Minutus

Dear Beth

It certainly seems that your first remedy was correct.

I have a quote for Kent, where he says "Never desert a remedy that has done
good."

In hindsight, it is too easy to say you should have waited. I think by the
evidence of the fever, it is possible that the infection had not been
completely resolved whether by A/B you homoeopathy. Also the fever may have
been a suppressed symptom which under the influence of homoeopathy showed
itself. But as colleagues have expressed, it is a shame that the patients
leave things to get in to a critical condition and then go an visit an
allopath or hospital before contacting the homoeopath who is then powerless.

When she comes back to you, you have no other option but to take the
presenting symptoms and prescribing against them. The latest trace of
infection is obviously upper most for consideration. Despite the copious
amounts of A/B the miasmatic aspect of such a vital organ infection will
leave long lasting effects.
I certainly agree with your choice of LMs.

As far as the baby is concerned, if the mother hopefully breast feeds, then
whatever remedy you give the mum, will also work on the baby through the
milk.

I would not regard this as a goof. Well done for such an accurate analysis.

With very best wishes & Rgds
Soroush

Hi Soroush,

Just to pick a nit...
I think we can't *know* what the first remedy might have done, had more
doses been given; a good *initial* response doesn't always mean that
the remedy will prove to be curative--whether acute or chronic. But
the response sure sounded promising, I agree!
Shannon