Digest Number 1594
Posted: Fri Jul 02, 2004 12:24 pm
I am on the ARH register in the uk and have access to the SOH register -
when people ask me for reference to a homeopath, however, i would prefer to
refer to someone i know or know of. There are two issues here, one is
'professionality and accountability' where the fact of being on a register
is a (not-infallible but OK) guide, and the other is style of practice and
none of the registers really help here : it is a definite shortcoming of the
system. If someone who has got on with a neo-Kentian approach from me turns
up and finds themselves wired up to a machine and prescribed complexes they
will not be very happy; likewise if they have been used to a more burnettian
style or diet/environment related treatment ( I do it all, me!) I would
prefer not to send them to someone who does nothing but psychotherapeutic
prescribing on principle. Knowing where people trained and other educational
background would help but none of the registers include this information and
the corporate boxes in the yellow pages only allow the briefest of 'letters'
ie you can tell the college there but not whether the practitioner has a
training in acupuncture, flower essences, nutrition etc etc.
I am not making value judgements here but but acknowledging that there is a
huge variety in styles of practice and a bit of advance warning would be
helpful. I was able to answer a reference query from this list recently,
confident in the knowledge that the person asking would be after the kind of
prescriber that I referred to in that particular town, as well as knowing
that the homeopath in question was reputable and solid. Much better than
telling him to look in the yellow pages!
On the related subject of this list in general, i think the mix is quite
good now. people are not getting shot down for non p-c remarks (or not much)
but it is evidently a list with a classical bias and discussion would be
frustrating and pointless if it was a complete free for all. There do need
to be some parameters for discussions to be fruitful, but also some room for
divergence of opinion! i have learned a great deal from the various
contributors over the last couple of years, for which i thank the regular
contributors in particular.
Theresa
the
Homoeopaths
course
suspicions
I
questions
adverts
you
not
this
us
encourage
when people ask me for reference to a homeopath, however, i would prefer to
refer to someone i know or know of. There are two issues here, one is
'professionality and accountability' where the fact of being on a register
is a (not-infallible but OK) guide, and the other is style of practice and
none of the registers really help here : it is a definite shortcoming of the
system. If someone who has got on with a neo-Kentian approach from me turns
up and finds themselves wired up to a machine and prescribed complexes they
will not be very happy; likewise if they have been used to a more burnettian
style or diet/environment related treatment ( I do it all, me!) I would
prefer not to send them to someone who does nothing but psychotherapeutic
prescribing on principle. Knowing where people trained and other educational
background would help but none of the registers include this information and
the corporate boxes in the yellow pages only allow the briefest of 'letters'
ie you can tell the college there but not whether the practitioner has a
training in acupuncture, flower essences, nutrition etc etc.
I am not making value judgements here but but acknowledging that there is a
huge variety in styles of practice and a bit of advance warning would be
helpful. I was able to answer a reference query from this list recently,
confident in the knowledge that the person asking would be after the kind of
prescriber that I referred to in that particular town, as well as knowing
that the homeopath in question was reputable and solid. Much better than
telling him to look in the yellow pages!
On the related subject of this list in general, i think the mix is quite
good now. people are not getting shot down for non p-c remarks (or not much)
but it is evidently a list with a classical bias and discussion would be
frustrating and pointless if it was a complete free for all. There do need
to be some parameters for discussions to be fruitful, but also some room for
divergence of opinion! i have learned a great deal from the various
contributors over the last couple of years, for which i thank the regular
contributors in particular.
Theresa
the
Homoeopaths
course
suspicions
I
questions
adverts
you
not
this
us
encourage