Which homeopathic community are you referring to?
I am unaware of changes in the homeopathic community to which I belong.
Nor am I aware of any involvement of any "homeopathic coommunity" as a whole in USA or anywhere else, as being involved in BIH or CHC activities.
The evidence does not support this notion ... and the status would be false and empty.
The USA's individual state laws would need to change first as well.
Those so-called standards are not universally discussed or accepted an they do a disservice to homeopaths as discussed below.
For example,
What is the purpose of the list of remedies to be memorized and reported back in the CHC exam?
(It is posted below)
And how does that memory work supposedly make a homeopath better at reading client symptoms?
Or are patient symptoms and how to read them, irrelevant in this new "homeopathic community" looking to be "professional"?
I see no training in the RIGHT way round to use homeopathy:
If there was a list of patients to study - instead of remedies to study - THAT would make some sense.
Homeopaths need to know how to choose what symptoms to use in a case. Without that all you have is a backwards use of remedies which will generally be incorrect. There is no homeopathy in that. Training anyone to do that is misleadig them into thinking they are homeopaths when they have it backwards.
After the student learns how to decide what symptoms to actually use in a case (and it is NOT slef evident, it needs intensive training in recognizing and choosing symptoms) - and is tested on how well they do that - THEN the next step is teaching them how to convert those symptoms to a balanced set of rubrics representing the case. Note that NO remedy knowledge is used for any of this critical aspect of homepathy case taking.
WHERE is THAT absolutelty critical and essential training and testing?????
The testing done instead is a joke. It does not have any way to tell if someone knows the techniques used to participate in any way in a live case, much less handle a live case.
The above two steps are the most important steps in homeopathy training - selecting symptoms and converting THEM to rubrics.
But no - CHC sets up a remedy memorizing test, and adds insult to injury by making it a multiple choice test. Yuk! Homeopathy is not about multiple choice - it is about individualizing - any test should reflect that.
I see NO value in the test used! Any fool can memorize, it does not make t hem a homeoapht.
In chronic case work, which is what SHOULD be tested, using ANY memory of a remedy is actually the biggest and most common mistake a homeopath can make. This CHC approach is training homeopaths to make these critical practice errors, AND THEN GOING SO FAR AS TO "CERTIFY" THEM ONLY IF THEY USE THOSE BACKWARDS APPROACHES! No decent homeopath can support that.
It is essential to forget remedies in every chronic case, and to work with patient symptoms.
Please do NOT try to put that nasty backwards approach by CHC (and now BIH in support of it - thank yo for confirming that BIH is supporting that backwards approach - I surely did not teach it when I was a tutor there) for so-called certification on the "homeopathic community". It is not our idea.
It is an invention by a few women at CHC collecting money for these memory tests on how to not to do homeopathy, and whoever follows them by the nose without bothering to debate about what really is homeopathy.
Hahnemann would never have had such an insult for a professionalism test.
REAL homeopathy involves patient symptoms. It would be a sad day for homeopathy indeed if such a negative idea of homeopathy got approved as the way to tell who was who. Hahnemann must be turning in his grave.
When are you going to tell CHC that they need a real test before they get BIH behind them?
You have plenty of clout as BIH, in sheer numbers - why do you not use it to get a test with meaning?
BIH credibility is also at stake by your supporting such a farce.
If that is the sort of backwards practice BIH approves and supports then it says a lot about how homepathy has fallen in USA. Nobody who cares abot homeopathy, teaches remedy learning as the starting place of a chronic case, but that is all that is being asked to be studied and tested to prove theoretical knowledge, and you seem to condone it.
It needs TRAINING to choose a good set of appropriate symptoms displayed by the patient, such that their situation is covered by the syptoms chosen with not too much or too little emphasis on any aspect. THAT is homeopathy.
Show me where the "homepathic community" signed up for what you are calling homeopathy instead?
I did not sign up and nor will anyone who thinks a chronic case starts with seeing patient symptoms.
I see just this as a sad joke to replace the real thing:
Remedies for Study
Aconitum napellus, Aethusa, Agaricus, Allium cepa, Aloe, Alumina, Anacardium, Antimonium crudum, Antimonium tart., Apis, Argentum metallicum, Argentum nitricum, Arnica, Arsenicum album, Arsenicum iodatum, Asafoetida, Asarum, Aurum
Badiaga, Baptisia, Baryta carbonica, Belladonna, Bellis perennis, Berberis, Borax, Bromium, Bryonia
Cactus, Calcarea carbonica, Calcarea flour, Calcarea phos, Calcarea sulph, Calendula, Camphora, Cannibus indica, Cantharis, Capsicum, Carbo animalis, Carbo vegetabilis, Caulophyllum, Causticum, Chamomilla, Chelidonium, China officionalis, Cicuta, Cimicifuga, Cocculus, Coccus cacti, Coffea, Colchicum, Colocynthis, Conium, Crocus sativus, Crotalus horridus, Cuprum, Cyclamen
Digitalis, Drosera, Dulcamara, Elaps, Equisetum, Eupatorium perf., Euphrasia, Ferrum metallicum, Ferrum phos, Flouricum acidum, Gambogia, Gelsemium, Glonoinum, Graphites, Hamamelis, Helleborus, Hepar sulph, Hyoscyamus, Hypericum
Ignatia, Iodum, Ipecacuanha, Iris versicolor, Kali bichromicum, Kali bromatum, Kali carbonicum, Kali phosphoricum, Kali sulphuricum, Kreosotum, Lac caninum, Lachesis, Latrodectus mactans, Laurocerasus, Ledum, Lillium tigrinum, Lobelia inflata, Lycopodium, Lyssin
Magnesia carbonica, Magnesia muriatica, Magnesia phosphorica, Mancinella, Medorrhinum, Mercurius vivus, Mercurius corr, Mercurius iod flavus, Mercurius iod ruber, Mezereum, Naja, Natrum arsenicum, Natrum carbonicum, Natrum muriaticum, Natrum phosphoricum, Natrum sulphuricum, Nitricum acidum, Nux moschata, Nux vomica
Opium, Palladium, Petroleum, Phosphoric acid, , Phosphorus, Phytolacca, Platina, Plumbum, Podophyllum, Psorinum, Pulsatilla, Pyrogenium, Ranunculus bulbosa, Rhus toxicodendron, Rumex crispus, Ruta graveolens
Sabadilla, Sabina, Sambucus nigra, Sanguinaria, Sarsparilla, Sepia, Silica, Spigelia, Spongia tosta, Stannum, Staphysagria, Stramonium, Sulphur, Sulphuric acid, Symphytum, Syphilinum
Tabacum, Tarentula cubensis, Tarentual hispanica, Thuja, Tuberculinum, Urtica urens, Veratrum album, Viburnum, Zincum metallicum
Followed by
The Examination
Theoretical
1. Homeopathic theory and philosophy- multiple choice, closed book.
2. Homeopathic materia medica – multiple choice, closed book.
3. Human medical sciences – multiple choice, closed book.
4. Homeopathic Repertory – fill in the blank, open repertory book of your choice (no computer repertories allowed)
..........
Does ANY halfway decent homeopath consider the above to be a good way to tell if a homeopath is professionally competent in homeopathic theory?
Put another way:
If you were deathly ill, would YOU select a homeopath whose only test for certification of theory of how to professionally practice homeopathy was the above?
By the way, in what year does CHC plan to enter the technology age?
Or does homeopathy suddenly not work in their view, if the computer makes the remedy lists for each rubric instead of the homeopath writing it down literally in some poor handwriting or other?
DO they not know technlogy is an improvement, not a detriment? Or maybe they do not know the real world has computer repertories and that homeopaths NEED to be able to use them and prove it - rather than the oposite as here.
Reminds me of many years ago when schools did not allow calculators. Now they require them.
AT least the schools make sure students know how to use them.
Poor CHC, they are scared of technology - even at a professional licensing level.
No - poor us - homepaths doing real homeopathy, deserve better representation than this money making scheme. Maria - the fees are not those expected for "volunteers". They are significant and they test nothing worth testing to know the theory used by a homeopath in a chronic case. I wish someone would pay me annual fees to check that three letters written down before (presumably by hand, as CHC does not believe in technology) did not magically get erased yet. Hard work that.
My concllusion is that I would in no way consider a "CHC" to be useful in selecting a homeopath, rather the contrary, for the above reasons. I would be more interested in a homeoapth who failed that memory test as they are more likely to be looking at patient symptoms. If/when CHC or some group who knows more about homeopathy themsleves, thinks patient symptoms are relevant in homeopathy, and proves it with suitable testing, (and not multiple choice or closed book or closed internet either) let me know.
In my school the students are REQUIRED to work in the real world, which has internet and computers and a library of medicine and photos of pathology and anatomy of various species etc, and if they do not know how to find the good research and reject the junk on the internet or look up side effects of a drug overdose, they cannot be good homeopaths. Their clients use the internet too - CHC forgot about that fact - the student/professional homeopath needs to know how to verify or refute what the client finds! (In the real world that is) - and know what is hype and what is truth out there on that modern internet, which is so very useful IF the student knows how to use it well - as well or better than their clients at least.
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."
