No Service?
Things have been changing in the orgs. In some ways
there is an easier, more relaxed scene but in some ways they are tightening up.
People have mentioned that the number of people who aren't allowed to have auditing
is increasing. I don't know how accurate that is--but I can see why it
might well be the case.
Cerridwen (May 22, 2001):> I have heard from several sources that approval to
do services at >Flag has become more difficult. Specifically, any PTSness, any
illness, any thoughts of >suicide (just a passing thought) will get you banned
from services at Flag.
I heard the same thing one time but I immediately
protested about the sense of it to the person who told me, as I don't think it
can be quite right. Surely there would have to be a degree of ~intention~ to
commit suicide along with
the thought.
Otherwise it would be like the story of the man who was promised a fortune if he
could only avoid thinking about a donkey's tail. (It's an impossible task.)
I reserve the right to consider and think about anything I want. I hate to think
that people are going around thinking that they can't ~think~ about suicide (a
very different thing from actively planning it and collecting together
convenient bits of
rope).
>I also know of one person auditing on OT 7 who was feeling rather psychotic
and was banned >from Flag instead of handled. This action effectively
cutting him off of any future services or >help. This data was given to
me within the past few months.
Now that's a difficult situation. They don't have the facilities or the
experience to deal with people who actually go psychotic or who have breakdowns.
'Type
Three [PTS] is beyond the facilities of orgs not equipped with
hospitals as they are entirely psychotic.'
L. Ron Hubbard. Introduction to Scientology Ethics. Page 184. Bridge.
1998 edition.
If someone is feeling psychotic, they will probably recover - but they might
have a breakdown.
Obviously the guys at Flag have to consider the problems that
can arise if things go wrong and (rightly or wrongly) they preferred not to risk
it in the case you mention.
If I was handling someone like that I'd probably have them see a doctor who
could give them a check-up and make sure their diet was adequate.
I'd also have them take a vacation if possible and give them a program to do
some hill walking (if possible with friends).
I think it's a bit extreme to say that the guy is banned from any future
services or help. Things change and he can always reapply later. I'd suggest
that he gets his life in order (there's one program laid out in Professional Auditor's Bulletin 6, and there
are many other applicable references). He should do some useful things, get his
life in order, and then
reapply to do services in two or three years.
There's plenty of stuff a person can study and apply at home. The
vast majority of LRH's work has been published and is laid out in
books and lectures for anyone who cares to take the trouble to work their way
through it. There's a wealth of wonderful material there for anyone who likes
reading.
I'll be more comfortable when the orgs have it all released (on one 27GB
new-generation DVD ideally),
but even now much of the information is available for anyone
who wants it.
One reason for the changes and the tightening up is the increased critical scrutiny. As became apparent in
the Lisa McPherson case, the orgs don't have the experience, the facilities, or the
proper licenses necessary for dealing with people who have had severe
breakdowns. Flag later made arrangements with a local hospital to take such cases in the future.
I've made a page on this subject now.
http://www.bernie.cncfamily.com/freddie/Key/Lisa.htm
Hope this helps someone.
Freddie T
