Return

Subud Vision - Discussion

Hassanah Briedis - The Latihan of Subud, Dissociation and the Neurology of Spiritual Experience

Discussion continued from this page

From Hanna Thomas, January 2, 2008. Time 10:50

Hi Hassanah,

I sooo enjoyed reading your article - thanks for your insightful, educational and articluate contribution on this very important topic. As you know, I have had concerns for several years now about the irresponible attitude of the Subud Organisation to mental health and illness. I am hoping to draft a policy/set of guidelines at our up-coming national congress about how we should provide appropriate care to members with a mental health problem. A somehwat ambitious task - but I want to make a start at addressing what you have already stated (to quote you) "Subud is behaving unethically in not taking this subject serious at decision-making levels". If you have any tips/suggestions on this, it would be much appreciated if you could send them my way. I am aiming for a strong practical focus in writing the policy,e.g. How to recognise mental health problems; What advice to give members who have a mental health problem; What might be useful to test with members and what shouldn't be tested; A reference of useful resources for members/helpers/carers; Establishing a network of Subud members who have professional experise in this area; etc.

Best wishes to you,

Hanna Thomas

Subud Wollumbin (Australia)

From Sahlan Diver, January 2, 2008. Time 12:40

Hanna,

Great project, and I have an additional suggestion - collect case histories, from which the helpers can learn. Two examples I know of from a long time ago:

1) Someone who was on medication for mental illness was opened - I believe the helpers tested the opening was OK, but the applicant was left alone in a waiting room with just one person, a non-helper, while the helpers did a pre-opening clearance. The applicant had never heard the noise of the latihan before and got quite disturbed and upset by it, but there was no experienced helper with them to offer support.

2) A person who involved all levels of the helper organisation for years in testing about their life situation without anyone suspecting mental illness, until a chance observation by a visitor showed that there was a problem and the person finally received the appropriate treatment.

From Philip Quackenbush, January 2, 2008. Time 19:21

Hi, Hanna and Sahlan,

I can give a slightly different example, which pertains to the legal status of Subud testing in relation to mental problems. At a Denver congress several years ago a member who was a lawyer and a "helper" pointed out that "testing" in such cases was a virtual ticking time bomb, in that giving advice when one is not legally qualified to do so can result in major lawsuits, and it would only take one major award to wipe out the organization financially.

The example I'm thinking of was a member who exhibited sudden, major personality changes that were tearing the family apart. The advice sent from "on high" (Ibu Rahayu, in this case) was that it was just "purification". It later occurred to me that it might be that a stroke had happened, and several people have agreed with me about that, though I'm not sure whether any of us is a qualified health practitioner of any sort. Anyway, a clear diagnosis in such a case that went against what was "received" could have resulted in a suit being brought against the organization with a possible major award being granted by the court. The organization can sit back and assume its under the protection of "God", but I'd suggest that, even despite that, if clear policies are not established, then the Association could be liable, rather than the specific "helpers" involved that could be going against those policies.

The easiest solution, IMO, is to eliminate "testing" for answers to members' questions entirely, but since that's unlikely to occur in an organization where it's seen to be one of the chief advantages of the "spiritual" practice, setting up policies, not just guidelines, for "helpers" and having them sign off on them to take on the position of "helper" may be the only solution to avoid possible future legal quagmires.

Peace, Philip

From Sahlan Diver, January 2, 2008. Time 20:8

A fascinating point, Philip.

Regarding setting up policies, I wonder whether that could ever give sufficient legal protection. There are surely too many grey areas. For example, a person starts to experience some strange but mild feelings, they go to the helpers who test in good faith and receive that it's just purification and will pass in a few months. The person leaves the situation alone even though the feelings get much worse. It turns out on this occasion that the helper testing is wrong, the person is suffering mental illness. The family urge the person to get treatment but they say "No, I've tested, it will be OK". Let's say the person then attacks and injures a member of their family. The family sue on the grounds that the person was encouraged to follow the testing and this prevented them seeking appropriate treatment for their worsening condition. In this case one could say the helpers probably followed reasonable guidelines, they tested in good faith and truthfully stated what they received - unfortunately they were wrong, with serious consequences.

I am no legal expert but it may be that the only real protection for Subud is to ask members to sign some kind of document that states that the responsibility of choosing to follow testing results is their's alone, and that therefore they can't hold Subud responsible if they request testing which turns out to be wrong.

Another answer might simply be to insure. If you enter a business premises and fall over on slippery floor, you can sue. Businesses do not conclude they should let no-one into their premises, or ask visitors to sign a waiver at the door, they recognise accidents can happen for which they will be deemed liable, and insure against them.

Sahlan

From Philip Quackenbush, January 2, 2008. Time 20:46

Hi, Sahlan,

You said:

"Regarding setting up policies, I wonder whether that could ever give sufficient legal protection."

I doubt that there's anything that could give total legal protection, because the whole business of lawyering is to get a judgment in favor of your client, and lawyers can often find persuasive arguments that will sway a judge or jury to rule in their favor, but I have no knowledge of the SUBorg having any legal protection whatsoever other than copyright for the symbol and publications.

"I am no legal expert but it may be that the only real protection for Subud is to ask members to sign some kind of document that states that the responsibility of choosing to follow testing results is their's alone, and that therefore they can't hold Subud responsible if they request testing which turns out to be wrong."

Could be a good idea, but the law may vary from country to country on liability.

"Another answer might simply be to insure. If you enter a business premises and fall over on slippery floor, you can sue. Businesses do not conclude they should let no-one into their premises, or ask visitors to sign a waiver at the door, they recognise accidents can happen for which they will be deemed liable, and insure against them,"

Another possibility. Maybe a SUBlawyer might know the preferable course to pursue. Peter Fillipelli is one name that comes to mind, but he's a criminal defense lawyer, I think, and might not be the best choice. Part of the problem with consulting a lawyer not in the cult might be a lack of familiarity with what happens in camera during "testing".

If the organization is to survive, either in its present or modified form, it seems prudent to me to take some such step as a precaution. The nice thing about the "latihan" is that it doesn't require an organization to survive or even promote it, though, so I guess it comes down to how attached one is to the organization's survival. Personally, I don't care much one way or the other, but a lot of the people I feel close to are in the org., and it's convenient to walk four blocks to do grope "latihan" and socialize afterwards.

Peace, Philip

From Sahlan Diver, January 2, 2008. Time 21:6

Philip,

Seems to me that's a strong argument in favour of the survival of the organisation, because if there's no organisation to sue, individuals are going to be sued instead - a far worse prospect,

Sahlan

From Philip Quackenbush, January 2, 2008. Time 22:27

Hi, Sahlan,

That doesn't guarantee that the individuals won't get sued; they often are, as part of the suit. That's one of the reasons I was reluctant to become chair, first of the San Francisco group, and later Seattle, because the officers of a corporation can be held liable for its acts, and both groups were in situations that were problematic legally (the Seattle group at the time I became chair, was its own corporation, but has subsequently become a part of Subud PNW, which is part of the national corporation, I think, and is now known as the Subud Greater Seattle, because the Subud Eastside group had to merge with the Seattle group to save the skins of one or the other [I wasn't in the cult at the time, so I'm not clear on the history, if anyone is]).

The likelihood of non-profit organizations getting sued, BTW, seems to have gone up in this country, as seen in the prosecution of various Catholic dioceses for the pedophile priests they've been responsible for hiding. At least one diocese has declared bankruptcy as a result of court judgments against it, I seem to recall from a newspaper article I read a while back.

Peace, Philip

Grope latihan. From Stefan, January 3, 2008. Time 0:9

Hi Philip,

I just noticed you wrote this:

"...a lot of the people I feel close to are in the org., and it's convenient to walk four blocks to do grope latihan and socialize afterwards."

WOW, That's a hot idea! This "grope latihan" innovation (especially if latihans were mixed) could be just the way to attract new members. Wonder how many people would keep their eyes shut ...

Happy New Year

Stefan

From Hanna Thomas, January 3, 2008. Time 0:32

Hi Sahlan and Philip,

thanks for your comments. I'm planning on using a scenario-based approach for part of the policy/guidelines. So please provide me with any other cases you know of - they would be very helpful. I'm also well aware of the potential legal implications of our 'neglect' in this matter. I don't want to focus too much on this and think that by having a policy that Helpers/Members follow will help to ameliorate our responsibility. At the very least we should have this in place at an organisational level.

Regards,

Hanna.

From Philip Quackenbush, January 3, 2008. Time 8:1

Hi, Hanna,

I can think of two instances more that involved the law in cases of what was clearly mental illness.

The first was about the time I was chair of the SF group, between the time we were renting a hall and went to renting our own house, owned by a Subud member, but being purchased from him by Subud California, I think. The facility we used in the interim was the second story of a semi-industrial structure in a high-crime neighborhood with three rooms, the men's hall and women's hall and meeting/social/women's "quiet" room separated by a building well that had many windows along it as well as windows along the front of the building. A member who claimed to be "channeling" an Indian chief from the "spirit world" (I have a while to wait to see if I'll die at 84 as he predicted while "channeling") was somehow gaining access to the building when it was not being used and essentially living there, stealing money from the donation box and generally making himself a nuisance both during "latihan" times and during meetings. It reached a peak when he broke all the windows (c. 125) one night before "latihan" and was carted off to jail. When he was released, he took a room in a nearby hotel and was found dead, an apparent suicide, by the hotel manager. As I recall, the building owner's insurance covered the broken windows, but the group was persona non grata until we moved out, possibly evicted (it's been a long time since it happened and I don't remember all the details).

A similarly violent episode occurred in Seattle around the time I was chair, when a guy from Eastern Washington who showed up with another guy from Canada camped out with him in the men's hall while they were painting the building (which they never finished). He was obviously displaying strange behavior after the "latihan" one night (which he didn't attend, because he wasn't "opened", but was from a Subud family, so he probably knew that he

wasn't supposed to be around when it was happening. Also, in his mental state, he could very well have been imagining that he was picking up "bad vibes" or "lower forces" "thrown off" by the members that set him off, since that's a part of the Subud mystique that many members adhere to in their thinking. Anyway, I was living in the building at the time in one of the rooms upstairs, and I came back the next day to find out that he had trashed the downstairs and had been carted off by the police to the city hospital's mental ward for observation. Meanwhile, there was no door to the men's hall and no back door downstairs until somebody nailed some plywood to both of them.

Neither of these instances had anything directly to do with "opening" applicants, but they suggest that a policy might be useful in dealing with Subud crises cases (or as known in the UK medical literature, "Subud psychoses") that might include reimbursement for damages when possible.

I heard there was a "crisis cage" in Cilandak for violent members, but, even if that was true, it probably wouldn't be legal in most countries, if it even was in Indonesia, so I suspect another solution should be considered.

Peace, Philip

From Hanna Thomas, January 3, 2008. Time 10:47

Thanks Philip for the additional anecdotes.

It's been suggested that in the interests of maintaining confidentiality that I use a private email address for this kind of information.

I think this is a good idea and I would feel more comfortable doing this. So, if you have any more stories or if others reading this

feedback would like to contribute, please send the information directly to me at:

hannathomasconsulting@gmail.com

Best wishes,

Hanna.

Add Feedback to this page / Communicate with us

Use the form below to


Very sorry but feedback forms now permanently closed on the Subud Vision site

Return