Re: Questions about Scientology? [STRIKE]Psych[/STRIKE]Scientology Iatrogenic pathologies within the field of [STRIKE]Psych[/STRIKE]Scientology. In most cases, [STRIKE]Psych[/STRIKE]Scientology can play a vital role in enabling people to manage emotional or psychological stress. However, it is suspected that at times the actions and dialect within some [STRIKE]Psych[/STRIKE]Scientological [STRIKE]therapy sessions[/STRIKE] auditing can inadvertently or perhaps even deliberately cause certain symptoms to manifest - perhaps stemming from the patient's attempt to conform to what they may perceive to be the [STRIKE]practitioners[/STRIKE]auditors wishes or expectations. This is a form of [STRIKE]social[/STRIKE] cult reinforcement and can have counter-productive effects [STRIKE]both[/STRIKE] upon the [STRIKE]therapeutic relationship as well as the[/STRIKE] general well being of the patient. The controversial diagnosis of Dissociative Identity Disorder, formerly known as Multiple Personality Disorder, is sometimes cited as a possible iatrogenic pathology. Other psychological pathologies may also be created or augmented in a similar way. Dispute Sometimes, there is some difficulty in determining when a disorder is actually caused by [STRIKE]professional[/STRIKE] intervention. Other possibilities include: Patients dishonestly reporting illness [STRIKE]to gain attention or sympathy, for example, a patient suffering from Munchausen Syndrome[/STRIKE] keep the stats up guys [STRIKE]Patients deliberately seeking medical or psychological treatment they know may cause them to somehow become ill, with the intent of monetary gain through a subsequent medical malpractice suit[/STRIKE] one way exchange Incorrect [STRIKE]professional[/STRIKE] diagnosis Sounds familiar Inexperience of the practitioner I would never imply auditors are dangerous and incompetent. WOULD I?
Re: Questions about Scientology? Can some of you FZ OTs get rid of those fucking icicles? Biberach: Marktplatz-Webcam
Re: Questions about Scientology? Domed the neuroplasticity discussion--an interesting topic, but derailing the thread.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Thank you--I think I got them all now. I may be in and out of this thread, so please report if I missed any. Thanks.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Get your point and more below. I must confess I'm in over my head here. I don't know that much about psychology or mainstream therapy. Was trying to answer questions about scientology. My understanding is that mainstream therapy was originally to help people handle difficulties in life. My mum saw a shrink, and one of her problems was her relationship to me. Also she was long divorced and raised two kids and didn't have well paid employment. She was often stressed out and I think at that time was having problems controlling me. I was around 10. I'd previously been taken to a child psychiatrist aged 3 as I was naughty and high spirited. Was more about my mother having to handle so much and not always coping properly. Scn is primarily addressing the spirit and looking to increase abilities. Mainstream talk therapy seems to have very much gone this way with " Life Coaches" helping people learn whatever helps them do better in life, and therapy directed to the same. I see this as addressing the spirit as do many streams of therapy. Mainstream talk therapy is full of different approaches. I think they are on a learning curve. Psychologists can do things like attend meetings of those who practice shamanistic ideas. I know FZers who have done the same. Note that the "bridge" in scn is a gradient of increasing areas of abilities. Its designed to work 100% for all. It doesn't of course, but does pretty well. Also note from the SS thread I mentioned you'll see quite an emphasis on people expressing gains specifically re abilities. This is primarily of problem in COS. One is there connected to a psychopathic organization and people can go extremely the effect of it. There is not any record of unwarranted deaths connected to the FZ. Few do. The main risks of auditing are not getting promised results. Also in COS there are a variety of problems of therapy in an unsafe environment. Auditing is talk therapy, and as such is by definition largely risk free. Here is the auditors code which is primarily aimed at making it safe and workable for those recieving auditing. L. Ron Hubbard - The Auditor's Code Doesn't happen in the FZ. We are not a monolithic organization that exercises totalitarian control. People don't like what you do we can't stop them walking to someone else. COS is a different kettle of fish. For example a friend of mine had a psychotic break [ just from reading non confidential material] and is periodically forcefully taken back to a mental hospital, and rightly so which he acknowledges. Another friend used to visit him on such occasions. Then he was told at flag that this person was " following other practices" and he shouldn't remain in contact. Duh!!! Having the fire brigade and police forcefully taking you to a secure mental facility is "following other practices"? They are fucking nuts! With regard to does auditing work. As I probably mentioned Frank Gerbode was a psychaitrist and also studying scn. He wrote in the forward of his book " Metapsychology" that the scn work produced better results than his day job. The personality test is used throughout ones auditing to see what progress was made. It was originated by a psychologist, Julia Sammons. who also studied scn. When I used to see if those wanting to join staff were qualified, they had to get good results on the OCA, IQ , and another oddball test which is more about thinking outside the box. Those not reaching the standard usually did after a basic course or two. Specially TRs course. I believe the gold standard of psychological testing is still the Minnesota Multiphasic personality test. In the second book in the subject, "Science of Survival" examples of the results of this and other standard tests of the day are shown, to good results.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Miranda, Miranda, Miranda - say it three times Terril! Care to answer anyone one else?
Re: Questions about Scientology? You missed this one. http://forums.whyweprotest.net/1366342-post310/
Re: Questions about Scientology? I'll respond in a couple of posts. Talk therapy is by no means risk-free. Therapists work with all kinds of very serious problems, from abuse to PTSD to suicidal depression. Many therapists combine drugs with "talk therapy"; not too many provide drugs without talk, and many consider that to be bad practice. An ignorant or misguided approach, let alone an error involving drugs, can be disastrous. Also, the relationship between therapist and patient is a delicate one that can easily go off the rails in a number of directions, causing emotional harm, if the therapist isn't skilled. Most of these risks, I think, would also apply to auditing--hence the great concern about proper training. My opinion: FZ auditors would do well to get training in psychology. I'm sure someone else could provide more detail on this point, but in general it's important to note that there are various approaches to "talk therapy," ranging from analysis, which is time- and emotion-intensive, to cognitive behavioral therapy and other similar approaches that focus more on offering new perspectives and ways of considering problems. Life skills coaching is not therapy--it is usually a short-term approach that addresses mostly practical problems such as employment skills, practical or daily living skills, and (to a lesser degree) social skills. Life skills coaches often don't have degrees in counseling or psychology. And as I mentioned above, "talk therapy" doesn't necessarily exclude medication. I'm not anti-religious and I don't mean to denigrate the concept of spirit--but in connection with psychology and auditing, I kind of need to know what you mean. As you pointed out, there's a lot of overlap in the situations and problems that all of these various methods, as well as auditing, address. It seems difficult if not impossible to draw a clear line between matters of the mind and matters of the spirit (and matters of the body).
Re: Questions about Scientology? Thank you. Please use the report button if there are more, in case no mods are in the thread--gets addressed faster that way.
Re: Questions about Scientology? i'm staying away from this thread. but, i think it is a good one anyhow, and the level of intelligence and maturity and spot on humour has my utmost respect. i love you, anonymous! you rock.
Re: Questions about Scientology? I do understand that, and definitely it's an improvement over CoS's approach. But totalitarian control is not the only kind of control. By promising positive results through auditing in a wide variety of areas that overlap quite a bit with those addressed by psychology, and by upholding the teachings of L. Ron Hubbard, who had quite a prejudice against "psychs," Scientology exerts a definite influence, encouraging people toward auditing and away from therapy. Given that auditors generally lack professional training as therapists, this greatly increases the likelihood of bad outcomes for people who genuinely need psychotherapy. Well, the more important issue to my mind is not that CoS was inconsistent in that instance but that there exists a rule or policy or belief against "following other practices." Yes, and he may well be quite informed on the matter. But I refer you again to the research done by Big Tobacco. It's important that there be actual studies done by objective parties. I'm not certain about this last point and perhaps someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the MMPI is no longer considered to be quite the gold standard that it once was. I'd defer to someone who knows more on the subject, though.
Depends on who's doing the "handling". (runs away laughing and giggling stupidly) And while it's true that Hubbard said not to allow a pc to leave a session (without the auditor's say so) he ALSO said not to audit a "protesting pc". So what bigger protest can there BE but trying to leave? Yes, there have been some accounts people have posted about sec checks and so on for children. Umm...pretty much everyone I know who's encountered Virginia McLaughrey on the net has an opinion (of her) that is similar to Terril's.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Dear Terril I have some questions about Scientology for you. I would be very grateful to hear your views. 1. You say that 1(a) Do you think that any OT VIIIs can demonstrate an "ability" not held by "preclears", or people in the general community, but that would be recognised by non-Scientologists? If so, what is that abilility and how would we recognise it? 1(b) Have you ever suspected that these "OT abilities" might be better described as indoctrinations, or modifications of one's personal "beliefs"? 1(c) Do you see any practical distinction between the two views that (1) the "bridge" is a document written by LRH describing increasing abilities and (2) there really is such a "bridge", as described? 1(d) Imagining for a moment that the "bridge" is only imaginary, could you see any reason why LRH might describe an imaginary thing as real? 1(e) Do we know that the bridge doesn't end up decreasing abilities, up past OTX, for example? 2. You say that 2(a) If someone is delusional or psychotic, is there any harm in that person indoctrinating others or providing talk therapy to troubled people? 2(b) Do you think that talk therapy based on delusional premises and suggestions could implant delusional ideas, or otherwise be harmful? 2(c) Do you believe that it is risky to partake in Scientology auditing in the "unsafe" and "psychotic" environment of the "Church of Scientology"? 2(d) Do you believe that malicious manipulation, "psychotic breaks" or self-delusion can be produced through talk therapy or exposure to delusional world views, suggestions and ideas? 2(e) How do you reconcile the belief that talk therapy is risk free, while "reading non confidential material" can make you have a psychotic break? 2(f) Do you not see Scientology as a process of indocrination, or do you think that indoctrination is risk free? 2(g) If LRH was delusional, malicious, or insane, could that have created problems in the "Church of Scientology"? 2(h) Is it logical that LRH's great inventions of the Church of Scientology, and the practise of Scientology, and the values of Scientology, and the wisdom of Scientology, and the sanity of Scientology, and the technology of Scientology, and the the abilities of Scientology, and the organizational tech of Scientology, produced what you describe as a "psychotic organization"?
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril, you for the fourth of fifth time failed to acknowledge my posts and questions, what is so unsettling about them that you won't even acknowledge them. If you are going to say that you do not like the tone in which i wrote them, that you find them to be rude and harsh --i recommend you consider the following: stop insulting people's intelligence, instead of manipulating try to be sincere. Did you or did you not refer to Jung's research with galvanometers in order to validate your claim that the e-meter is a good thing --thus establishing the link between auditing and hypnotherapy? Do you or do you not consider auditing to be psycho/hypnotherapy? Do you reckon that clinical psychology and our understanding of the human mind has evolved in the past three decades? Do you reckon that LRH TECH has not been changed in the past three decades? Do you reckon hypnotherapy should be done in a controlled environment, to avoid negative physical and cognitive symptoms? Do you reckon auditing is done in a controlled environment? What are the anticipated outcomes of auditing? What are the risks of auditing? What are the risks of hypnotherapy? What proof is available that auditing is not nefarious? What is your prime reason to ignore questions? Have the effects of LRH TECH ever been studied at peer reviewed level by any recognized universities or education facilities? Would you please drop the pseudo-"meta"-argument: You mention it in about every post, it doesn't make the Freezone legitimate, stop already and answer questions.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Let's for the sake of argument call the Freezone quackery, religion for a minute. People often seek consolation in religion when they are unable to answer spiritual and existential questions. You recently said that the Freezone helps the "able" be more "able". My questions is: is that a two way exchange, does it make the "unable" more "unable"? Reason for me to believe this is that you seem to be unable to answer most questions in this topic.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril, how many of your freezone friends are psychologists? How do you define a "freezone friend"? Who are these people? (I know of no freezone people who are psychologists) If you don't answer these questions, I will conclude you are lying to us, to paraphrase Hubbard, in order to control us.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Alright. So basically you agree that Hubbard was full of shit on that point. As he was with numerous other clear abilities, such as the attainment of perfect eyesight just with even "slight attention" (Dianetics 1990 paperback p. 17). Tell me again why you believe in this guy? Well, the problem is that not only is there no clear, there's no existence of Hubbard's "reactive mind." Ask the Scientologist: Scientology: Selling Invisible Things
Re: Questions about Scientology? Your question assumes that Terril only has FZ friends. Terril has friends who aren't Free Zoners. Some are psychologists. Wouldn't it be up to the psychologist if he or she wanted to join the FZ? Let's turn the tables on your question. Do YOU know of any who want to join the FZ?
Re: Questions about Scientology? No, I beg to say, it doesn't. Terril stated verbatim that he has "several FZ friends who are psychologists". It's entirely congruous and pertinent to then ask, as did Scatman "Terril, how many of your freezone friends are psychologists?" Moving right along, I wonder if these several scientologist psychs see themselves as the root cause of criminality in this sector of the galaxy, or as delusional cultists, or both.
Re: Questions about Scientology? That should probably have been accompanied by boom tish rimshot effect. It's nice to reflect that the number of people who would understand that joke has skyrocketed over the past year.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Both scientologists and psychologists might recognize this as a case of lunatics running the asylum.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril has stated that he knows several FZ psychologists, and that few FZ auditors have degrees in psychology. The question has been asked: How many FZ psychologists does he know? I can't see the importance of this question, but I'm sure it would be easy enough to answer when he's back online. It would help to read the whole thread before posting. He's been asked a lot of questions and is entitled to choose from among them. I agree that some of the more difficult ones, including some of mine, haven't yet been answered. There's still time. I'd like it, too, if he addressed some of them. For the record, though, some of the questions I posted were cut and pasted from others' posts--so to be fair he is not answering only me.
Re: Questions about Scientology? For the moment I'll give priority to your questions as you ask good ones, though they are difficult, and they tend to reflect others questions. I know 4 possibly 5 Freezoners who have degrees in psychology. One may have only a degree in socialogy, and works in that field in her day job. She is highly trained and experienced in scn. One no longer considers herself a scientologist, but had great wins from the subject and still follows spiritual paths and is very supportive of the FZ. There may be others I know who have such degrees and qualifications who havn't told me. Its not something I usually ask. Actually there are more. Those involved with Metapsychology and TIR are more closely aligned to the mainstream and I know one who runs seminars on these subjects and most attendees are social workers, psychologists or psychiatrists. These people in general are more aligned with mainstream therapy than scientology. Again note that Metapsychology and TIR are essentially scn and dianetics re written with to the best of my knowledge little change.
Re: Questions about Scientology? I see the things you mention as problematic. Those severely disturbed would not be eligible for scn auditing in COS. This in general I believe is carried forward into the FZ. Note that the auditors code says that one should only accept as a PC one you feel you can help. In the old Mission network, destroyed by COS mostly, they did accept some who were classed as " illegal PCs" to good effect. But I'm sure these would not be the most disturbed. Such are it seems very difficult to handle by anyone. Hubbard did find an answer to the psychotic break. The "introspection rundown". This is what Lisa McPherson was allegedly doing. However CO$ completely screwed up. Other times this approach has been successful. It involves mild sedatives if needed. Not sure of the legal aspects of this. Would an ordinary Dr working with scientologists be legally sufficient? Or is a psychiatrist legally mandatory? Scientologists have a problem with those who have a psychotic break. They fear if they go to conventional psychaity that they will be damaged by very heavy drugs and shock treatment. Also they will never again be allowed scn services. In fact this has been taken so far that Flag dosn't even allow anyone for services who are overweight. They are that scared of bad publicity! Ideally one would find a nursing home where one is allowed rest and mild sedatives as needed and allowed to destimulate, with the introspection rundown auditing as needed. Far as I know CO$ could have set up such an institution but you probably know they don't like spending money....Also Not sure how it would exist legally I might ask, why don't psychologists get trained in scientology? IMO for the more disturbed a mixture of both would be helpful to many. Instead DM vowed to exterminate psychaitry by the year 2000 without putting in place a method for handling the more fragile other than saying " Go away"! This is as I understand such matters. I have a similar view as yourself. Scn specifically takes the view that it addresses the spirit. Note that DMSMH, the start of it all ruled out the spirit as something needed to resolve the problems of the mind. Then people started running what seemed to be past lives, and thus a spiritual theory, Scn emerged. IMO anyone, or maybe only most, doing talk therapy is looking at spiritual matters whether they think so or not. If one considers life is spiritual in nature it seems difficult to me to think otherwise. Matters of the body are often relatively simple to find suitable methods of address. This is in scn considered the first approach one makes in bodily difficulties. Nutrition is a favoured and very valuable approach. Also its considered that mental problems may stem from unidentified bodily problems. This can be true for some, eg lack of vit B3 can be a cause of schizophrenia. Some body problems are psychosomatic and need more than a physical approach to handle.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Come to think of it I have two family members who are psychologists.
Re: Questions about Scientology? I can tell you that schizophrenia is a genetic disposition- it can certainly be triggered by stress, trauma or street drugs, but someone who is schizophrenic (as opposed to someone who has a temporary psychosis). Unfortunately, it cannot be stopped with just vitamins, if only that were the case. Sure, a balanced diet with a high amount of EPA fish oil could be beneficial, but, sadly, the condition for many people requires pharmacological medication. My step-brother is a serious paranoid-schizophrenic, really heavily schizophrenic to the point that he has absolutely no idea just how delusional he is (that's psychosis for you) and only medication has ever made him able to function. I did, recently meet a clinical psychologist at a party and she is actually opposed to anti-psychotic drugs for schizophrenia because they can cause brain shrinkage- she would prefer that sedatives were used. Psychiatry and psychology are constantly evolving and the fact that medical science is involved means no dogma is too mighty for analysis and no treatment is unimprovable. Should anyone think they could "audit" my step-brother to mental health- I'm sure I can arrange a meeting, I promise you, unless, you can understand an entirely made up language, you wont get far!
Re: Questions about Scientology? I second this, having also been somewhat close to people with schizophrenia. I don't think anyone claims that the drugs currently used to treat it are ideal. In some cases they create symptoms that are as difficult to deal with as the disease itself. But talk, or auditing, can't address what has been shown to be a brain disease. And the fact that auditors are supposed to simply turn such people away isn't encouraging either. I would respect them more if they sent such people directly to a psychiatrist. That is their best hope at present. Schizophrenia is only one example, and as an extreme illness maybe not the most relevant. Depression affects far more people and can be debilitating and fatal. Misunderstanding it, telling a depressed person to "buck up" or "try this, it worked for me" are classic and serious errors. I would guess that auditors don't know how to identify depression and therefore probably audit many depressives. I think there are two issues here: 1) Practicing medicine without a license, and 2) The idea that only the able qualify to become more able.
Re: Questions about Scientology? ^^ Schizophrenia isn't entirely genetic, but definitely has a significant genetic factor. Schizophrenia.com - Schizophrenia Genetics and Heredity Terril, if you are referring to me as one of your friends with a degree in Psychology, yes, I have a Bachelor's degree in both Psychology and Sociology. Sociology was by far the easier of the two with its short history and far less branches of study. I studied these after I left Scn. My main motive was to get the crap of Scn sorted out. Psychology helped me tremendously with that and I am a huge supporter of CBT, but not Freudian methods. Anyone with any sort of genuine study in Sociology would be aware of the negative impact of the group dynamics of the Church of Scientology, since it operates as a fascist religious organization. They would also be aware of the incredible negative effects of disrupting the child/parent bonding relationships. But I am not a Freezoner, I am a fully out Ex. I certainly have spiritual interests, but I greatly regret my time in Scn. Still, I would say some of the lower level processes (i.e., Grades), particularly Life Repair and others that did not deal with past lives or engrams or did not deal with controling the client were beneficial. However, they did not achieve the results stated. I support those Freezoners who take an honest, realistic approach and do not deny the damages of the cult, the schizophrenic/paranoid actions of L Ron Hubbard, the lack of valid research for Scientology processes and ridiculous claims, the damages of some very detrimental processes and procedures, or the damages of the policies that created the criminal, abusive organization of the Church of Scientology and maniacs like DM within it. Personally, I think when all of that is sifted through, the good that is left doesn't even come close to the original Scientology, but resembles psychology much more closely.
Re: Questions about Scientology? In the interest of thoroughness, here are a few additional questions extracted from the thread and somewhat rephrased: Can you clarify your views on Jung's galvanometer research and its relevance to auditing? We sort of started to discuss this but wandered off. Related: Do you feel that there is any relationship or similarity between auditing and hypnosis? Where L. Ron Hubbard's teachings conflict with recent developments in the fields of psychiatry and neurology, do you feel he is in error? (This is meant as a general question, not referring to specific developments but rather inquiring about your willingness to grant that he may have made mistakes in these areas because of the times in which he lived.) More fundamentally, are you, for want of a better word, a "fundamentalist Scientologist"--that is, one who believes that "tech" as Hubbard presented it is correct, should be followed exactly, and should not be altered? Do you view hypnotherapy as risky in any way? Do you agree with the concern that some have expressed regarding practicing hypnosis in an uncontrolled environment? Related to that, should auditing also be conducted in a controlled environment? Is it? What are the anticipated outcomes of auditing? You mentioned that not achieving anticipated outcomes is a risk of auditing--do you see any other risks? Are you aware of any scientific proof (non-anecdotal) that auditing 1) delivers the promised results and 2) does not cause harm? Are you aware of any controlled and peer-reviewed studies of "tech" that have been conducted at universities? Again, it's of course your right to choose what to respond to. I think that to many people here, it would indicate good faith if you would respond as fully as possible to all serious questions. And, once again, no disrespect in any of this. I'm rephrasing other people's questions because you have indicated a willingness to respond to my posts, and I think this has to do with communication style, probably. So I'm trying to phrase the questions in a way that might make them a bit more respectful and accessible.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Hey there, I thought you had studied nursing and had such qualifications. No wasn't referring to you. Kudos on such study!
Re: Questions about Scientology? Thanks, Terril. I just started on the Aged Care nursing. Not sure yet how far I want to go with it. I am looking into some branches that may combine the psych/soc degree with the nursing. Now can you please answer Miranda?
Re: Questions about Scientology? A friend just posted on ESMB that he considered there were 3 classes. 1] Those that just went on with their life with an occasional bit of self help, maybe even therapy of sorts. 2] Those who seek greater understanding, and pursued further enlightenment in whatever chosen path. Could be scn , other religious paths including Magick and even politics. 3] Those locked up to prevent damage to others. I consider there is much categories between 1,2 and 3. Scn of course is in category 2. Re "depressives" I'm not sure I understand the parameters of this. Someone unhappy may benefit from anyone's talk therapy including scn. Is "depressive" a valid categorization? Scn isn't practicing medicine. If its needed medical doctors are referred to ideally. "2) The idea that only the able qualify to become more able." In general is seems scn is castigated for not helping the less able, and on the other hand vilified if it tries without a psychology degree! Broadly some in the FZ would like some unification here. I'm all for that. There is a situation of great sadness for me. I believe CO$ has made the subject so unpalatable that very few wish to find out more. Some still do. Those highly trained are getting on in years and are not being replaced. Training is a weak point in the FZ. CO$ is an abortion producing robots for councilors. The bright spark are the Ron's orgs in Russia who are the greatest trainers of auditors. More so than the COS and english speaking FZ combined. And then I see that the ideas of scn may best preserved in the english language with Metapsychology and TIR. And in future I hope the ideas will be forwarded in the general area of psychology. In a sense I'm a dying dinosaur. I do my best to promote the good of Scn. The COS has fucked that up completely. I still live, survive, but I don't see a good future for the subject. I hope I'm wrong.
Re: Questions about Scientology? I love how this turned into a Q&A into a bunch of ego faggots trying hard to be right. Congrats to Terril for sailing through the shitstorm.
Re: Questions about Scientology? Terril, thanks for your response on the schizophrenia and depression issues. I took you to mean that the three classes refer to all people (not only schizophrenics) and won't address that comment as I'd prefer to stay on the topic of questions that haven't yet been answered. About depression, it's a medical illness treated by psychiatrists. I'm not referring to people who are "a little down" over something that happened or "having a bad day." Here's the Mayo Clinic definition: Causes include biological (brain) changes, neurotransmitters, hormones, inherited traits, life events, and early childhood trauma. Here are the symptoms, again from the Mayo Clinic site: Treatments include drugs and/or psychotherapy--usually a combination, especially in serious cases. Mayo has this to say about alternative therapies for depression: Why this is important: Many people, not Scientologists only, notice these symptoms but may misinterpret them and respond in ways that actually make the depression worsen--for instance, encouraging the person to just work harder at being happy, to set some goals, to be more organized, etc., often has a negative effect as a depressed person may simply be unable to do these things; in order to do them he or she needs treatment. The end result of a severe untreated depression can be suicide. Specifically regarding Scientology, the concern is that without psychological and/or medical training, auditors would likely misidentify depression; that promising results to such a person is very dangerous; and that much of the "conventional wisdom" in Scientology, not to mention the attendant financial stress, may actually be harmful in these cases.
Re: Questions about Scientology? PS. You fall in love far too easily. Critical thinking can help you with that! (joke... kind of)
