Minutus

Hello, I have to apologise for not reading the original post on this as I am
just catching up with posts - here are my thoughts.

Take the case and prescribe on what FACTS you have at the time - try not to
interpret or place your own subjective thoughts onto the case or read too
much into the information you have. Keep it simple and it will be. Don't
take on too much at this time. If your client cannot or will not talk about
the past then sometimes you have to leave it at that (more of this later).
'Closed' clients take time. You could ask him why he doesn't want to open up
but don't push it. You could try 'engaging' with him by talking about the
war or some aspect of it - show some interest in it, some common ground -
trust will then develop.
You ask - Is this a 'one sided disease'?

Doubt it.
Most of these people have whole lives that hardly seem to

Not always - keep taking the case and evaluating. Prescribe on what you
have.

Try not to develop preconceptions when taking the case or during case
management. Keep the individual rule upper most for both remedy and potency.

Probably not - careful case taking will eliminate these queries. Go one step
at a time with one remedy at a time otherwise you will be confused as well
as the case.

So, as I said more about this..... often the fact is (for whatever reason/s)
they are closed and will not talk about such experiences. They were probably
like this even before the war (but you don't know this yet, so no
assumptions) - so use the appropriate rubrics for this as part of the whole
case taking = TACITURN, INDISPOSED TO TALK etc and include all the sub
rubrics that are involved during your work in finding the simillimum -
AVERSION TO ANSWERING QUESTIONS, IRRITABILITY, INDIFFERENCE, MOROSE etc etc.
There are many. Yes a lot of work but that is what it takes.

I don't want to start suggesting remedies for such situations because I
don't know the full case.

The most important thing is that you prescribe on what you have (the total
case at any given time), not alienating the client (you need to stay with it
as it could take time), not assuming or guessing about what he won't talk
about. Keep it simple 'cos life is difficult enough.

Hope this helps. Best wishes, Joy Lucas.

Hi Joy,

I appreciate hearing your points here!
One question:

Joy Lucas wrote:
I'm hesitant to make the leap from "won't talk about war experience" to
"won't talk"!

I'm curious, in the bit that Maria quoted, where he's saying "You know
I'm insane", and etc. -- would you consider that "closed", or
"taciturn"? That fragment didn't sound "closed" to me... Or is it just
that he doesn't know how to approach (integrate, communicate,
understand...) *this part of his life*? Maria talked about some of
these folks having a sort of remove from that horror -- it leaps up
unexpectedly in nightmares or etc., but the rest of their life goes on
as tho all that had never happened... To me this suggests a different
area of rubrics/remedies than "taciturn", tho I'm not entirely sure
what...

Perhaps (???) "things which should be painful are not" (or however it
goes), or (long shot thought) "confusion re identity", or (duh)
"ailments from shock", since shock by its nature involves a sharp and
"shocking" departure from the prior course...

And (thinking,thinking...) how about
GENERALITIES; ALTERNATING states (SRII-31): (3) Kali-bi., Lac-c.,
Sulph., (2) ambr., ars., cann-i., cann-s., cocc., lyc., phos.,
(1) abrot., acon., adam., agar., aloe, anac., ant-c., arn., bell.,
berb., cimic., croc., cupr., dulc., ferr-p., glon., ign., iris, lach.,
meph., mut., onop., prot., psor., puls., sep., stram., sul-ac., valer.,
xan., zinc.
GENERALITIES; VIOLENT effects (SRII-676): (3) Bell., Cham., Nux-v.,
Stram., (2) acon., aeth., ars., hyos., lach., tarent., verat.,
(1) alum., anac., bry., canth., carb-v., cupr., glon., hep., ign., iod.,
merc., sulph.
GENERALITIES; SUDDEN manifestations (SRII-616): (3) Acon., Bell.,
(2) mag-acet., tarent.,
(1) am-c., ambr., androc., apis, ars., bar-c., berb., buni-o., cact.,
camph., canth., carb-ac., choc., cimic., coloc., con., croc., crot-h.,
cupr., dios., eup-per., eup-pur., form., glon., hydr-ac., hydrog.,
ictod., ign., kali-bi., lyc., mag-c., mag-p., mez., musa, nat-s.,
nit-ac., ox-ac., oxyt., petr., phos., plb., podo., rad-br., ran-b.,
spig., stann., stry., sul-ac., tab., tarent-c., thuj., tub., tung.,
valer., verat., vip.
Best,
Shannon
and include all the sub

Hello Shannon, thank you for this. But I have to say I find it speculative
as we don't know the full case and one could go on and on presenting rubrics
in this way. I was homing in on the fact that it was stated that there was
some reluctance to talk about the war experience (for whatever reason) and
that this was presenting a problem in the case.

I suggested the Taciturn and Indiposed to talk rubrics as part of the work
that needs to be done in selecting the right rubrics (the ideal is for one
or two succinct rubrcis as opposed to twenty etc.) They and their sub
rubrics need to be studied (rather than all being incorporated into the
case) - eg, there is - "Indisposed to talk about his sufferings" which, if
relevent should be taken into consideration of the whole case.

Verbatim is valuable but can be misleading if the client is prone to using
fanciful (?) language (which would also then form part of the case taking).
Insanity is a form of closure of the mind but this is a different discussion
I think. Whn someone is "unable to integrate, communicate or understand"
then they are Indisposed, imo. I can't really comment any futher than this
unless we are presented with the whole case.

Best wishes, Joy
_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com

Hi Y'all,

Having had conversations with guys suffering from PTSD (people with SEVERELY
messed up lives) - I can tell you

The guy who said he was insane MEANT IT, and he is right; however this has
to be looked at in relation to our present day society (in the U.S.) where
insanity has become the norm.
We need to be able to lead this person to a similar POV- "yeah, you're
crazy, & who isn't" ... "it's a crazy world..." Our institutions are
insane. The biggest corporations are bloodthirsty, lying, cheating,
murderers.

We can help a guy like this by *listening* .. and it may very likely be
impossible to get him to "open up" at first. There's a homeopathic
principle that I've used - tell a little story about something utterly
horrendous in my past. (some of you would probably have to make something
up)

Taciturn wouldn't fit. Indisposed to talk - well, a bit of an understatement


I don't think that it is necessary to treat the "indisposition" to talk - I
think it is necessary to use homeopathic psychology, and perhaps peer
counselling (there is, naturally imho, a barrier to speaking with women or
with men who are perceived as being incapable of having "been there" .. of
understanding)

Generally the scenario is some dualism; and a walling-off of
that-which-is-too-painful.
There is *extreme* desire for understanding, but there is fear of censure,
fear of facing the painful memories.
Generally there are numerous self-recriminations &/or self-hatred, mixed up
with guilt for having survived when buddies didn't.

Very likely there is alcoholism, drug use/abuse, & possibly a constellation
of "meds" thanks to the V.A. hospitals.

These are not situations and people that we want to go thru the sort of
aggravation that comes to mind with a Staph or Sep. woman in a bad
relationship, who suddenly reacts after a dose of Rx.

I would recommend caution in prescribing on a basis of "breaking thru" the
barriers.. slow & gentle would probably be best. I would recommend against
prescribing to include the so-called indisposition to talk -except as a last
resort, and then cautiously.

It is Very Not Good to have an insane professional killer "snap.'

seriously,

Dave Hartley
www.localcomputermart.com/dave
Santa Cruz, CA (831)423-4284

Dave wrote:

Absolutely. This brought straight to mind two pretty deep conversations I'd
had with friends, both of whom had been in the British special services,
many years before I'd even heard of the word "homeopathy". Although they're
quite extreme examples given the special nature of their military training,
they both provide different angles on similar symptoms and may add to an
understanding of the problems combat veterans face.

The first friend had been invalided out of the service having fallen half
way down a mountainside while on a mission. What he couldn't handle was the
knowledge that he had been trained to the point where he could kill a person
in a reflex action, with a single finger if need be, before he'd even had
time to think about it. Being taken by surprise in the most innocuous of
circumstances would stir that reflex, and he was terrified by the prospect
that one day he might not be able to stop himself from reacting in time. So
he drank to dull the reflex. But the drinking terrified him just as much
because when he sobered up he couldn't remember where he'd been or what he'd
done.

The second friend had been an officer - well educated, upper middle class
English background, Ivy League equivalent. The life he came back to was
dull, ordinary, safe, and to him, having been through intensity of
experience the people around him couldn't even guess at (and which he
couldn't tell about because of the secret nature of a lot it), completely
lifeless. His marriage fell apart, so he took his three sons to live in an
area of the city which is almost exclusively Afro-Caribbean. He said he felt
more at home in that atmosphere, because people around him understood the
nature of life better, and because he was constantly under threat from those
who didn't know him because he was white. One night he came home late, so
drunk he was having to crawl up the escalator steps from the subway. As he
got near the top he realised there were several pairs of feet arranged in a
semi-circle waiting on him - obvious target. A moment later, the owners of
those several pairs of feet were all horizontal and wondering what the hell
had hit them, while he had long since disappeared.

The impression I got from both friends was that they'd had their eyes opened
to things which made the "normal" world look dozy, stupid, half asleep. They
could evaluate a situation and act on it in less time than it takes the rest
of us to go "whaaa...?", they knew how intense life can get, how easy it is
to die or to take someone else's life, and they knew there's no point in
trying to explain it to anybody who hasn't woken up to that themselves.

They both, from different angles, had an enormous hunger to experience that
intensity again - it felt more natural to them, more in tune with who they
were - but because it was indelibly associated with the horror of the
circumstances that brought it about, also guilt, doubts about their sanity,
moral rectitude, etc, aside from any actual events that they might be
hanging on to. And these were two guys who, apart from the drinking, didn't
make too bad a job of handling "normal" life.

Regards
Wendy

In regard to PTSD, a number of VA hospitals have opened special clinics to
deal with this situation for their Vets. One of the modalities that they use
is REM. Although I have never seen this technique in action it appears to be
very effective for all kinds of PTSD, including child abuse, auto accidents,
etc., and even more minor stresses that the client can't seem to stop
reliving.

I wonder if this technique is repressive. Anyone know? The only opinion I
have is from a friend who used it to help deal with child abuse in her
family. Even with the use of homeopathy she said that she didn't think she
would have dealt with all the negative memory recall as effectively without
REM sessions.

Anyone know about REM and how it works?

Thanks,
Barbara
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

hi barbara, i had a few rem sessions a few years ago. i am one of those
people who think there are no magic bullets, not even homeopathy, and that
healing takes years of hard work, and maybe in several modalities. -
completmentary and not supppressive. in my experience everything helps and
adds up. i did not find the rem suppressive at all. in fact, i think one of
the purposes is to heal suppresssed and repressed memories. sheila
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com

Much of this is subjective twaddle (spoiling that which is good and solid)
which is very very dangerous when dealing with a case of such magnitude - or
any case for that matter. Just take a look at the remedies in Taciturn and
Indiposed to talk - yes a lot of remedies and yes a lot of work but this is
what it takes to learn about the usefulness, appropriateness and the
potential curing qualities of these remedies which might be needed in a case
which has a reluctance to talk about certain traumatic events of one's life.
It is part of the whole case.

Identifying with a client's "insanity" is one of the dozen (at least) blocks
to listening and understanding what needs to be cured in a case.

None of us know the full case here and I am not sure that that matters at
the moment - what is though is the speculative, cute and contained
psycho-babble and unbalanced approach which you are suggesting. Something in
this has sparked an interesting ignition for you Dave (which is interesting)
but not relevent.

But let's not argue - it is all too interesting for that.

best wishes, Joy Lucas
_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com

i tried a session with a man who does a similar process but uses a larger sphere of movement. the aim
is to desensitize the trauma and as a result make it unemotionally charged for the person. it seems to
be another way of eliminating the negative emotionality attached to bad conditions of our lives.

tanya

irrelevant
twaddle
subjective
psychobabble.
"sparked an ignition"

hmm..
I think that Joy's out-of-hand rigidly judgemental dismissal of my input is
fascinatingly out-of-character! =;->)

I had hoped that the input I gave, which is based upon a fair amount of
interaction with several fellas suffering mightily with PTSD might mean
something to someone. I imagine it has, beyond the fact that it seems to
have exposed some obviously sensitive area in the normally objective Joy.

I imagine that there are some who have "ears to hear" ... what is based in
experience - as opposed to being subjective. (irrelevant, twaddle, etc.)

At least we agree that it is a case of some magnitude and that there is some
reason to use the word danger; perhaps

It is irrelevant in this case, to consider "taciturn."
"Indisposition to speak" is also irrelavant - look for unusual symptoms,
not common generals.
It is absolutely, utterly common for "war wounded" PTSD sufferers (among
others) to have difficulty speaking of the trauma.

The *failure* of the homeopath to utilize homeopathic psychology; to be
flexible and be able -as opposed to "identifying with the client's
nsanity" -to see that insanity & sanity are points along a continuum...
are hopefully not the final end point of that homeopath's mental & spiritual
development -but ARE a *dangerous* precipice with regard to
treatment!

To use the rubrics "taciturn" and "indisposition to speak" in this case, are
merely admission of incompetence in taking this case, imho.

If you can't get beyond that, refer the case!

If you think it "twaddle" that such an individual could become dangerous -
you need your head examined

regards,

Dave Hartley
www.localcomputermart.com/dave
Santa Cruz, CA (831)423-4284