A friend of mine presents chiropactic in a confrontational manner and maintains that he can get the message across in this confrontational dialogue. I am not going to question his approach. He is very successful and it seems to work for him but I do see two problems. The logic of chiropractic as we present it in OSC is not confrontational in and of itself. It is difficult to make it confrontational unless it is presented as an alternative to medicne or as a health care system. But more important is the fact that we live in a society that does not want to be confrontational. No one wants confrontation today. No one says that”you are wrong and I am right!” People accept that, with very few exceptions, everyone is right. “That is your truth”, they say. No one is right or wrong. People do not want to argue that you are wrong. But they are not willing to agree that you are right. There is no wrong…everyone is right. So while people do not argue with us, by not doing that, they are not put in a aposition to make a committment to what we do or at least accept what we say. They do not confront, hence cannot be convinced. As B.J. so wisely said and wrote, Conflicts Clarify.
Can “enhusiasm” be construed as confrontational? That is, in showing your enthusiasm to people. Maybe your friend is only being enthusiastic about what he does. I suppose his “confrontational manner” elicits what he wants in practice. While I believe I am nice and easy to get along with and present chiropractic lovingly, my personality prevents me from being confrontational until after somebody pisses me off. 🙂 Still, at times I think I need to be more confrontaional. Sometimes people can be pulled (or led) by confronting them. Maybe your friend only attracts individuals who need confronting while the individuals who can think for themselves come to you and me. 🙂
Before I would agree or disagree with your friend’s presentation of chiropractic, “what exactly does he say”? Confrontation can mean different things to different people.
Hey Joe,
I’m not sure you are right on this position, but you know me, I hate to argue. That said, let’s look at it this way. If WHO we choose to be conflicts with our new prospective PM’s World/Life view and they don’t address or confront that difference, what have they learned? In other words, if our reality and theirs are in-congruent, without confrontation on one side or the other, what changes? Some people are open to education through logic, others need more nudging ( as Bob said, pulled or led ). I guess the trick is to know WHO needs WHAT.
Meaning no disrespect to BJ, conflicts only clarify if confronted. I don’t think mere recognition gets the job done. If we agree to disagree with a PM that means we are willing to care for someone that does not understand what we do. Is this acceptable?
Dear Steve,
I truly think it is NOT acceptable-if we do not ask the PM the confrontational / thinking REGGIE orientation-questions & stand on our NTOSC purpose, then the PM turns the Chiro into a therapeutic practicioner(i.e.the PM is the only family member that receives care).BTW, I do not ( at this time!) stand firmly on our NTOSC purpose-& it sincerely eats @ my core! —How do you handle them?
Nathan, you are firmer than many my friend, do not sell yourself short! 🙂
Hey Nathan,
I don’t ask for agreement. I explain Chiropractic step by step and ask if they understand. If they do, we begin. I do not proceed to the next step however until they understand the last one. Then I reinforce my purpose and our goal over and over. I also pay attention to what kind of questions they ask as this sometimes better defines their level of understanding. I really don’t care if they agree with my W/L view as long as they know what and why I’m doing what I do. How they “use” me is up to them.
If you think about it, every issue that anyone ever discusses or addresses has a level of “confront”. It is impossible not to. But that confront may or may not be strong, aggressive, rude, beligerant, nice, loving, passionate, intense, excited, etc. All of the things that moods, attitudes and emotions can bring into the picture.
Different people may need a different level of “confrontational” interaction to be effective, to make the point, get them to take action, etc., which is normal. And doing that the best we can with a new person, or anyone for that matter, will likely make it win-win.
I think this is why “mirroring” techniques have come about.
Personally, I find nothing wrong with confront or being confrontational as it is a necessary part of life and most certainly chiropractic practice. It doesn’t have to automatically viewed as a negative.
That’s why I asked Joe, exactly what does his friend say to his new practice member. I believe it is important to challenge anyone’s beliefs about health, but it is in the manner that it is done that makes the difference. When someone is belligerant, rude, aggressive & in my face it is highly unlikely for me to listen. However, there may be some that respond to this type of confrontation. Different strokes for different folks.
i’m not sure of the extent or breadth of his NPM orientation. I only heard him talk about hsi orientation to chiropractors, did not hear ythe content of the talk.
It is not difficult to have someone accept a new idea….that is providing it doesn’t challenge a current belief of theirs.
The beauty and the strength of presenting OSC is its simplicity. Unless one can say, “No, some people are better off with subluxations than without…”, how can that be argued?
Steve and Tom,
Exactly to both. Confront is just an action, a verb. Doesn’t mean good or bad, positive or negative. The HOW of the “confront” is the crux.
Tremain did a whole audio as part of bis Walk the Talk program, just on confront and it was great!
Tom,
I am short – 5’8′(:
Steve,
What I meant by my not standing firmly on our NTOSC purpose was that I (at this time) provide care to just one family member if that is all the PM wants–but we constantly share the truth each encounter w/ the hope that the PM will eventually get the entire family under weekly care.—-As Reggie always said,” the PM EITHER didn’t understand your orientation or would really rather kill the the little bastards”(i.e. not have their kids receive care)
What questions do you ask of the PM to see if they understand?
Dr. Nix,
I can understand that. I too struggle with the one family member coming in situation although I don’t fully understand the Reggie quote. I might need some context.
Reggie always said,” the PM EITHER didn’t understand your orientation or would really rather kill the the little bastards”(i.e. not have their kids receive care)
Making it about killing someone if they don’t come in, is that OSC or something else?
Your last question is a great one. Some very intelligent people suggested an active listening approach where their answers tell you how much they are understanding. (e.g. So, if you have a subluxation in your spine, how could it affect you?)
…and those intelligent people are all on this blog and reading this right now I assume…. 😉 thanks y’all. 🙂
Hey Nathan,
Our objective should be offered and made available to all. In my view that would include animals as well. Not all will accept or make full use of it. Sometimes it is lack of understanding, sometimes different priorities, sometimes affordability, sometimes schedules conflict or proximity or lack of immediate subjective results. Some of these are under our control, some are not.
I think of it this way: If I give everyone I meet a book, some will read the title and throw it away. Some will read further. Of those that read further, some will understand. For those that don’t understand I can help with endless new examples or explanations. Personal tutoring (table talk), is where the questions they ask reveal their level of understanding. Of those that understand, some will apply this knowledge fully, some partially, some not at all. My goal is to be there for those that wish to apply it in part or whole. Much like our art, I try not to be attached to the outcome.
Dear Don,
Listen to Reggie’s “philosophy & application of ‘-albums for clarification of “not bringing in the kids” comment
Dr. Nix, I will. Thanks
Steve,
I liked your giving a person a book example.
So, do you see the Reggie quote above as OSC or something else?
Does the OSC refrain from suggesting vs will result in a shorter life?
Don,
Not to answer for anyone else, and not as the NTOSC/OC spokesperson, but I would ask you a couple questions regarding the above posts and Reggie’s quote, as it may help you answet the question yourself.
1. What do you understand is the path/result of being subluxated?
2. What do you consider the outcome of a decreased expression of II?
For me, it very much is about life and death. Not as an on/off switch, but as a spectrum. The greater the expression of II, the greater the expression of life, which effects both quality and quantity. While we can’t easily say “shorter”, we do know VS causes dis-ease and decreased expression of life, then the logical extension is something less than full life, which is heading toward death.. Not death in likeness to being shot or hit by a bus, but a slow and insidious process, slowly robbing one of life.
Not everyone is comfortable using life and death analogies as they may consider them “scare tactics”, but I don’t see it that way. I see it as a truth and logical deduction. As long as we don’t try to determine what the quality (better or worse) or quantity (more or less) should be, but rather view it philosophically and determined by II, then I see no problem with it.
…. and that’s WHY Reggie said that WHEN someone is under your care and they leave their children at home, his expression to emphasize the seriousness of the situation was: “they’re “killing” the “little bastards” by leaving them at home”. Or he used to say it the other way: ” WHY would anyone receive chiropractic care and leave their children at home to DYING is beyond me”. –
– Reggie believed that those WHO chose to leave their kids at home was a result of NOT understanding chiropractic. Of course, he always said that it was the result of the chiropractor’s inability to communicate the message. Thus calling us ALWAYS to polish our skills. –
– On a personal note, before you go on beating yourself up, believe it or not, there are some people WHO choose to NOT bring their kids in even if they understand. WHY? –
– WHO… KNOWS!
I have used and/or explained that Reggie quote on a number occasions. It can be a bit harsh, but it gets the point across. i would prefer to take it on myself and my explanation to have kids under care as a logical, “no-brainer” conclusion.
Dr. Duncan,
I understand that the result of being subluxated is that the coordinating impulses to the body are interfered with and that the ramifications of this is a less than full compliment of mental impulse being delivered. As I understand it, this could also be termed the outcome of a decreased expression of ii.
Maybe the use of the term killing and death are the difficulty here.
Killing – An act of causing death, esp. deliberately.
Death – 1. The action or fact of dying or being killed; the end of the life of a person or organism.
2.An instance of a person or an animal dying.
I will have to come back to this thread later when I have given this a bit more thought and have more time. Thanks.
Hey Don,
I guess it depends on, as Claude says, who you are. If you are a positive person you will emphasize the positive aspects such as, maximum potential, improved communication, higher coordination, functioning as designed. If you prefer to teach with fear, you discuss death, disease, body confusion, tissue insanity. I might suggest Joe’s book.. Enhance Your Life Experience. After 50+ trips around the sun, this is how I see Chiropractic. LIFE ENHANCEMENT
I have been giving adjustments since I was 9 years old* and have seen Chiropractic do some wonderful things. I have also witnessed loss of life in spite of care given.
(*- I was summond by the Board of Parents and summarily told I was not to adjust anymore until I had recieved training and a licence)
Steve,
I am a little puzzled by your statements as they appear to suggest that if one chooses to share the reality of dis-ease, lack of expression of II, lack of control and coordination of cells, tissues and organs, that it is based in fear and negativity? Unfortunately, like it or not, there ARE consequences of having a VS and the longer it is there, the greater the ramifications. However, it is possible to teach/educate about that AND also teach/educate the positive benefits of living a life free (as much as possible) of VS. But because many of those things are subjective and esoterical to a degree, especially in an OIBU world, I think it necessary to put both sides into as much context as possible for the pm, as to allow them to understand and make the best decisions possible at the time. That can only be done if the information that resonates with THEM.
Part of stating our objective, “locating and facilitating in the correction of VS, because they, in and of themselves, are a detriment to the expression of II, and therefore a detriment to the expression of life”, is inherently “negative” and we have an objective, at least in part, to help eliminate a negative. No way around it, so no reason not to address it or bring attention to it in a proper context.
Personally, I feel that if it is not addressed as a “downside”, then people only think there is at best an “upside” and at worst, by not being under care a “no side” as in null, and that position lacks importance and urgency.
Hi Don,
I understand what you are saying. For me, my tendency is as a very black and white type person.
With regard to this topic, it is no different. where you said “COULD” (emphasis mine) be an outcome of decreased expression of II”, I see it no other way. If II is always 100%, then any interference would have to result in less/decreased. So, to me, it is a WILL/MUST, not a could.
And we consider 100% II, being expressed with 100% Force through 100% Matter as being full LIFE, then again anything less is moving toward DEATH, regardless of that actual number/percentage.
With regard to the definitions of “killing” and “death”, I think you creatd the answer, although may not yet be comfortable with the understanding or ramifications of it. Many folks I discuss this with apptoach it with baited caution as you have. 🙂
Killing, has a tendency to be more intentional/deliberate for sure, but it doesn’t always. Regardless, in the cintext of our discussion and Reggie’s quote, we’ll go with it. If a.parent or anyone for that matter, knows amd understands (although likely not completely or fully), the ramifications of leaving a child home to remain subluxated, is that not deliberately and intentionally allowing a continued decreased expression of II (and therefore death and deceased quality and quantity of life) in that child?
Don,
Let’s get personal. Do you check you children spine every week? WHY or WHY not?
Steve and Drs. Duncan and Lessard,
I do have a tendency to prefer to speak from the LIFE enhancement frame/perspective when discussing the outcomes/benefits of chiropractic like Dr. Strauss’ text Steve eluded to. (Another add to my reading list.. *thanks Steve*)
Dr. Duncan asked,
“If a.parent or anyone for that matter, knows amd understands (although likely not completely or fully), the ramifications of leaving a child home to remain subluxated, is that not deliberately and intentionally allowing a continued decreased expression of II (and therefore death and deceased quality and quantity of life) in that child?”
Taking into account the LIFE principle/Innate principle, yes, that is correct. Does this message always carry with it a connotation of a scare tactic?
Suspending judgement here for a moment..
If the life principle is true (and it is true) and is as scary as it may seem, does it need to be delivered unabashedly just as Reggie and Joe Flesia did?
Or does it need to be delivered in a different and more subtle way nowadays for some reason?
I assume most will say it comes down to personal preference but what if it is not? 🙂
Don,
You said “for some reasons”…. WHICH reasons? –
– It’s NOT a scare tactic if it’s a fact! Scare tactics are lies!!!! The tragic consequences of VS to anyone IS real! It becomes a duty to tell EVERYONE about the devasting effects of VS. –
– Again, on this blog, do YOU check your children spines every week? WHY or WHY not? 😉
Don,
First, let me assure you, I am not considering any of this discussion passing judgement, nor am I intending to pass any. So, please speak candidly and openly. When I speak or write, I attempt to do so as honestly and straightforward as possible, but sometimes context isn’t as clean and clear in this kind of forum.
If something is true, as is the Life Principle, as you appear to agree, I don’t see a need to beat around the bush or sugar coat things unnecessarily. That isn’t to say that the message might be tempered depending upon the person or situation, as long as the message and seriousness doesn’t get lost. I don’t consider it a scare tactic, although it may be somewhat “scary”.
Hey Micheal,
I would say it is a case of the glass half full or half empty but telling people that the half empty glass represents a coming drought in an effort to sell them water is more than a mere difference of opinion. If you tell a mother she is killing her children when they don’t come in and it is actually her husband that does not agree with your point of view therefore won’t allow it, have you enhanced her life? May I offer a non-chiropractic example? I used to discuss the toxins and dangers of vaccinations and how they hurt the nerve system with my patients until I saw the look on the mothers faces that had already vaccinated their children. Now, when asked, I explain the basic difference between natural and artificial immunity. How they integrate that information into their W/L view is up to them. Yes there are consequences to subluxations and there are bennifits to Chiropractic care. I choose to teach, emphasize, reinforce, support, elaborate, demonstrate, illustrate, explain, decipher and offer the bennifits of care for any creature willing and able to recieve it. Chiropractic is the LACOS for the purpose of better expression of the Innate Forces of Innate Intelligence, period. How you teach it and how you sell it is up to you.
Steve,
I kind of like your glass half full/half empty analogy, although I view it a little different. I would prefer to point out BOTH the pros and cons of a glass half full. And on the half empty side, indicating an impending drought WOULD be a scare tactic of an unknown and unpredictable outcome, just as predicting arthritis or being crippled as a result of remaining subluxated in order to sell a package of “corrective care” or “restoration of a cervical curve”. However, pointing out the negative of no longer having a “full glass” and further ignoring things, and in our case, a VS, that will inevitably lead to further emptying of the glass.
Likewise, we can explain and demonstrate the positives of a glass half full. And in our case, the fact that we can’t undo the past damage, including vaccine damage as you pointed out, but we CAN move forward in light of the NEW info and positive benefits of living a life VS free. Now, they can CHOOSE to stay on the same path (and actually understand what that “negative” direction is), or choose to change their path and move in a “positive” direction.
And to paint a complete picture, both sides can be given without scare tactics, judgement or guilt, yet offer a result that WE choose to steer them toward as THEIR decision. And depending on the situation and person, the spectrum of “selling” becomes much broader and more applicable.
Only selling the “positives” doesn’t always reach people well or change behaviors. For example, driving within the speed limit can save fuel, wear and tear on tires, wheels, shocks, etc. It can also maintain a safer speed at which to stop or react as necessary. It will also keep your auto insurance rates lower due to less tickets. However, what keeps a very large majority of people driving within the speed limit? Of course it is the “negative” of getting a ticket, paying a fine, having it on your record and increasing your insurance. It is why people slam on the brakes when they see a cop. It is why local authorities create billboards deterring “aggressive driving” and “doubling fines in construction zones”. It is because the “life enhancement” factors alone DON’T adequately change behavior in enough people, quick enough.
The same thing can be said about many things…drunk driving, drug addiction and many others.
Hey Michael,
Maybe this is where we diverge, “yet offer a result that WE choose to steer them toward as THEIR decision.” I choose not to steer anyone anywhere. I prefer to point out the fork in the road. Giving a choice is enough for me. What, how, when or why they choose what they choose is beyond my realm. I may be taking this “unatached to the outcome” to far but it seems as though it should apply to our philosophy as well as our technique. Now that I think of it, it should apply to our science as well. Research should validate truth not aggendas.
Steve, if you think you don’t have an “agenda” to get people under care, and OC care at that, your are mistaken. But that’s ok, as we all have it. If you didn’t, you wouldn’t be in business. You, have a service to sell, as we all do. And we offer to sell it for a singular reason, with perhaps different ways. You said it yourself before.
But whether you accept it or not, there is not any part of you, your message or education that is not biased TOWARD getting people to understand the WHY behind accepting and consuming chiropracTIC care. If it weren’t, you might as well stop running your practice stand anonymously on the street corner handing out Strauss’ “Enhance Your Life Experience” and let the chips fall where they may and not even offer a way for them to choose you. But even that wouldn’t be totally unbiased and without agenda.
With all that said, I too have an agenda and am quite proud of it.
But, I also like you, detach as best I can from the “outcome” if you will. I recognize that they have freedom of choice. Everything is their decision to make. I cannot and will not make the decision for them, although, by giving them as much info as I can, I do recognize that it may be steering them in a direction that I would make, if it were up to me. It is their responsibility and their choice, and always will be.
Steve,
That seems very NTOSC of you….sorry I couldn’t help myself. 😉
Dr. Duncan,
Thank you for being open. I will try me best to be candid here.
If the message is to be truthful and serious can it be tempered and still retain the seriousness of the message. Does tempering not dilute the message?
Vs will kill you if you don’t get it corrected.
It could be me but this doesn’t seem ADIO to me. Am I wrong here?
Don,
In tempering a message, can different choices of words be used yet not detract from the message? Must it result in dilution?
I am not following your reference to not being ADIO. Please clarify your thought and/or your question. Thanks!
Dr. Duncan,
LOL! Your posts are so well worded, particularly your last to Steve, that you answered my question without following my reference. 🙂 Thanks for posting.
I can see that it is a matter of getting my confront up or at least making it automatic. Thanks for reminding me of the Tremain lesson.
How do you choose to let parents with unattending children know that vs in their kids is as serious and immediate to be life threatening?
Don,
In the orientation, when discussing what a VS is, Dis-Ease (i talk about life, death, 100% equals death, lack of expression of II and that robs you of life), causes of VS, (3 types of stress/external invasive forces), I do a demo of tbe birth process and ask “Do you think that could cause a subluxation?” You’re right! And do you know what that know what tha was?” It was your daughter/son/kids being born, it was YOU being born, it was ME being born. In, fact WHO do you know of that has gottrn into this world without being born?” They laugh, but it makes a point. I then say, this is why EVERY child, including your, should be checked as soon aftrr birth for VS as possible and then checked and adjusted regularly for the rest of their lives.
And during the orientation, I sprinkle socratic questions, some I WANT answered by someone, and others rhetorical. But they are such as “Is this stuff common or uncommon?” and “Would you say this is unique to you or me?” “What about your kids, friends, co-workers?” when talking about causes. “Are VS bad? Always bad, or just sometimes?” after they understand what a VS is and how it occurs. I ask “how long shoukd we leave it there?” And “now, that you understand about VS, how.lomg should someone be under chiropractic care to have their spine checked and adjusted as needed?”
So hopefully after THIS, they understand enough to come to that conclusion on their own and have their kids under care.
Dr. Duncan,
Wonderful. I like your approach. I imagine there are very few questions after such a thorough orientation.
Do you find that you never have to re-visit the need for parents to bring in their children on a regular basis after the orientation?
If not, how do you choose to confront this issue later on?
Don,
Let me say that I am not perfect and I struggle with many/most of the same challenges that everyone else does. With that, I do occasionally have people that don’t necessarily bring in their children for a variety of reasons, no matter what I have said or how often I have said it. It could be a divorce situation where the practice member doesn’t have the kids much, or maybe they don’t have the other parents permission or can’t get it, want to deal with the hassle/wrath of the other parent, a teenage kid that is hard to get into the office, etc. Spouses are a different story as they are adults and individuals and make up their own mind.
However, what happens is that people have a tendency to find out rather quick if our office is for them or not. Usually within the first month, they are either in or out. And most folks that have kids, have them under care. And while I do offer a “per visit” fee, I have very few practice members that use that. Like I said, they are either here and on the membership or they are not.
I find that you sometimes need to re-visit the “need for care” due to “life” getting in the way. People are busy and their kids are in a multitude of activities and sometimes the week goes by too quick and they missed getting in. People usually don’t go more than a week without getting in. It is not usually due to them understanding and NOT choosing to bring them in. It is more a time and convenience thing at that point.
We don’t require appointments for membership clients, and so we don’t call and remind people of appointments or that they “missed”. But I will remind them in the office of staying regular (in my office I define that as weekly). I do it in a friendly, loving and non-threatening manner as possible.
“Hey Joan, you know you need to make sure your kids are getting in here each week too. It is just as important for them as it is for you.”
“Hey Joan, I know you are busy, we all are. But it is important that you and your family are here each week to get checked. You remember that a subluxation robs you of quality and quantity of life and it only takes a couple minutes to check and adjust you.”
“You know, it only takes a couple minutes to get in here and get checked and adjusted. If you have time to gas up your car each week, you got time to get your spine checked.” (That car/gas one is from Mark Romano)
“You know Joan, I know you are busy. But I make time to get my spine checked each week and I make time to check my wife and kids. I want the same for you and your family, which is why we make it easy, convenient and affordable. Make sure you get in here each week?”
And if they have an answer to the contrary that demonstrates their lack of understanding, etc., then you need to “confront” that and correct it, or they will never bring the kids in. Also, do you have a fee and office system that makes it easy, convenient and affordable for them to bring the family in?