perspective and recounting of a
disgruntled patient who is airing their frustration on a public list -
that is another. I have only attended 2 years of seminars with Dr.
Ramakrishnan. I have only personally observed him work with a few
individuals. I obviously do not have your experience, but I would
not agree with your assessment.

Publically impuning the practice, reputation or character of any
individual practitioner would appear to be inappropriate. Our
profession could benefit greatly from more discussion and less attack.

Donna

D C Rona, PhD., ND, DHM
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "McPhee Family"
wrote:
say it, I will. You asked for feedback on his methods.... let's break
it down -
different remedies.
the patient with such diagnosis.
set time. Where's the personalization? And how will you know which
remedy is doing what?
the expected aggravations (but thankfully know how to adjust with 5th
water dosing).
case regressed, you contacted him and his response was - "keep taking
it and pay me more money again so I can tell you what to do when I
come to the states." So what kind of pathology do you think that
could create by the time he gets here?
Treat Yourself CD" would do something wouldn't it? Just what will
that be? Cure your diabetes? Maybe. Stir up latent miasms, aggravate
the you-know-what out of you? Possibly. Who really knows? Sure, his
protocols may work in some cases. And yes, I know he's allegedly
curing cancer with his unique methods. If you want to spend lots of
money on this chance protocol working, that is definitely your
prerogative.
records and your need to resend all of your case. I hope every
practitioner uses some sort of back up for their system - especially
ones charging those kinds of fees.
it! Do yourself and your health a favor and find a good quality
homeopath who will give you the care and attention your case
deserves! I don't care who it is - you are receiving HORRIBLE care
and spending a LOT of money on it! I wouldn't waste another penny on
it! If this person's name was Dr. So-and-So Knowbody Knows, I would
think the response would be much different. You can call me stupid or
naive or whatever you want but this is NOT good homeopathy.
homeopaths and paid *thousands* of dollars for it and have received
nothing but heartache, wasted time, and aggravation in return.
Clearly writing books or being famous in the homeopathic community
does not necessarily equate to good practice. If a practitioner has
proven, consistent, successful cases and gives every case the
attention it deserves, and works in earnest for a cure, and makes
themselves available when the patient needs them, then yes, they
deserve every penny of every hundred or thousand they charge - even
if they don't find the simillimum. Otherwise, you are paying simply
to perpetuate their fame with the pure luck chance of cure.
prescribing so that may not be an issue for you. But since you asked
about it, it appears you're unsure. If your goal was to receive
experimental, protocol, quasi-homeopathy, then I suppose you are
getting what you paid for. If you want good, classical homeopathy,
then I suggest you need a different homeopath. Do yourself a favor,
read Fran's article and then interview a few homeopaths. Find someone
you click with and someone who will treat with honesty, integrity,
and good method. As others have said, the case management is integral.
homeopathy when I see it. For what my opinion is worth, you decide.
You deserve better! I wish you all the best on your journey to
wellness.

Let me be clear in that I agree with what Irene, Fran and Rosemary are saying regarding the payment of services. I wish all clients could read it!
Really, anyone has the "right" to charge whatever they want (and feel is warranted for their services) and anyone has the "choice" as a consumer to pay those prices for services rendered.
I think the overall question from the OP is ... is the person paying for the name rather than the service. If the results will be no different than any other homeopath, then you're simply paying a higher price for the name. Of course, the expectation is that you are paying a higher price because the service will be that much better. But that is simply an expectation, never a given. As already stated, there are no guarantees and especially not in homeopathy!
The poster asked for opinions on the method and the apparent "value of the service." My previous response addressed that but I wanted to clarify my thoughts on the whole charges issue. It is frustrating as someone who refers many, many people to homeopaths to hear back that some are more hype than help. Who says someone is the "most respected homeopath in America"? Was there a poll taken? This just perpetuates the name. In the end it means nothing if the only thing perpetuating the name is the person him/herself!
It's the same as if I wanted to go and have crowns put on my teeth. If I had the money, I would find the dentist with the best reputation and who had worked on celebrities, thereby hopefully increasing my chances for beautiful results. But perhaps there is a great unknown dentist who charges 1/2 what the "famous" dentist would charge. If I could afford it, I would more likely choose the famous dentist but the results may not be any better than had I seen the unknown dentist.
In the end, the choice to purchase the service or not lies with the consumer. I think we all agree the bottom line is to be an educated consumer.
And wow - Rosemary - is that really happening in college these days? Yikes!
Truly,
Erica
Rosemary wrote:
As a former college teacher, as I watch this discussion evolve, it's reminding me of the "consumer mentality" one so often encounters these days in college classrooms -- i.e., if a student doesn't get an "A" or a top rating, s/he then is prone to complain about not getting value for money spent,regardless of variables such as effort, time on task, and yes, even ability.
When you said, Fran, that the client is not buying a cure but the time of the practitioner in helping to find workable solutions, that's the appropriate paradigm. Too often, if people spend a lot of money for a famous name, they at least subconsciously assume that they're buyng assurance of a cure.

Hi List,

Someone asked about the charges for homeopathy under the NHI in the
UK.

I do not know that but:

For a few years now, the equivalent of the NHI in Germany has paid for
classical homeopathy if done by a MD.

Afaik they pay the doctor Euro 90,- (roughly $ US 120 at the present
rate of exchange) for the intake and less (perhaps
half of that) for 3 follow ups per year, (something along this line).

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

Hi Theresa,
This applies in an area where there are relatively few homeopaths, I
presume?. Or where the health insurance pays for them?

In Germany by now the streets are plastered with them and the schools
are turning out more and more each year.

Only the private insurance companies pay for non-MD homeopaths.
Relatively few people are privately insured, the self-employed and
those with an income from employment over a certain amount.Most
patients of non-MD homeopaths are from the group of those
privately insured people. It appears there are not enough of them to
go around - after all, not that high a percentage wants to go to
(classical) homeopaths. I at least do not know of any non-MD homeopath
(of the MD's I know nothing in this respect) who makes his/her living
entirely from their practice.

While, of course, Irene, Rosemary, Fran .. are quite correct in what
they said about the patients' paying for the consultation and not for
results - this is from the view of the homeopaths. It is their
prerogative to see it thus.

The patients who are not covered by insurance see it differently - and
this is THEIR prerogative.

This was brought home to me many years ago. I gave a talk on classical
homeopathy for some group and said: "people think nothing about buying
a spoiler for their car, but when it comes to their health, they do
not want to pay anything for it." A woman answered: "True, but when
you buy a spoiler you know what you get, when you go to a homeopath
you do not!"

So definitely everything follows the rules of the market - but it cuts
both ways. I only wish people were aware of this fact before they run
themselves into debt for studying homeopathy and setting up a
practice. Many of them are not:-( (And the schools do not tell them -
for obvious reasons)

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

Hi Rosemary,
If the students were told that no-one can gauge their ability and that
no matter how much effort, time and task they apply, no-one could
foretell how long it would take until graduation and whether they
would ever graduate or even have any benefit at all -- I believe that
college enrollment would experience quite a drop;-)

Regards

Luise

--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

Donna,
The last time I checked the goal of Minutus was to share information on classical and Hahnemannian homeopathy. A first year homeopathy student should have read that message and recognized bad homeopathy *as it pertains to classical or Hahnemannian homeopathy.* The OP asked for opinions and yes, I gave mine based on the case specifics relayed from the OP. I even numbered each one out that violated the basic principles of classical homeopathy and what I guess are not so obvious examples of overall poor practice behaviors.
This is what happens... people pay their money to see a trusted, "well respected" homeopath and when they're given less than appropriate service (having nothing to do with finding the right remedy or not), they don't dare say anything because they fear the consequence of saying something about such a person of stature. Well guess what, if more people said something, perhaps we would find that the person is not all they say they are and it would save more people their money and the name of homeopathy would not be damaged in the process. If this is not the case for this homeopath, then my measly, unfamous opinion will mean nothing.
When you are in the position to refer hundreds of people to homeopaths and you see what is happening when they visit the homeopath - it's enough to make you want to stop promoting homeopathy. So if my forthrightness offends you, I apologize. But for every single person that has a bad experience with "the best of the best" or *any* homeopath and then walks away from homeopathy sharing their story - we lose credibility and the ground we have worked so hard to gain.
Additionally, there are over 2,700 members on this list with various levels of experience and knowledge of homeopathy. I wanted them to know at least one classical homeopath thinks the treatment detailed was a poor example and why.
It is also my opinion it is *this* very type of discussion that would benefit our profession more. The response was not an attack of any sort - it was a direct response to the points the OP inquired about. Whatever anyone wants to make of it in regard to the reputation, practice, or character of the homeopath is up to them.
Truly,
Erica
Donna wrote:
Wow, how impressive. . . Publically impuning the practice, reputation or character of any individual practitioner would appear to be inappropriate. Our profession could benefit greatly from more discussion and less attack.

http://drluc.com/cons-apmt.htm and also speaking with a couple of his
former patients. And he only charges $700, not $750.

Do you know that he does spend hours researching after the "upto 90 minute" initial prior to prescribing?
--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, Sheri Nakken wrote: