Minutus

Our colleague Wendy wrote:
======
"Well yes ... but what really shocks and astounds me is the surprise and
amazement that's contained in your post about this!! What you have presented
here is basically no more than Hahnemann's instructions for taking the case.
I have to ask, what were you doing before?!

Regards
Wendy"
======

I think as Jill wrote in response to my post, when you see this technique in
operation, you realise that this is perhaps different to how one has been
taught and seen senior homoeopaths take a case (and believe you me I have
seen a few).

As you may have noticed, in this method the patient is not allowed to escape
from the presenting symptom until he has given everything about the
presenting symptom or indeed any other symptom.

If you already employ this method and you keep asking the questions about
e.g. the pain in the knee and the sensations is causes and the feelings it
generates for half an hour, then all well and good. If you don't, then
listen up. In talking about it to a few other colleagues, it seems that this
is different to the way they take the case - that is why I thought it was
worth posting.

Also if you are already using this method Wendy, please tell us a bit more
and if you can give any further helpful comments on how the patients reacted
to such questions and if poss give some cases where this led you to some
symptoms that the patient was perhaps not going to mention which helped you
find the Similimum.

Also none of the cases presented on this site have shown this mode of
questioning before.

I thought that this technique allowed one to be a better "unprejudiced
observer" because one is continuously reflecting the pt's words to get more
and more symptoms out of them without any input from the homoeopath.

With regards and respect
Soroush
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Soroush wrote:
this
reacted
you

OK ... I think I can see where differences in perception have led to
differences in understanding. I hadn't picked up on the idea that you were
seeing this as a prescription for how to go about conducting every patient
interview. I was seeing your post as simply a detailed exposition of
Hahnemann's instructions in the Organon, which concentrate on the presenting
symptom(s) and which is something I was assuming (rightly or wrongly) that
most of us have in mind during our interviews with patients. Have in mind --
ie. it's present as an awareness of the information we're looking for in
some way, shape or form -- rather than specifically in the form you
described.

I have problems with the idea of applying any systematic routine "method" to
case-taking, analysis, repertorisation, posology, etc -- because in creating
this thing called a "method" which you're determined to adhere to
regardless, you're putting something inflexible between you and the patient
which not only fails to respond to the individuality of the patient and the
individuality of the case, but gets in the way of your being completely open
and receptive to the state of the patient. I think we need to be informed by
principles, but not bound by method.

Hahnemann's instructions are clear. He highlights all the salient points
with regard to the information we need to elicit in a case. And all of that
was pretty much detailed in your post. Now how you actually go about
obtaining that information is a different matter, and is surely something
that needs to respect the individuality of the situation, as is the method
you use to analyse and repertorise the case, as is the remedy, potency and
dosage you select for treatment.

I can see instances where using such a directed method as the one you
described would be very helpful. I can also see instances where it would be
counter-productive. The best advice I ever got as far as case-taking was
concerned was to learn how to get out of the way.

Regards
Wendy

Hi Soroush,

Personally, I was surprised by Wendy's surprise. I found your
write-up very thought-provoking, interesting! And yes, not the way I have
been accustomed to either take cases, or have mine taken.

One prescriber did try this approach on my "presenting complaint", but I
don't think it worked very well. He pressed and pressed to get me to say
more about things that I really didn't have any more to say about. So
finally i started "guessing", and "speculating", "well, *maybe* it's sort of
like this...". I found it quite frustrating, felt sort of like having my
head beaten against that proverbial brick wall. And sadly, the remedy he
kept coming back to was one that didn't work, argh... And when I *have*
tried to elicit more complete descriptions of my patients' presenting
complaints, I tend to run into similar brick walls, which is maybe why I've
gotten in habit of focusing on "the rest of the case", unless the presenting
complaint is so ablaze with impassioned imagery and rich color that I can't
get away from it...

But I think I will try this method some more; maybe it just needs more
practice and thought...

Shannon
on 2/3/03 8:45 AM, Finrod at finrod@webstar.co.uk wrote:

Dear Soroush, I have to say that I was somewhat amazed also when I read your
post. May I ask what you concentrate on when taking the case other than the
presenting complaint? And as for "none of the cases presented on this site
have shown this mode of questioning" is a nonsense. You go where you have to
to find the simillimum but you can never ignore the presenting complaint

Joy
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself with cool emoticons http://messenger.msn.co.uk

I'd like to thank Soroush for his posting and offer a few comments on Sankaran's method that may help illustrate why Soroush and others are so excited about it.

This method of case-taking does NOT focus upon the chief complaint to the exclusion of all else. What Sankaran is looking for, in the chief complaint and throughout the case, is what he calls the "vital sensation." This is a feeling that permeates the case on the physical, mental, and emotional levels. Hence, he probes incessantly to get the patient to articulate that feeling in his own words.

For lots of examples of his method in action, read Sankaran's "An Insight into Plants" (which will also show you how he uses the vital sensation to home in on some rather small remedies). The virtue of the method is that it can cut through thickets of symptoms very cleanly -- you will, in other words, be able to see the forest instead of merely the trees. The potential drawback that I can see, at least in my corner of the world, is that closed patients may find it too intrusive, while unobservant patients will feel taxed to the max to try to describe the feelings associated with their symptoms.

But let's try to understand the method before taking potshots at Soroush for introducing it.

Peace,
Cinnabar

Thanks Cinnabar,

I found your thoughts here very enlightening! Makes me want to read the
book and learn more about the method, *and* when you mentioned the possible
limitatons you see, I went "Yeah...".

And again, thanks to Soroush for posting his piece!

Best,
Shannon
on 2/5/03 9:30 AM, DMH at igan@gis.net wrote: