The Illness of Not Being Allowed to be Ill
I was studying Husemann and Wolff’s take on Anthroposophical Medicine, Vol. I and read the following excerpt about H. Muller-Eckhard who devoted a monograph to the problem of “the illness of not being allowed to be ill.”
I was deeply struck by my own experience of this plight of the intellect to not know the deeper meaning behind the functional nature of illness. If you have a tumor, the Allopathic Doctor, will over-recommend surgery and some form of chemical warfare. However, he will not ask you why you feel you’ve chosen the path of “the un-lived life” or why you may “rescue others to the exclusion of yourself” as a function of your evolution. He also won’t suggest that your beliefs be looked at so that a re-infection can be avoided.
If I never saw illness, I would not know that fever in a child produces the most amazing growth spurt afterwards. I’ve witnessed Autistic children speak for the first time after a bout of a healthy fever. I’ve listened to many women, who have come off their anti-depressants, tell me they feel they’ve missed years of feeling any of their emotions. One women cried at a movie for the first time in twenty years after she stopped taking the pill. I had one fellow, during Heilkunst treatment, quit his job, leave his wife and strike out as an Art Consultant as he resolved his cancer state of mind. En route, though, he had many bouts of tears and anguish.
As a Heilkunst Physician, we have now come to the heretical understanding that a child has childhood diseases in order to become healthier. It is evident that without this function, the child cannot easily or effectively accomplish the complete adaptation process to fully enter the adult order. Without this capacity to navigate through the adversity of illness, he can not wholly learn to discern the promise of continual change without pause and suffering.
Tylenol and Vaccines suppress this spiritual mapping to becoming a whole, generative and creative being in the face of healthy adversity at a time in their lives when they are meant to develop this function. The Allopathic model simply can’t take the heat!
Summarizing in conclusion, H. Muller-Eckhard says:
“Every childhood disease has a meaning and an immanent
function that can become active in many directions. Quite often a
childhood disease is an irreplaceable help in life, which the child
cannot do without in many situations on the difficult journey out
of his magic and mystical state of consciousness into the world of
the crass reality of the adult order. In all the well-meant protective
immunization against childhood diseases, especially against those
involving desquamation (the shedding of the outer layer of a surface), one thing seems to have been forgotten: with the childhood diseases that are “eliminated,” and whose appearance and arising is made impossible, the active and wholesome functions of these diseases are also taken from the child.”
In fact, Harris Coulter has even linked the criminal element to the suppressive nature of vaccines in his book, Vaccination, Social Violence and Criminality. I, too, had the toughest time shifting my own paradigm. Crawling out of my son’s own Autistic spectrum paradigm was the vehicle to knowing that the function of childhood illness is absolutely critical to a human being’s development. And with Heilkunst medicine, all of this can be accomplished without suffering or harm to the child.
Allyson McQuinn, DMH, Author of The Path to Cure: The Whole Art of Healing
I’m not knocking any of what has been said above. It could be valid (and I know the “converted” believe it to be so), but I do wonder why, in these kinds of essays and comments, no one ever mentions the fact that sometimes, these childhood diseases leave children with permanent damage to some system in the body, or even kill them. And the allopathic community uses this argument to argue in favour of vaccinations. Mumps left three brothers in my extended family sterile many years ago, for example. What is the response to this?
Hi Cindy – this is a great question to overlay onto this essay, and gets to the heart of another general question in medical Heilkunst of what the correct basis for medical intervention should be in any case of illness (which wasn’t the specific content of this essay, but you are correct in identifying it as an important issue to address). Many patients pose a version of this question when they’re facing the vaccination decision for their children, and it highlights the specific issues of whether or not to intervene, and if so, on what basis to do so. The question ends up being falsely polarized, and the parent ends up torn between the fear of the illness itself if they don’t vaccinate, vs. the fear of the undesirable effects of the vaccination if they do.
On one side of the debate, the “allopathic community”, as you refer to them, highlights the potential dangers of childhood illness and fever, and the need to vaccinate as the best means of protection – with the implication of distrust of the body’s natural ability to defend itself. The “natural health movement”, on the other hand, tries to avoid medical intervention whenever possible, and focuses instead on strengthening the body’s innate capacity for healing, and sometimes also highlights the benefits of overcoming illness, as this article discussed. There is a grain of truth to both of these positions, however each side also contains a fundamental misunderstanding of how to resolve this question.
The allopathic concept of vaccination is partially correct, especially in terms of the medical principle applied, which in this case is to use the Law of Similars – which is the same principle for either the cure OR prevention of natural disease (as any Homeopath would know). One of the major problems with this approach, however, is that conventional vaccination is deliverd in a dose that is too large, or “crude” as Dr. Hahnemann would call it, and ends up often becoming even more harmful than the illness. This is a critical point to highlight, even without also addressing the issue of the toxic additives and preservatives that are also contained in the vaccination, but are issues to address elsewhere.
The natural health movement is correct in its approach (sometimes concious, sometimes not) of allowing nature to “take its course”, and allow the body to gain all the benefits that the overcoming of illness has to offer (and much more could be written about this concept), or as some people conceive of strengthening the “general immune system” through nutrition or other means. However, the blind spot of the natural health movement is in not recognizing the profound danger that may be possible in allowing crude nature to have its way, as it will in certain cases result in profound side effects or even death.
The approach that Medical Heilkunst takes, is to capitalize on the grains of truth offered by both camps – on the one hand, to deliver a vaccine as a prevention to a specific disease, and to deliver it based on the law of similars, but in a highly safe dose, ie a potentized remedy, (which is commonly mis-named a ‘homeopathic’ remedy). This specific approach is either called ‘Homeoprophylaxis’ or ‘Homoprophylaxis’. On the other hand, Heilkunst pays a great deal of attention to strengthening the “general immune system”, which the natural health movement does pay attention to, and the allopathic system does not. All in all, this approach offers the benefits from both sides – it does allow the child to benefit from the illness itself, however in the highly refined form of the potentized remedy, rather than in the unmeasured crude dose that nature would deliver. It also offers the benefit from the other side, of strengthening the more import general immune system, which allows the body to fend off any illness, whether or not a specific vaccine has been administered for it.
There are many many inter-related topics that could also be explored in this area, but would go beyond the scope of this reply.
Thanks for that considered and rational response, Jeff. I have a clearer picture of the whole thing now.
I’m really appreciating this discussion and have another, related question, perhaps a bit off topic, though…
I am in the camp of parents who have not immunized their children, but feel uneasy about it. I got very sick withing 6-8 months of every immunization I’ve ever had, and ONLY sick at those times, so it is crystal clear to me that allopathic immunizations suppress my system, not strengthen it.
I have not given my children homeopathic prophylactics either, because my understanding of the prophylactic remedies is really sketchy. I understand the law of similars, and that when you are ill or doing sequential therapy, a remedy deals with what it finds in your body to deal with. But I also understood that if there *isn’t* a similar already in your system, the remedy simply passes through, which is why there are no side effects etc. as there could be if you took an allopathic medication that you don’t actually need. But given this understanding, how do *prophylactic* remedies work, given that the individual actually does NOT have, say, mumps, there’s nothing there for the remedy to interact with, so doesn’t it just pass through? I know I must be missing something, because logic + my understanding of how homeopathic remedies work don’t add up to effective prophylactics.
Wow! I’m loving all these great questions.
Robin, you ask “…given that the individual actually does NOT have, say, mumps, there’s nothing there for the remedy to interact with, so doesn’t it just pass through?”.
The brief answer to this question is that in the case of a correctly timed prophylactic remedy, there IS something for the remedy to interact with, which is the child’s resonance for these archetypical illnesses, which, you could say, we’re ‘hard wired’ to experience at certain phases of our development, as they give us the right type of resistance to struggle against, in order to gain the particular benefit of that phase of growth.
Its kind of like our relationship to great art – you may pass by a particular artwork at a certain time in your life without it affecting you, but at another time it will completely knock you off your feet. In the second response, we have reached a sufficient level of maturity to now have a resonance for the meaning of that artwork.
So, yes, it is possible to attempt Homoprophylaxis at the wrong time or condition for the child, and it will pass through and do nothing.
That makes sense… I guess the question that remains for me is, “how would you know when the timing is right?” 🙂
I had a feeling you’d be asking that question…
A complete answer to this question would be very very very long… I’ll try to encapsulate a part of the answer by saying : To know when the timing is right, a correct ‘Diagnosis’ must be undertaken. To ‘diagnose’ in the true sense of the word, means to have the perceptual ability to ‘see’ the flow of life energy that is occurring beyond the surface of the outer physical form of the individual. To ‘see’ life function and energy flow, is kind of the ability to ‘connect the dots’ between the static pieces of information that our intellect will grab onto in our ordinary way of perceiving, and instead to see the living flow of energy behind the scene, so to speak, which is fundamentally causing those particular bits of ‘information’ to manifest in an outer visible form.
You can relate to this in terms of any life experiences you may have had where you had a correct ‘hunch’ or ‘intuition’ about a person or situation which wasn’t based on any of the obvious visible clues or things that were said, but perhaps on the things that were left unspoken or ‘between the lines’. In the context of medicine, this everyday ability for ‘hunches’ has to be developed and organized into a rational and repeatable scientific process which connects specific ‘objective feelings’ to specific medicines or disease processes. (As a side note, this is where the Inergetix-CoRe is a very helpful tool for us to augment and verify the development of these inner capacities, with an objective measurement of the realm of life energy in the patient.)
As an analogy, you can think of a parent with 2 very different types of children, who has a deep, participative relationship to them. As they enter the teen years, the mother may have a very different sense for each child for which age they may have the emotional maturity to handle their first sexual experiences – one child, for example, may be able to handle it at 15, whilst the other wouldn’t really be able to deal with it maturely until 19. To extend this back to Homoprophylaxis, the correct diagnosis will tell you when the child has reached the correct developmental stage to be able to handle mumps, or measles, for example.
I’ve been mulling this over for the last couple of days and admit I’m still deeply confused. If my child has completed sequential therapy, and hasn’t been ill, as a parent how would I ever know when the timing is right to do the prophylactic?
Hi Robin – being deeply confused is a good sign – its a sign that you’re in the process of learning and moving forward. My previous answer was more about some general principles, but to find the answer for an individual child would require taking the time to explore their individual context and history, in terms of correctly diagnosing what the optimal timing of Homoprophylaxis would be for them.
We can also follow general rules of thumb about ages, and such, and give a remedy at a particular calm phase, when the life force isn’t dealing with anything else too demanding (overly demanding school situation, for example, or other stressful circumstance). The CoRe, as I also mentioned, is a good tool for getting objective feedback about the child’s overall state and resonance pattern at a given moment.
Ultimately, the correct “diagnosis” (and this is the same process for treating an active disease), depends on being able to match the given resonance capacity of a child with the known resonance pattern of a given disease and its corresponding developmental stage – its really kind of what a good matchmaker does.
Thanks for the time you’ve taken to respond to this!
Are there any books/resources you’d recommend on the subject as well?
Hi Robin – there are many books about vaccination in general, as well as specific books about some of the concepts we’ve discussed here, however that kind of information is scattered in many different sources, and takes a lot of work to find all the bits and then integrte them into a meaningful whole. On that note, stay tuned for my book “The Vaccination Myth”, which will integrate Anthroposophical medicine’s view on childhood illness, with Heilkunst’s understanding of medicine and Homoprophylaxis, as well as Medical Orgonomy’s understanding of the development of the capacity for fever in children as a necessary stage to allow for a complete, wholistically functioning sexuality.
It is quite bare at the moment, but you can check back periodically to http://www.thevaccinationmyth.com where I am posting various tidbits along these lines.