Culture & Lifestyle

Rant

Scientology's Disconnection Policy

Posted 37 months ago|15 comments|755 views
VIDEOS
Written by
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
One of the areas in which the Corporation of Scientology is frequently criticised is that part of L. Ron Hubbard's harsh "ethics" system known as Disconnection.

Disconnection has been compared at times to divorce, excommunication, and the Amish practice of shunning.

Unlike divorce, disconnection is not a personal or consensual decision, it is a third party, the Ethics Officer, who orders you to disconnect.

Unlike excommunication, disconnection allows for absolutely no contact with the person the Ethics Officer has declared Suppressive. An excommunicated Catholic may continue living with his Catholic family, doing business with his Catholic associates, and even may continue attending Mass at any Catholic Church in the world (he may not take communion, however). Once a person has been declared a "Suppressive Person" by the Ethics Officer, however, all Scientologists must Disconnect from him. He may not attend any Scientology events or receive any Scientology services, no Scientologist (except the E.O.) may have any contact with him, personnal, professional or religious.

The comparison to the Amish practice of shunning is perhaps the most apropriate, however close examination will reveal that while both practices are harsh and have been viewed as abusive by the outside world, Disconnection appears to be more arbitrary and frequently abused.

The fear of having the Ethics Officer tell one to disconnect from a loved one is a powerful tool in the Corporation of Scientology's arsonal for maintaining control over its members.

Now let us take a journey through the writings of L. Ron Hubbard to see where Disconnection comes from and what it really means.

Paragraph A of the License Agreement of the Hubbard Ecclesiastical League of Pastors/Field Auditors (Marks), L. Ron Hubbard's "writings and recorded spoken words with respect to SCIENTOLOGY applied religious philosophy and the organizations formed for the purpose thereof" are the Scientology Scriptures.

Important terms you may not be familliar with:

PTS: (Potential Trouble Source) – a person “…intimately connected with persons (such as marital or familial ties) of known antagonism to mental or spiritual treatment or Scientology” [Ethics. p. 201]. “All sick persons are PTS” [20Apr72]. A scientologist whose statistics are down is PTS (or SP) [Ethics. 260]. The PTS is ALWAYS connected to a Suppressive Person [20Apr72].

SP: (Suppressive Person) – a person of known antagonism to the Church of Scientology [Ethics. p. 201], its Tech, its founder, management, or their corporate goals [Ethics. pp. 309-315]. This would include most if not all ex-members and critics [Ethics. p. 311.], as well as the majority of the secular mental health field (aka “psychs”) [Ethics. p. 264].

These first quotes are usually used by scientologists (if they will admit disconnection exists) to claim it is no different from divorce or excommunication and that it is always the individual's choice.

"A Scientologist can become PTS by reason of being connected to someone that is antagonistic to Scientology or its tenets. In order to resolve the PTS condition, he either handles the other person's antagonism (as covered here and in full on the PTS/SP Course) or, as a last resort when all attempts to handle have failed, he disconnects from the person. He is simply exercising his right to communicate or not to communicate with a particular person.
"With our tech of handle or disconnect, we are, in actual fact, doing nothing different than any society or group or marriage down through thousands of years."
[Ethics. p. 206.][10Sep1983.]

"WHEN DISCONNECTION IS USED
"An Ethics Officer can encounter a situation where someone is factually connected to a suppressive person, in present time. This is a person whose normal operating basis is one of making others smaller, less able, less powerful. He does not want anyone to get better, at all.
"In truth, an SP is absolutely, completely terrified of anyone becoming more powerful.
"In such an instance the PTS isn't going to get anywhere trying to "handle" the person. The answer is to sever the connection."
[Ethics. p. 208-209.][10Sep1983.]

The next quotes clearly show the CoS teaches disconnection and believes it works, but now it takes the disconnection out of the hands of the individual and puts it in the hands of someone else:

“The bare fact is that disconnection is a vital tool in handling PTSness and can be very effective when used correctly.
“Therefore, the tech of disconnection was restored to use, in the hands of those persons thoroughly and standardly trained in PTS/SP Tech.”
[Ethics. p. 207.]

“The person is asked if anyone is invalidating him or his gains or Scientology and if the pc answers with a name and is then told to handle or disconnect from the person, the good indicators come in promptly and the person is quite satisfied.”
[Ethics. P. 190.]

How does L. Ron Hubbard recommend you go about disconnecting?

“HOW TO DISCONNECT
“...move to a ...new location. He need not write any sort of “disconnection letter”...”
[Ethics. p. 209.]

“He should disconnect and, if he wants to inform the SP... he may write a letter of disconnection... The letter would be inspected by the Ethics Officer... and copies kept for the PTS person's own Ethics File and pc folder.”
[Ethics. p. 209.]

“One discovers that an employee... is an SP... the PTS fires him and that's the end of it right there!”
[Ethics. p. 209.]

The following quotes show that religious progress is unavailable, actually denied to those who don't disconnect when told to, and that doing so marks them suppressive, so now other scientologists must disconnect from the PTS (now SP) scientologist.

“…it is a Crime to be or become a PTS without reporting it or taking action or to receive processing while PTS. Further, as per Policies on Physical Healing, Insanity and “Sources of Trouble,” a PTS may not be trained.”
[Ethics. p. 202.]

“A Potential Trouble Source may receive no processing until the situation is handled.”
[Ethics. p. 309.]

“This means that a person who is PTS may not receive processing or training while PTS and it also means that they had better do something to handle their condition.”
[Ethics. p. 203.]

“To fail or refuse to disconnect from a Suppressive Person not only denies the PTS case gain, it is also supportive of the Suppressive—in itself a Suppressive Act.”
[Ethics. p. 209.]

“Any PTS who fails to either handle or disconnect from the SP who is making him or her a PTS is, by failing to do so, guilty of a Suppressive Act.
[Ethics. p. 318.]

“It is a SUPPRESSIVE ACT to deal with a Declared SUPPRESSIVE PERSON unless you are the named terminal to deal with the SP (i.e. Sea Org MAA). Per the above referenced PL, " continued adherence to a person or group accurately pronounced a Suppressive Person or Group by HCO" is a Suppressive Act.”
[SPD 28. p. 1]

“To deal with a Suppressive is a Suppressive Act.
“The above is unequivocal Church Policy.”
[SPD 28. p. 2]

Disconnecting from your loved ones can give you great relief and even save lives?

“If you were to weed out of your past by proper Search and Discovery those Anti-Social Persons you have known and if you then disconnected, you might experience great relief.”
[Ethics. p. 181]

“If you were to weed out of your past those Anti-Social Persons you have known and if you then disconnected, you might experience great relief.”
[Slant. p. 196]

“The technology of Disconnection is essential in the handling of PTSes. It can and has saved lives and untold trouble and upset. It must be preserved and used correctly.”
[Ethics. p. 210.]

And even more clear statements that not disconnecting when told will stop your religious progress cold:

“Auditing or training must not be continued over an unhandled PTS...”
[Ethics. p. 211.]

When “disconnection is validly indicated in order to handle the person's PTSness, it should be done exactly per PTSness and Disconnection.”
[Ethics. p. 214.]

“Any processing of the Potential Trouble Source is denied or illegal while the connection exists...”
[Ethics. p. 320.]

“A truly Suppressive Person or Group has no rights of any kind as Scientologists.”
[Ethics. p. 321.]

“If evidences of disconnection are given, the Committee of Evidence Findings and Recommendations and the Convening Authority... must remove the label of Potential Trouble Source from the Scientologist.”
[Ethics. p. 322.]

Is this going to be in my permanent record?

“Any HCO Secretary may receive evidences of disconnection or disavowal and... must place copies of such evidence in the Ethics File and in the CF (Central Files) folders of all persons named in them.”
[Ethics. p. 324.]

And some more confirmation from a few others among L. Ron's many works:

“If you were to weed out of your past those Anti-Social Persons you have known and if you then disconnected, you might experience great relief.”
[Life. p. 196.]

"There are only two answers for the handling of people from 2.0 down on the Tone Scale, neither one of which has anything to do with reasoning with them or listening to their justification of their acts. The first is to raise them on the Tone Scale by unenturbulating some of their theta by any one of the three valid processes. The other is to dispose of them quietly and without sorrow."
[Survival. p. 183.]

“The principle of the contagion of aberration is broad in scope. One can observe in any group of men that one or two may be much more aberrated than the others. One can make the simple experiment of removing the one or two aberrated persons from the group and he will then see that the general tone level of the group will rise.”
[Survival. p. 241.]



Bibliography

[20Apr72]. Hubbard, L. Ron. HCO BULLETIN OF 20 April 1972 “Suppressed PCs and PTS Tech.”

[10Sep1983.]. Hubbard, L. Ron. HCO BULLETIN OF 10 SEPTEMBER 1983 "PTSness and Disconnection." (Note: It has been claimed by some that this HCOB was actually written by Robert Vaughn Young, and then attributed to LRH. This is not the view of the Church of Scientology, Church of Spiritual Technology, or the Religious Technology Center, all of which continue to attribute its origin to LRH, and thus is effectively the Scientological equivalent of canonical scripture.)

[Ethics.]. Hubbard, L. Ron. Introduction to Scientology Ethics. Los Angeles, CA. Bridge Publications, Inc. 2007.

[SPD 28.]. Scientology Policy Directive 28. 13 August 1982. Suppressive Act: Dealing With A Declared Suppressive Person. Church of Scientology International (unpublished work). 1982.

[Life.]. Hubbard, L. Ron. Scientology A New Slant on Life. Los Angeles, CA. Bridge Publications, Inc. 2007.

[Slant.]. Hubbard, L. Ron. Scientology: A New Slant on Life. Los Angeles, CA. Bridge Publications, Inc. 2007.

[Survival.]. Hubbard, L. Ron. Science of Survival: Prediction of Human Behavior. Los Angeles, CA. Bridge Publications, Inc. 2007.
EMAIL|FLAG THIS POST
COMMENTS
DeanFox
DeanFox
England
37 months ago: Thanks for this well researched write up. The disconnection policy of the cult calling itself the church of scientology has torn apart many families and destroyed many friendships over the years, all because the cult wants to isolate members from any critical sources.
skeptic
skeptic
Canada
37 months ago: I agree, that is a very well researched rant. I would add that as Scientology becomes deservedly more and more ridiculed and rejected by the world at large, Scientologists will accordingly become increasingly disconnected from the world. Actually, if it were in my power to do so, I would put all devout Scientologists on another planet where they could pursue their futile dreams of OT abilities to their hearts' content, without continuing to cause problems for the rest of us.
37 months ago: Ha, yet another rant, created from misunderstanding to promote misunderstanding. HA!

It is not a great deal of trouble to understand the purpose and practice of what you are mis-naming, "disconnection". Yes the written tech does use that word. No, the meaning of the word is not presented in this rant.

First if all, a parishioner rarely does that. It is a last resort. They guy is going along in the Church, finding the tech and auditing helpful. He is seeing a little more future in life, maybe thinking of getting a better paying job, finding he is enjoying life more and handling his problems more easily. But *boom* he runs into some sort of barrier or problem and is feeling like he can never make any headway.

Disconnection from a source of suppression is an answer of last resort. But this isn't done lightly. Happy understandings.
37 months ago: Terryeo, who gets to decide when disconnection should be used? Is it one person or a committee? How do they know that they can't progress any further?

Using suppression as a last resort with the only guideline that "he runs into some sort of barrier," is not reasonable. When has suppresion of an individual through objective guidlines ever been reasonable?

The use of suppresion, even if a last resort, is a very abrassive and oppresive thing for a religion to use.

How about love, understading, compassion, and patience instead of supression? These things would have a more beneficial affect upon an individual than using oppression.

Can the person opt out of the suppression? What if they are content where they are in life and do not wish to progress further? Is the option for suppression in their hands or someone elses?

Any religion/self-help group/ whatever you wish to call it that uses suppression (even as a last result) reveals its weakness as a weak theology/philosophy so much so that it must use oppression to achieve results.
DeanFox
DeanFox
England
37 months ago: Disconnection in scientology terms means to have no further contact with a suppressive, the organisation saus it is a person exercising their right not to associate with someone.

Subjects are taught that all life's problems can be addressed by the tech and any problems that apparently cannot be handled in this way are down to suppressive people, SPs.

A person who is deemed to be in contact with a SP is classed as a potential trouble source or PTS and told they must handle their SP. The organisation suspends all services for the subject that don't have anything to do with identifying and handling the SP.

SPs cause the subject to feel doubt about the organisation, a high crime in the organisation; if you believe the tech isn't working you have doubt so you must have a SP in your life.

Handling the SP means to get to a state where the SP no longer causes doubt in the subject. The subject is interrogated repeatly using an e-meter until the organisation is convinced the subject doesn't harbour any more doubts. This is a high stress interrogation.

If the subject cannot handle the SP they are faced with the choice of leaving the organisation or disconnecting from the SP. For various reasons most initially choose to disconnect from the SP. SPs are usually identified as being those closest to the subject outside the organisation. This mechanism works to further isolate the subject from outside influence and to discourage doubt (critical thought) regarding the organisation.

DeanFox
DeanFox
England
37 months ago: The actual scientology definition of disconnection by the organisation calling itself the church of scientology:

"an individual attempting to improve his life through Scientology is encountering persistent opposition from a close associate, his spiritual advancement is impeded.

In the vast majority of cases, the antagonism is rooted in false information about Scientology and providing the true data ends the matter. As a last resort, when all attempts to sort out such situations have failed, the Scientologist may decide to disconnect from the person until the antagonism ceases.

A person who disconnects is simply exercising his right to communicate or not to communicate with a particular person. This is one of the most fundamental rights of man. Members of other religions have exercised it down the ages when confronted by those who persistently opposed the practice of their faiths. Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Amish practice “shunning"—a form of disconnection—and their right to do so has been upheld by courts across the country. Certain Orthodox Jewish congregations practice an extreme form of disconnection in which a mock funeral is held for apostate members. Disconnection in Scientology is neither new nor strange in the annals of religion."

This has to be taken in the context of the OP's quotes though. Disconnection isn't new but neither is it right. Anything that discourages critical thinking and encourages isolationism is wrong.
skeptic
skeptic
Canada
37 months ago: Terryeo's claim that "disconnection from a source of suppression is an answer of last resort" is misleading, since it is also the answer of first resort; Scientologists are required to disconnect from anything that they would consider to be a source of suppression, which in practice means, anything critical of Scientology. But you, at least, practice what you preach. This web-site is full of very powerful and legitimate criticism of Scientology, and hence is suppressive, yet you have not disconnected from it. But then, maybe you were assigned to take on this dangerous assignment, so that there would be a voice of dissent even among the anti-cultist camp. But be careful, you may still wind up reading a criticism that will make sense to you, and then you'll become PTS. It has happened to others that I have known.
37 months ago: dangerranger asks: "who gets to decide when disconnection should be used?" An individual himself is the only person who can make such a decision. From DeanFox' quotation: "A person who disconnects is simply exercising his right to communicate or not to communicate with a particular person. This is one of the most fundamental rights of man".

You're thinking you might apply for a little better job and dear Auntie Mathida is dissing you all the time. Well, you quit standing around listening to her make-wrong. Off you go, doing what you think you ought to.
37 months ago: "An individual himself is the only person who can make such a decision."

B-S. The policy has been seen before twisted and used against members of the church who were disruptive. Disconection has been documented being used to keep mothers from talking to daughters, families from talking to family members. If the mother wished to talk to her daughter, then why didn't she just un-disconect herself and reconnect back to scientology.

Furthermore, the disconection policy is not only a method to stop communication between people, its a suppressive policy to stop communication between scientologists and the world. Look at Gold Base. What is around it? A wall.

Sure, you can make the argument that they can leave whenever they want, but think about it. Walls keep things out. Ideas, emotions, values, etc, and keep things in like people, society, secrets, etc.

The wall between us and mexico does not only keep the illegals out, it helps keep the culture out too.

This policy of disconnection is further proof of the disconnection between scientology and reality. What legitamite religion or theology uses suppression, even if brought on by the individual, to further progress themselves. When has suppression ever been benefical?

If this pseudo-science/religion/self-help program uses suppression as part of its tennants to an ultimate goal, then we can look to history and see one thing: that the suppression of the people leads to the destruction of the system.

When the french aristocrats suppressed the lower class, a revolution followed. When the British suppressed the colonists rights of representation and rights, a revolution followed. When the USSR used suppression to send its followers to gulags and silence critics, it mets demise.

Suppression of the people to make the system work always breaks the system Terryeo.

37 months ago: Also, good job to skip around the fact that i proved suppression by a religion/self-help group/ pseudo-science is a bad thing.

Avoiding admitting suppresion is a bad thing and that scientology uses it does not make your arguments look more legitamite.
DeanFox
DeanFox
England
37 months ago: I agree terryeo that being associated with some individuals can adversely affect you. The problem is the church of scientology uses this to isolate subjects from any stimuli critical of the church of scientology, CoS.

The Potential Trouble Source mechanism only comes in to effect when there's resistance by the subject to the CoS or when the subject expresses doubt regarding the CoS's application of the tech.

A person having a problem achieving a goal will go to his auditor. The auditor will always say the tech works so it can't be the tech, it must be something you're not applying correctly. The person goes away and re-reads the tech, maybe do some more auditing too. If this fails then the auditor will say, look you must have a Suppressive Person holding you back. Is there anyone who has been antagonising you? This cannot be the CoS because it applies the tech properly and the tech works.

I've heard a recorded phone conversation where a register is trying to get a public scientologist to sign up to a course they believed they could not afford. The register said explicitly look, the problem isn't that you can't afford it you can, the problem is your wife. The couple were indeed worried about their finances BUT the man was being encouraged to shift the cause of the problem on to his wife who did not subscribe to the tech.

Another example was a man who was brain damaged in a motorcycle accident and who developed epilepsy as a result. This man was told by the CoS they could cure him. When the tech apparently failed and his wife was saying perhaps they should spend their life savings on other ways of improving their lives the man was encouraged by the CoS to divorce his wife and sue for custody of their daughter.

Disconnection seems reasonable but as applied by the CoS only serves to isolate subjects from any critical influences they cannot themselves ignore. Invariably the sources are people very close to them.
37 months ago: "Unlike divorce, disconnection is not a personal or consensual decision, it is a third party, the Ethics Officer, who orders you to disconnect."

You are misinformed, mistaken, and critical. Fortunately, not everyone is unable to understand the written word. Have a nice day -- with your misunderstandings.
Chef Xenu
Chef Xenu
Columbus, OH
37 months ago: There is ample evidence, from "Source" (The written and recorded words of L. Ron Hubbard), that my claim is true. There are also literally hundreds of people who have experienced disconnection first hand who say it is this way, just as LRH wrote it.

As you have provided no evidence to counter my claim and the evidence I have presented, what reason would anyone have for believing your unsupported counter-claim?

It is unfortunate you have such a poor understanding of your own religion's Disconnection policy as established in the "Tech" by L Ron Hubbard.
DeanFox
DeanFox
England
37 months ago: Terryeo, the disconnection decision is presented to the individual by the organisation calling itself the church of scientology, usually through an ethics officer.

Sure the individual makes the decision but they are put in to the position of having to make the decision by the organisation.

Further more the individual is pressured in to siding with the organisation because the organisation says that if they side with the SP they become an SP too and no one in the organisation will have anything further to do with them; the same cycle of pressure would apply to individuals in contact with them.

When disconnection applies the individual is:

Presented with a stark choice, the organisation or the SP.

Pressured in to making a decision because until they do they cannot receive any further services from the organisation.

Pressured in to siding with the organisation by threat of being ostracised from their friends and family in the organisation.

With divorce the individual almost always (there are always exceptions) comes to the realisation that they should make a decision by themselves. This will almost always be based on their data and without external pressure to make a decision or which way to make it.

Hope that helps with you misunderstanding of the OP's statement.
DeanFox
DeanFox
England
37 months ago: OK, Terryeo, I realise self determination is perhaps a tricky concept to get your head around so how about this:

There are no rules written down in society defining when someone should get a divorce. Grounds for divorce are defined BUT when to apply those grounds is not. The individual makes the choice on their own and no measure is applied to the individual to determine if they should either resolve their issues or get a divorce.

There are written rules in the organisation calling itself the church of scientology that define when a person is determined to be a PTS. There are procedures a PTS must them follow and a requirement placed on the PTS to either handle or disconnect from the SP. The individual is not allowed to stay in a perpetual state of trying to handle their SP either. They are constantly pressured to handle or disconnect and the e-meter is employed to determine if they have handled the SP.

Eventually they will be presented with the stark choice, disconnect or be disconnected by the organisation.

The organisation decides when the individual must make the "disconnection decision". The individual decides when they want to get a divorce.

Hope this clarifies the point the OP was making in his statement.

Post a Comment
Sign in or sign up to post a comment.