SLCHG may be a small study, however, it provides a glimpse into the experiences of health care consumers regarding the ‘status quo’ of our health care system and use of collaborative teams in both the private and public health care systems. In my practice, I have been privy to work in both. One old controversial example that persists and noticeable at Intake is that candidates expressed reluctance to disclose historic and current use of CAM to their family physicians for fear of judgment, rejection and/or refusal to participate in their care plan, plus minimization of CAM beneficial effects including no discussions on the ‘placebo’ effect or mystical healings. I searched the net and found a great study on trends in use and attitudes from 1997 to 2006 concerning CAM written by Nadeem Eismail of the Fraser Institute
I witnessed professionals within the ‘traditional, publically funded medical health care system’ resistance to serve informed consenting patients [clients], who are self-directing their healing-to-cure programs utilizing choice, collaborators and blended treatment options. Some reasons for refusal to collaborate were:
1) Receiving reports via email is a violation of ‘physicians/surgeons’ code of ethics (?),
2) The physician in ‘independent practice’ can refuse to provide publically funded health care to a person, if he does not want to collaborate (?), and
3) The physician does not have to read reports submitted from professionals who operate outside of the publically funded system (?). This project has a fee schedule and the client pays for this collaborative service.
Concerning #1, there are many other viable options for practitioners, who do not have secure email capabilities [outside the government run computer system], and that is the project participant can provide the a hard copy at their next visit or sent by Canada Post. As I am an e-commerce business, I no longer have fax capability. I discussed my on-line practice need for a secure site ‘attachments’ option with Worldwide Therapy and the good news is they are working on it!
The 21st Century may be remembered for the ‘regulating and privatization’ movement of all members across the helping professions. Then, individual practitioners can state they have “independent” practices, are accountable to the ideals inherent in their scope of practice with pre-determined codes of professional ethics and standards of care noted in their field. For me, the word ‘independent’ is an archaic [1630’s] term resurrected during the humanism movement as a new age, cultic, mythic being state that simply does not exist in reality. We begin totally dependent upon our caretakers, hopefully we can individuate to remain interdependent upon each other till death. The exception would be a cast-a-way situation on an uninhabited island where a person truly is alone, hence, independent for there are no other human beings present, except in one’s imagination or minds eye! However, I say this person is alone and isolated – halfway into a state of existentially angst.
Concerning #2, a physician who believes they operate an independent practice (a self-actualized mythic state), professionals are encouraged to create all across our great Canada Nation. I remain old fashioned and primitive in many ways for my knowing advises me that we are unique, personally and professionally by design, circumstance, social placement, and states of being. However, we shall remain interdependent. If traditional and CAM practitioners are invited to participate in a health care consumers ‘inner healing circle’ as a collaborator – an atypical honor that will challenge all formed professional ideals, ethics, models of health care service and delivery, plus standards of ‘independent’ practice for many years to come.
Brief 8-Month Review (September 2013 To May 2014):
Candidates: 9 heroic survivors were identified or referred as potential candidates to date. One declined admission [no further healing program needs at-this-time], 1 participant withdrew following 7 months of Entry/Transition Programs, 1 participant withdrew and was discharged with need for Acute Oncology Care, 1 referral consult receiving acute medical care is currently not a candidate for this project, and 2 candidates remain at the consent/pre-treatment stage of assessment and treatment planning – impending care.
Participants/Collaborators: Currently, there are 3 heroic survivors actively engaged in Healing Programs with a total of 24 collaborating practitioners, whom they attended to during this part of their healing journeys and includes:
1) 11 Doctors – 3 primary care, 1 psychiatrist, 2 naturopaths, 2 chiropractors, 1 dentist,
1 psychologist, 1 trauma psychotherapist, 3 Specialty MD Referrals: 1
Tropical Medicine, 1 GI Referral +1 Surgical Referral
2) 4 Body Therapists – 2 physiotherapists, 1 craniosacral + 1 massage
3) 5Allied Professionals – 2 Spiritual Advisors, 1 homeopath + 1 career counsellor
4) 1 – 12 Step Programs – 1 referral
2) 3 Phase Healing-To-Cure Programs: One participant required acute medical care, her Entry Program was suspended and she was placed into an Entry Transition Program. One participant was recently admitted into her Eagle Entry Program – testing revealed she has a Dissociative Profile potential, but does not meet the criteria for DID or C-PTSD, however, due to transgenerational traumatogenic loading, she can remain in the project. One participant remains actively engaged in her Fulcrum Program.
Author: Dr. Linda AK Thompson, PsyD, CCC, FAAETS
Owner, Matrix of Trauma (© MOT ™): Research, Advocacy, Healing
Merriam-Webster, Inc. (1985). Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Thomas Allen & Sons Ltd. Markham, ON: ISBN 1-919028-66-7
Thompson, L.A.K. & C.A. Zimmerman (2013 – 2017). MOT: Pilot Project – Silver Linings Core Healing Group [SLCHG]. A Complex-Posttraumatic Stress Disorder [C-PTSD, visionary healing-to-cure, experimental, experiential, applied trauma psychotherapy protocol.
*The views expressed by our authors are personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect the views of the CCPA