Page 8 - Spring 25

continued from page 5
In this example, we have a patient treated entirely on a physical level, the remedy choice being based on general pathological signs and clinical diagnosis only (though who can say if he may have been a constitutional Chelidonium? Personally, I have never identified one). This patient was clearly not cured, despite the fact that the signs of the disease improved dramatically with homeopathic intervention. The absence of any change in the clinicopathology results, and the remarkable post-mortem findings, would suggest that this improvement was purely on an energetic level, not a physical one. The improvement in his well-being was so clear, and his ability to continue to enjoy his life until the pathology advanced too far was so marked, that perhaps we can question whether he was, in some way, “healed” at a deeper level, even when not cured as such.
A second case was very similar. I was asked to try to give something to a poor old Labrador cross with an advanced malignant neoplasm of the shoulder who had severe oedema of the affected limb and was clearly in some distress with it. It was owned by an old lady who was very attached to her, and she said that, although she accepted that she should be put to sleep, she just was not ready for it yet, and was there anything else I could do. She was already on maximum dose Frusemide, and also on Prednisolone. I was very reluctant to continue this dogs suffering, but the owner was distraught at the thought of losing her and would not yet give permission for me to euthanise. I saw them on a Friday, and she wanted to spend a last weekend with her.
This introduces another interesting topic for consideration; do the needs of the animals carer ever outweigh those of the patient? I believe there are possibly as many cases when our judgement that the level of suffering justifies euthanasia may be premature as there
are cases when lives are extended too long and suffering unnecessarily prolonged. The end-of-life process, and the experiences we go through at this time, is an essential part of our own journey, and the same is true of our animal companions. Sometimes the animals themselves would rather be around that little bit longer, even if we have judged them to be suffering to an unacceptable level, if they know that by doing so, they are helping their much- loved lifelong companion. Such a difficult decision is one that I am sure we have all grappled with on multiple occasions, and perhaps sometimes retrospectively regretted the choices. Mostly, the animal tells me what to do, sometimes in a very positive way (“NOT READY!!!”) even when the physical body has reached its last limits, sometimes in a more passive way (“I’m tired, but despite appearances there’s still some gas in the tank”), and sometimes, as perhaps in the case above, they would themselves be ready but part of that decision depends on whether their carer is too.
I gave this patient Apis 30c, to be repeated 3-4x daily or as necessary, in the hope that maybe it might do a little something to ease the discomfort. I saw this patient again on Monday, and as she walked in it was clear that the
oedema had gone down considerably, and her discomfort was greatly reduced. She was still very tired but was no longer suffering to the levels that she was. However, the lovely owner had now come to realise that she did not really have a quality of life good enough to hang around any longer, and she had been able to share that last, precious, time with her before having to say goodbye.
I believe this was important for both of them, and the dog probably passed in a much more accepting way, knowing that her greatest love on earth was reconciled and mentally in a good place.
This patient was, once again, in the very early days of my homeopathic journey, and my application of it in my everyday practice. She was another example (there were quite a few!) which gave me the early encouragement to pursue my homeopathic training and to get to understand it to a deeper level. I am very grateful to each and every one of them. [I should say that I have no surviving written records of these patients, so I am unable to provide exact details, sadly. I am not even certain of the sex of the patients concerned, although this is not of relevance here].
There is an opinion that homoeopathy is giving one
remedy at a time and then observing and judging. This implies that all else is not really homeopathy. I believe that this could not be further from the truth. It may not enable full healing as such, and it may not be homeopathy in the purest sense, but this does not invalidate it, nor does it mean that it is not homeopathy. The approach as seen in the above cases matches the frequency of our remedy to the pathological level of existence and is a very valid way of treating when the pathology has advanced to such a level that reversal is not possible. In a similar way to dosing a 6x potency three times daily to treat a deep constitutional disturbance is inappropriate, so is the use of a single dose of a higher potency remedy not the most advantageous
6