Re: - Sharing a Case
Posted: Thu Oct 02, 2003 9:12 pm
Dear Rosemary, I think there is a great need to keep it simple. If one has
taken the case as carefully as possible and can 'see' the remedy needed,
prescribes it and it does nothing, then it isn't the end of the world, we go
back and look at the case again, ask more questions check our details, read
and probably read again and then we might see the obvious. It is a
continuing learning curve.
best, Joy
www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
on 10/2/03 7:35 PM, Rosemary Hyde at rosemaryhyde@mindspring.com wrote:
Thanks, Julian, for carrying on this discussion and presenting your analysis
of the case that was cured by Chamomilla. This sort of thing really is
interesting, because it happens all the time.
It's entirely possible, using the obvious rubrics, to come up with a remedy
that came through and yet does nothing. It's also possible, in my
experience, to come up convincingly after the fact with a remedy different
from the one that someone else chose to actually cure the case.
Of course, Rochelle had an advantage over the rest of us reading the case,
in that she had seen the child and mother together, and knew that Pulsatilla
was unlilkely, given the way they behaved.
But I've often wondered about situations like this. Either more than one
remedy could have worked (we never find out, because the one that does work
finishes the job, and the same case never recurs).
Or the practitioner actually relating one on one with the patient(s)
benefits from energetic and intuitive information that goes back and forth
and becomes part of the whole healing situation (I've seen enough evidence
for this to believe it, actually).
Or the reference materials we have available as homeopaths can use some
firming up, confirmation, scientific review, reformatting on a variety of
levels. I believe all of this is true as well.
I'm glad people like Sankaran, Scholten, and Vemeulen are focusing on this
last issue. I'd be interested to learn what others think of the first two
possibilities I raised.
Rosemary
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
ATTENTION PLEASE:
The Minutus Group is established purely for the promotion of Homoeopathy and
educational benefit of its members. It makes no representations regarding
the individual suitability of the information contained in any document read
or advice or recommendation offered which appears on this website and/or
email postings for any purpose. The entire risk arising out of their use
remains with the recipient. In no event shall the minutus site or its
individual members be liable for any direct, consequential, incidental,
special, punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever caused.
****
If you do not wish to receive individual emails, send a message with the
subject of 'Digest' to ashahrdar@yahoo.com to receive a single daily digest.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
minutus-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
taken the case as carefully as possible and can 'see' the remedy needed,
prescribes it and it does nothing, then it isn't the end of the world, we go
back and look at the case again, ask more questions check our details, read
and probably read again and then we might see the obvious. It is a
continuing learning curve.
best, Joy
www.homeopathicmateriamedica.com
on 10/2/03 7:35 PM, Rosemary Hyde at rosemaryhyde@mindspring.com wrote:
Thanks, Julian, for carrying on this discussion and presenting your analysis
of the case that was cured by Chamomilla. This sort of thing really is
interesting, because it happens all the time.
It's entirely possible, using the obvious rubrics, to come up with a remedy
that came through and yet does nothing. It's also possible, in my
experience, to come up convincingly after the fact with a remedy different
from the one that someone else chose to actually cure the case.
Of course, Rochelle had an advantage over the rest of us reading the case,
in that she had seen the child and mother together, and knew that Pulsatilla
was unlilkely, given the way they behaved.
But I've often wondered about situations like this. Either more than one
remedy could have worked (we never find out, because the one that does work
finishes the job, and the same case never recurs).
Or the practitioner actually relating one on one with the patient(s)
benefits from energetic and intuitive information that goes back and forth
and becomes part of the whole healing situation (I've seen enough evidence
for this to believe it, actually).
Or the reference materials we have available as homeopaths can use some
firming up, confirmation, scientific review, reformatting on a variety of
levels. I believe all of this is true as well.
I'm glad people like Sankaran, Scholten, and Vemeulen are focusing on this
last issue. I'd be interested to learn what others think of the first two
possibilities I raised.
Rosemary
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ADVERTISEMENT
ATTENTION PLEASE:
The Minutus Group is established purely for the promotion of Homoeopathy and
educational benefit of its members. It makes no representations regarding
the individual suitability of the information contained in any document read
or advice or recommendation offered which appears on this website and/or
email postings for any purpose. The entire risk arising out of their use
remains with the recipient. In no event shall the minutus site or its
individual members be liable for any direct, consequential, incidental,
special, punitive or other damages whatsoever and howsoever caused.
****
If you do not wish to receive individual emails, send a message with the
subject of 'Digest' to ashahrdar@yahoo.com to receive a single daily digest.
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
minutus-unsubscribe@egroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]