|
Before
I start this dialogue, I would like to remind the readers that I
have just launched a blog on my website
www.lookingbackmovingforward.com
for discussions about how we feel about our profession, how we feel
about what is discussed in the interviews, for us to share our experiences
and to create an international place to meet and chat in the matrix.
Feel free to come and visit and contribute your thoughts.
And now for your monthly slice from my book
Looking Back Moving Forward (www.lookingbackmovingforward.com).
This time I have chosen international teacher and successful London
practitioner for the last thirty years, Simon Taffler,
to inspire you.
I first met Simon Taffler in Malvern in November
2004 where I met several of the other interviewees. Simon and I
had stayed in touch since meeting for joyous conversations about
homeopathy and our profession. We set this specific session up for
the purpose of the interview and I was very excited about it as
Simon is one of the high earners within our profession and he has
carved for himself a successful career in homeopathy. It was a cold
yet sunny Monday 28 November 2005 that I picked him up from my local
train station and took him back to my home for lunch and a long
and fruitful conversation.
SIMON: I see the need in the UK and in
the USA for the vision of homeopathy to change and be clearer, especially
about where our profession is going. And I see a lot of common traits
that I am not comfortable with. Homeopaths for example, are susceptible
to working in their ivory tower alone – forsaken, isolated
and separated from the world. With that susceptibility in mind,
I think we should be working together and opening centres of excellence
that invite research and co-operation in which homeopaths work together
to improve and evolve themselves and their profession.
Perhaps a floor of a building in Harley Street with two-way mirrors
in all the treatment rooms so that practitioners and students can
observe, learn and give advice. Then, if you have got a problem
with a patient, you just walk into the observation room and invite
someone who has been observing into the clinic room to help. This
is an experience I had in Sri Lanka this summer where I was working.
There were ten or eleven of us all practising in one room without
any curtains, without barriers and I loved it because people called
me down to diagnose something or treat someone and they sent me
patients and I did the same. I like that kind of interaction and
it has got to be much healthier, in my mind, than working in isolation
and competition. This ethos acknowledges our collective susceptibility
and offers opportunities for all sorts of learning and healing.
ROWENA:
You spoke earlier about going to the USA in order to study further
how to teach homeopathy. What were your frustrations with how homeopathy
was taught here?
SIMON: It has been changing in the last
few years, but there are a number of schools that still have a curriculum
that is very allopathic with a disproportionate emphasis on the
material aspects of health and not enough importance given to the
energetic aspects of life. And homeopathy is a vitalist, energetic
medicine. If you take the model in the Organon of the mind, body,
soul and spirit of homeopathy, then the mind, soul and spirit are
the energetic parts of the totality leaving the body as the only
physical part. That means three quarters of our being is energetic
and one quarter is physical.
In my opinion many curricula are based the other way around –
that is three quarters physical and one quarter energetic, if that.
And some schools are even more physically inclined, particularly
the ones that have gone for university degree status, and that has
meant that the way they do anatomy, physiology and pathology is
much more allopathic than homeopathic. So, I have a problem with
this. The extreme of this occurs at the Royal London Homeopathic
Hospital. They were much more homeopathic in their thinking, but
not anymore; now they think and prescribe like allopaths. When I
went there a few years ago a patient would sit in front of a doctor
for say ten or fifteen minutes, the repertory would be opened and
they would look at asthma and locate the black type remedies and
keep trying them until one of them made a difference. That is not
homeopathy.
What I see is that the essence of the curriculum of homeopathy
has not changed in the last twenty years and it is very allopathically
oriented. What I have found is that many of the people I supervise
are allopathic thinkers prescribing homeopathy and I don’t
get on very well with that concept and I cannot supervise them very
easily. So I encourage them to venture forth on a transition process
from allopathic to homeopathic thinking. However, everything in
our society validates allopathic thinking, so people need to do
this journey against the current.
For me, a homeopathic curriculum needs to acknowledge and recognise
primarily that the student is there to make this transition, this
journey from allopathic to homeopathic thinking. From thinking and
considering things from a culturally based model that validates
allopathic meaning, to being prepared to stand behind a philosophy
that understands life differently and puts us on the margins of
society. When we start thinking differently, we start appreciating
different values based on different assumptions and we start having
a comprehension of a way of understanding that validates individual
experience over notions of collective symptom pictures or syndromes.
In my opinion, one of the biggest problems we have in ensuring
the future of homeopathy, is how do we make sure that our curriculum
is homeopathic and not allopathic? And this could get worse once
we have a single register. The more the Government and conventional
Western medicine become involved with homeopathy, the more allopathically
thinking and allopathically validating it could become. If homeopaths
don’t think homeopathically they will not be able to teach
their patients nor advocate clearly for their profession.
This is reflected in the media that constantly criticises homeopathy
from an allopathic perspective and headlines research that can only
invalidate homeopathy given the premises under which the research
was undertaken. You cannot double-blind test homeopathy, it just
cannot happen and there is no point trying. It just won’t
work because the essence of homeopathy is about treating everybody
as an individual. And that means double-blind testing won’t
work.
Homeopathy prescribed and researched allopathically is happening
all the time. The 2002-3 research into Arnica for pain relief after
carpal tunnel release surgery is a good example as I don’t
know a single homeopath who would give Arnica for postoperative
carpal tunnel pain relief in the first place. But this type of research
and the thinking behind it and the media that publishes it, is going
on all the time and I think it affects the way homeopaths write
their brochures, the way they promote their clinics, the way they
think about what they do, the way they address their patients and
the way they address the world. And I have problems with that, because
to me that is not homeopathy. You can see I feel passionately about
this.
ROWENA:
Yes, I can see that. So what is the answer Simon; how do we move
our profession forward?
SIMON: I think everybody needs to be
plopped into a crucible that nurtures and supports them to think
homeopathically.
It is important that students get exposed to as many different
forms of practise as possible. It is not about creating little Simon
Tafflers or teaching and making little Rowena Ronsons. It is about
everybody becoming the person that they can be and practising in
their own way and I think that that is very important. Listen, I
started in a class of around two hundred and fifty potential homeopaths
of which at the end, I think, fewer than forty graduated. The year
I left the College of Homeopathy, ten of us transferred to the School
of Homeopathy and many more left without completing the course.
It was an appalling indictment of the way I was taught and if I
think of the people that started with me, I don’t know how
many of them are still practising.
So learning homeopathy clearly is not just about helping people
prescribe; it is about validating the chosen philosophical framework
(homeopathic) and then helping them validate their experiences by
reviewing their understanding of the world. This is one way of looking
at what a remedy does. And that is the starting point because many
of the people who graduate don’t practise. They need to be
exposed to as much personal development, validation and acknowledgment
as possible. Then they will know that it is OK that we think differently
from everybody else and that we can address medical problems based
on the experience of the patient and not on what a test says. They
will know that people’s health is transitory and that we have
assumptions in homeopathy that actually support the way people understand
their health.
Case taking in homeopathy is unique and extremely pertinent and
relevant to every single practitioner of medicine anywhere in the
world. When I teach doctors, I don’t start by telling them
about remedies. Instead, I tell them how we take a case, because
it is an eye opener for them. And when doctors sit in on my practice
and I take a case, they ask me where I get the information from.
That is because they sit and hear, and I sit and listen. Hearing,
for me, is a physical thing you do and listening is an active participation
in a conversation without influencing it. I think people need to
be trained and it is a skill that they have to have when they leave
homeopathy school. And that is much more important than how many
remedies they know because you can always look up a remedy.
I am concerned that homeopathy could die because it could get swallowed
into an integrated health care programme where the primary responsibility
for a patient is taken by an allopathic doctor who will validate
tests and research over personal experience. In other words, I see
that conventional Western medical practitioners will validate explanations
over experience while homeopaths validate experience over explanation.
I cannot envisage an integrated medicine approach working for homeopathy,
because as I said before, the homeopathic paradigm has a greater
worldview than conventional Western medicine. And therefore, allopathy
or Western medicine fits nicely into homeopathy but not the other
way around.
I hope you enjoyed reading this extract from
Simon’s chapter in Looking Back Moving Forward
and it has given you plenty of food for thought! I would very much
welcome a worldwide discussion on the issues raised by Simon. If
you visit the blog on my website, www.lookingbackmovingforward.com,
you can make your contribution and also receive a ten percent discount
if you buy the book. Also, please check out the website which has
very recently been updated with all the latest reviews. Many thanks!
Long live homeopathy! |