Comments on: Spiritual Healer On Trial Over Actress’s Death: Justice Or Witch Hunt?

By: Christine Garvin

Christine Garvin — Tue, 19 May 2009 20:07:21 +0000

Eva, I appreciate and agree with your point of view–alternative practitioners should be held up to standards in the same way that allopathic practitioners are. And I can also see the point that there are plenty of intuitives/psychics etc. that are frauds (hence my point in the beginning), or they read the energy of the moment, instead of the actual future. In cases that this fraudulent or present-moment type of reading leads to death, the practitioner should be held accountable in some way.

But my point is that I wonder if we are getting the whole story here…like the supplement companies that are being run after by the government. I’m the first to agree that we need supplements to be regulated–there is a lot of crap out there that people are spending a lot of money on and it can actually harm their health. But who is pushing the regulation of the supplement industry? The pharmaceutical industry, and they want to be the ones to regulate it. That means billions of dollars in their pocket that they are currently losing to supplement companies AND they will inevitably change many vitamins and minerals into prescription drugs. I want experts in alternative health and vitamins and minerals to regulate supplementation.

Sorry, that may be a long and convoluted explanation of something that is pretty simple: Follow the money. Sometimes these types of cases are set as a precedent in order to tear at the fabric of a particular alternative method, and bring the money back to the standard method. I’m not saying this is true in this case–what is written sounds pretty damning–but as we all know, the news is often skewed.

(Report comment)

By: Eva

Eva — Tue, 19 May 2009 19:22:37 +0000

I’m not sure how helpful it is to generalize here. I have a feeling this case won’t be very representative of other, clear-cut efforts to marginalize alternative methods of medicine. In this case, the issue isn’t really her methods — if a practicing MD mistakenly told a patient they were cancer-free and didn’t require treatment, they’d be looking at malpractice and wrongful death suits. And if they did so knowingly, rather than in ignorance, then yeah, they’d be up for murder, too.

I think the key to all of this is disclosure. Yes, alternative methods work for some people and not others, and belief plays a big role — but the practitioners *need to be able to tell* whether or not their methods are working, and to advise their clients accordingly. It’s not about “did it work, or didn’t it,” in this case, really. Evidently, it didn’t work, and the patient was (allegedly) misinformed — that’s the issue. If it’s true that this woman, in a professional capacity, told this woman she was cancer-free (whether knowing or not knowing that this was false), then she should face the consequences. Anything less actually undercuts alternative healing, I think — it says, “this isn’t real medicine, they can’t be expected to be held to any sort of standard.” Know what I mean?

Not sure if I’m making sense here. It’s an emotional subject for many, I’m sure, but that’s exactly why I don’t think it does much good to treat any given case as a broad-brush showdown between two types of medicine.

(Report comment)

By: theresa

theresa — Tue, 19 May 2009 17:17:43 +0000

Christine – this is intense! A lot of questions and defenses rise up in me as well. If a doctor told me I had cancer and I had to do A, B, and C to live, I would consider it. If a healer told me it was not cancer, I would be concerned. As you know, I practice alternative “holistic” medicine as a practitioner and as an everyday person and I know the value of complementary and modern medicine. I think it is free will and care of self… whichever way a person chooses to go.
When I did my presentation on Narrative Healing last summer, there were some questions at the end. Are the treatments what cured, or the belief? The story changing? The healer? It is different for every person and yet the stories remain the same… Person A and Person B have the same disease and are healed through very different means… Person C is not. Certainly, we are not in “control” of outcomes, however we are in control of what we do and allow to have done to our bodies.
I think it’s sad that these doctors / healers are on trial. I think that if people did not receive the services they paid for then they could take the healers to court for their money back… but posthumously?

(Report comment)