Introspection Rundown

Question answered by honorarykid in Scientology

formerscientologist asked this question on 7/19/2000:

Is it ok to give someone on the introspection rundown valium?

honorarykid gave this response on 7/20/2000:

I would say that theoretically, the answer is no. Scientology despises what they call "psych"s and they hate the prescribing and dispensing of "psych drugs."

However, in actual practice, things aren't always so pure. Guarding a psychotic person is not an easy job. According to the logs of her babywatch handlers, Lisa McPherson was reported to be manic and somewhat violent at times during her Introspection Rundown. The Scientologists who were guarding her arranged for Chloral Hydrate to be prescribed for her by a Scientologist doctor who had never examined her. This powerful drug was administered to her a doctor who had lost her license to practice medicine.

So clearly, Scientologists will be opportunistic when things get tough on them. If it makes their lives easier, they have demonstrated that they are willing to forceably medicate their own incapacitated members with psychotropic drugs, even if they did not specifically choose Valium in Lisa McPherson's case.

Unfortunately, I think there is little hope that these opportunistic suspensions of their belief systems will ever create the impetus for an institutional rethinking of Scientology's knee-jerk hatreds of what they derisively call "psychs" and "psych drugs."

formerscientologist asked this follow-up question on 7/20/2000:

I didn't make myself clear on this question. I was only asking to find out whether the valium is out tech or not because I had read that Lisa was given valium.

Maybe I'll find the info on the internet.

honorarykid gave this response on 7/29/2000:

Hi FormerScientologist,

Sorry it took so long to get back to you on this question. But I'm back from traveling and active as a Scientology expert once again.

Did you ever find out if giving Valium to a Babywatch subject was officially "out-tech?"

formerscientologist asked this follow-up question on 7/29/2000:

No. I did not.

honorarykid gave this response on 8/1/2000:

I posed this question to a.r.s readers, and got some tech references which address your question. I will add several followups with comments and tech references of other answers, with this first one being (IMO) the most complete.

Apparently, it is NOT strictly out-tech for Scientologists to dispense Valium (a mild sedative) to their psychotic peers.

L. Ron Hubbard wrote in
HCO BULLETIN OF 12 MARCH 1969, Issue II
PHYSICALLY ILL PCS AND PRE OTS

" The problem in insanity is often how do you keep the patient from injuring himself or starving or dying before he can be examined by a competent medical doctor in a properly equipt clinic. This is done by rest, security, feeding, under drugs if necessary."

This information came to me from former Scientologists Catarina Pamnell. Here is her entire answer, which also shows that other "psych" drugs were apparently tolerated by Scientology for treatment of the psychotic and the insane (people which Scientology calls "PTS Type III") in the past, as well as some very curious and contradictory statements by Hubbard, not only about the efficacy of dispensing sedatives, but also about the need and efficacy for medical care for "Type Three" people by licensed physicians.

=============
Begin Answer from Catarina Pamnell
===============

The Introspection Rundown bulletins I have seen have not discussed drugs, only vitamins and minerals:

----------------- HCO BULLETIN OF 23 JANUARY 1974RA
THE INTROSPECTION RD

STEPS OF THE RD

(Steps 0 and 00 are for a person in a psychotic break, not a normal person.)

Put this checklist on inside front cover of folder as a pgm.

0. On a person in a psychotic break isolate the person wholly with all attendants completely muzzled (no speech).

00. Give Vitamins (B complex, including niacinamide) and minerals (calcium and magnesium) to build the person up.

-------------------

But the following bulletin outright recommends mild sedatives for insane patients:

------------------- HCO BULLETIN OF 12 MARCH 1969, Issue II
PHYSICALLY ILL PCS AND PRE OTS

"The CORRECT ACTION ON AN INSANE PATIENT IS A FULL SEARCHING CLINICAL EXAMINATION BY A COMPETENT MEDICAL DOCTOR.

He may find disease, fractures, concussion, tumors, or ANY COMMON ILLNESS which has escaped treatment and has become chronic(perpetual). He should keep looking until he finds it. For it is there. NOT some "insane germ" but some ordinary recognizable illness or physical malfunction."

(...)

"The problem in insanity is often how do you keep the patient from injuring himself or starving or dying before he can be examined by a competent medical doctor in a properly equipt clinic.

This is done by rest, security, feeding, under drugs if necessary.

A patient can be "built up" by various biochemical compounds, diathermy and other mild means that add to his stamina."

(...)

"Slow gain, poor result is a physically ill pc.

The exercise of these points requires judgement for a person can be given treatments which will not heal him. Where this is the case, and the treatment seems too damaging or uncertain, treat the pc on this routine:

1. Rest
2. No harasament
3. Food
4. Mild sedatives.

When the person seems well, audit him."

-------------

Note that it also stresses a thorough medical exam of the insane person.

The next bulletin also advises soporifics if necessary:

------------------

HCO BULLETIN OF 24 NOVEMBER 1965
LEVEL IV SEARCH AND DISCOVERY

"The task with a Type Three is not treatment as such. It is to provide a relatively safe environment and quiet and rest and no treatment of a mental nature at all. Giving him a quiet court with a motionless object in it might do the trick if he is permitted to sit there unmolested. Medical care of a very unbrutal nature is necessary as intravenous feeding and soporifics (sleeping and quietening drugs) may be necessary, such persons are sometimes also physically ill from an illness with a known medical cure."

--------------------

This would make it OK to use Valium in a psychotic break situation, if one would classify Valium as a "sleeping and quietening drug".

However, there are other passages where Hubbard advises against using sedatives on psychotics, but recommends stimulants such as Benzedrine (an amphetamine):

--------------------

Science of Survival, book 2 chapter 17:

"Sedation of the neurotic or psychotic is a very dangerous practice. If one must do something by way of drugs for these people, better effects, according to medical observation, can be achieved by the administration of stimulants such as benzedrine."

---------------------

Dianetics - the modern science of mental health, chapter 9 part 2:

"Benzedrine and other commercial stimulants have been used with some success, particularly on psychotic patients."

---------------------

I'm not very well versed in the subject, but I believe that amphetamines were over-the-counter drugs in the early 1950s.

Later on, Cal-Mag (a drink made with calcium gluconate and magnesium carbonate) or magnesium tablets are suggested as replacement for tranquilizers:

---------------------

HCO BULLETIN OF 5 NOVEMBER 1974
DRUGS, MORE ABOUT

CAL-MAG FORMULA
(...)
Anything from 1 to 3 glasses of this a day, with or after meals, REPLACES ANY TRANQUILIZER. It does not produce the drugged effects of tranquilizers (which are quite deadly).

---------------------

HCO BULLETIN OF 30 JULY 1973
SCIENTOLOGY, CURRENT STATE OF THE SUBJECT AND
MATERIALS

"While the medical doctor and his psychiatry branch flood out the useless and destructive "tranquilizers", the nutritionist hands out a couple tablets of magnesium which actually cool a person off beautifully and far more effectively without the physical damage carried by the tranquilizer."

--------------------

As regards auditing, the recommendation is to not audit a person who has recently taken drugs:

-------------------

HCO BULLETIN OF 17 OCTOBER 1969
DRUGS, ASPIRIN AND TRANQUILIZERS

"A person who has taken aspirin or other drugs within the past 24 hours or the past week, should be given a week to "dry out" before auditing of any kind is given.

It is not fatal to audit over drugs. It is just difficult, the results may not be lasting and need to be verified afterwards.

---------------------

However, under special circumstances the person may be audited without a prior "dry out" period:

---------------------

HCO BULLETIN OF 11 JULY 1973
ASSIST SUMMARY

"When a person is injured, given a contact or touch assist and then medical examination and treatment, he is given the remainder as soon as he is able to be audited. The drug "five days" does not need to apply."

--------------------

=============

End Answer from Catarina Pamnell

===============

honorarykid gave this follow-up answer on 8/1/2000:

Another poster to a.r.s, Michael Gormez, pointed me to an older webbed a.r.s post made by Diane Richardson, which also mentions another Hubbard Bulletin, HCOB 24, in greater detail. Diane's full answer, which also contains some speculations about other aspects of the treatment of Lisa McPherson, can be found at:

http://www.b-org.demon.nl/scn/deaths/lisa_mcpherson/ars970711.html

Clearly, in HCOB 24, Hubbard is saying it's sometimes necessary to drug a psychotic, but that the drugging is only a sort of security and safety feature to keep a person from hurting themselves, but that the drugs are not part of the ultimate treatment of the psychosis. Interestingly, Hubbard also admits that the Introspection Rundown treatment is not 100% effective, and even casually predicts that some psychotic people will die.

================

Begin statement by Diane Richardson

=========================

[from] HCOB 24 November 1965 "Search and Discovery"

Contained in this HCOB are methods to be utilized to identify and handle suppressive persons and potential trouble sources. Hubbard begins by categorizing three types of PTS. Under "Handling Type Three" Hubbard writes:

"The type three PTS is mostly in institutions or would be. In this case the type two's apparent* SP is spread all over the world and is often more than all the people there are--for the person sometimes has ghosts about him or demons and they are just more apparent SPs but imaginary as beings as well.

"*All* institutional cases are PTSes. The whole of insanity is wrapped up in this one fact.

"The insane is not just a bad off being, the insane is a being who has been overwhelmed by an actual SP until too many persons are apparent SPs. This makes the person roller coaster continually in life. The roller coaster is even cyclic (repetitive as a cycle).

"Putting the person in a current institution puts him in a bedlam. And when also 'treated' it may finish him. For he will roller coaster from any treatment given until made into a type two and given a search and discovery.

"The task with a type three is *not* treatment as such. It is to provide a relatively *safe environment* and quiet and rest and no treatment of a mental nature at all. Giving him a quiet court with a motionless object in it might do the trick if he is permitted to sit there unmolested. Medical care of a very unbrutal nature is necessary as intravenous feeding and soporifics (sleeping and quietening drugs) may be necessary, such persons are sometimes also physically ill from an illness with a known medical cure.

"*Treatment* with drugs, shock, operation is just more suppression. The person will not really get well, will relapse etc.

"Standard auditing on such a person is subject to the roller coaster phenomena [sic]. They get worse after getting better. 'Successes' are sporadic, enough to lead one on, and usually worsen again since these people are PTS.

"But removed from apparent SPs, kept in a quiet surrounding, not pestered or threatened or put in fear, the person comes up to type two and a search and discovery should end the matter. But there will always be some failures as the insane sometimes withdraw into rigid unawareness as a final defense, sometimes can't be kept alive and sometimes are too hectic and distraught to ever become quiet. The extremes of too quiet and never quiet have a number of psychiatric names such as 'catatonia' (withdrawn totally) and 'manic' (too hectic).

"Classification is interesting but non-productive since they are all PTS, all will roller coaster and none can be trained or processed with any idea of lasting result no matter the temporary miracle.

"Remove a type three PTS from the environment, give him or her rest and quiet, get a search and discovery done when rest and quiet have made the person type two.

"The modern mental hospital with its brutality and suppressive treatments is not the way to give a psychotic quiet and rest. Before anything effective can be done in this field a proper institution would have to be provided, offering only rest, quiet and medical assistance for intravenous feedings and sleeping draughts where necessary but not as 'treatment' and where *no* treatment is attempted until the person looks recovered and only then a search and discovery as above under type two."

=============

End statement by Diane Richardson

========================

honorarykid gave this follow-up answer on 8/1/2000:

Sorry for the long answer. This is the last followup I'll post on this subject.

Another a.r.s poster named madwog, who was also subjected to the babywatch, just as Lisa McPherson was, also pointed me to HCOB 24. She gave this reference to this webbed a.r.s post made by Scientology critic Ray Randolph:

http://www.stud.uni-hannover.de/user/76201/lisa/hcob.htm

Drifting slightly from the point of the original question, Madwog's story may be read at:

http://www.primenet.com/~cultxpt/irsurviv.htm

Another Scientology "Babywatch" testimonial can be seen at:

http://home.snafu.de/tilman/mystory/940131_1.txt

Finally, a recent story of yet another psychotic break by a Scientologist can be read at:

http://www.xenu.net/archive/personal_story/kathryn.html

When will the CoS finally see the big picture? When will they realize that they have absolutely no clue about treating psychotic people? When will they realize that their mental experimentation and quackery are dangerous to those unfortunate people being treated?

Soon, I hope...

formerscientologist rated this answer:

It looks like you gave me enough to keep me busy for a week.

---

likely to be read by the public. So I'll keep on answering them.

Anonymous rated this answer:

Thank you for your reply. Any idea if there are other adgend or "missions" in making such posts?

honorarykid gave this follow-up answer on 9/24/2000:

In my opinion, the agenda of the questioners who presume there is a "hate group" here on AskMe.com, is a singular and familiar one. Hubbard wrote over and over that his followers should "strike a blow against Scientology's enemies," and "Keep Scientology Working" (i.e. do anything you have to), and "Never fear to hurt another in a just cause."

Just as the CoS had to do with a.r.s, the goal here at AskMe.com seems to have shifted away from marketing to newbies, and toward descredited anyone who says uncomplimentary things about the Church of Scientology.

The Scientologists have a term for this type of effort. It is called "dead agenting" someone. Now the ones who do the dead-agenting will delude themselves into believing that the act of dead agenting is fundamentally a form of truth-telling. But it's not. Scientology "handlers" have lied, cheated, broken the law, and even committed serious felonies in the past in order to "dead agent" their critics.

The dead-agenting we see here on AskMe.com is small potatoes compared to what people like Paulette Cooper and Robert Vaughn Young and Bob Minton have had to deal with.

Now, if you're asking whether or not there is an official CoS church organized effort to "handle" the critics of Scientology here on AskMe.com, I would guess probably not (although I could be wrong). To me, the Scientologists here seem to me to be in volunteer mode.

That their behaviors, attitudes and arguments all seem so similar is probably not enough to prove that an organized "handling" operation is being mounted. It's only enough to prove that the mental indoctrination that Scientologists receive is pretty darn effective at getting them to act and think in very similar ways.

By the way, another tactic Scientology has tried in the past, is to obscure critical messages so they don't reach as wide an audience. Here on AskMe.com, we've seen several series of non-sequitur questions, which push the real questions about Scientology off the first page in the HTML list. Being a reasonable person, I suspect Scientologists.

Of course, both tactics, "dead agenting" and message flooding, are done to mitigate the PR damage done by public statements which are critical of Scientology.

Return to The Skeptic Tank's main Index page.