HCO BULLETIN OF 10 SEPTEMBER 1983

Remimeo
HCOs
E/O Hats
MAA Hats
Tech/Qual
All Staff
PTS/SP Course

    PTSness AND DISCONNECTION

Refs:
Tape: 6505C18 "Organization and Ethics"
Tape: 6506C08 "Handling the PTS"
HCO PL 23 Dec. 65RA Rev. 10.9.83 SUPPRESSIVE ACTS,
  SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS
Tape: 6608C02 "Suppressives and GAEs"
Tape: 6608C25 "The Antisocial Personality"
HCOB 27 Sept. 66 THE ANTISOCIAL PERSONALITY THE ANTI-SCIENTOLOGIST
HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I C/S Series 79 PTS INTERVIEWS
HCO PL 3 May 72R Exec Series 12 Rev. 18.12.77 ETHICS AND EXECUTIVES
HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING
HCOB 29 Dec. 78 THE SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN
HCOB 31 Dec. 78 II OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING
HCOB 31 Dec. 78 III EDUCATING THE PTS THE FIRST STEP TOWARD
  HANDLING: PTS C/S-1
HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R PTS TYPE A HANDLING Rev. 10.9.83
HCOB 8 Mar. 83 HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS

  THEORY

Perhaps the most fundamental right of any being is the
right to communicate.

Without this freedom, other rights deteriorate.

Communication, however, is a two-way flow. If one has the right to

communicate, then one must also have the right to not
receive communication from another. It is this latter
corollary of the right to communicate that gives us our
right to privacy.

These rights are so basic that governments have written
them into laws - witness the American Bill of Rights.

However, groups have always regulated these rights to one
degree or another.

For with the freedom to communicate come certain agreements
and responsibilities.

An example of this is a marriage: In a monogamous society,
the agreement is that one will be married to only one
person at one time. That agreement extends to having
second-dynamic relations with one's spouse and no one else.
Thus, should wife Shirley establish a 2D-type of
communication line with someone other than her husband
Pete, it is a violation of the agreement and postulates of
the marriage. Pete has the right to insist that either this
communication cease or that the marriage will cease.

HANDLE OR DISCONNECT

In the HCOBs on PTS tech you'll see the phrase "handle or
disconnect." It means simply that.

The term "handle" most commonly means, when used in
relation to PTS tech, to smooth out a situation with
another person by applying the tech of communication.

The term "disconnection" is defined as a self-determined
decision made by an individual that he is not going to be
connected to another. It is a severing of a communication line.

The basic principle of handle or disconnect exists in any
group and ours is no different.

It is much like trying to deal with a criminal. If he will
not handle, the society resorts to the only other solution:
It "disconnects" the criminal from the society. In other
words, they remove the guy from society and put him in a
prison because he won't HANDLE his problem or otherwise
cease to commit criminal acts against others.

It's the same sort of situation that husband Pete is faced
with in the example mentioned above. The optimum solution
is to handle the situation with wife Shirley and her
violations of their group (marriage) agreements. But if
Pete cannot handle the situation, he is left with no other
choice but to disconnect (sever the marriage communication
lines if only by separation). To do otherwise would be
disastrous, for he is connected to someone antagonistic to
the original agreements, postulates and responsibilities of
the group (the marriage).

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 in the
materials on PTS handling) 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.

LOST TECH

Earlier, disconnection as a condition was cancelled. It had
been abused by a few individuals who'd failed to handle
situations which could have been handled and who lazily or
criminally disconnected, thereby creating situations even
worse than the original because it was the wrong action.

Secondly, there were those who could survive only by living
on our lines - they wanted to continue to be connected to
Scientologists (see the HCOBs on the characteristics of an
SP). Thus, they screamed to high heaven if anyone dared to
apply the tech of "handle or disconnect."

This put Scientologists at a disadvantage.

We cannot afford to deny Scientologists that basic freedom
that is granted to everyone else: the right to choose whom
one wishes to communicate with or not communicate with.

It's bad enough that there are governments trying, through
the use of force, to prevent people from disconnecting from
them (witness those who want to leave Russia but can't!).

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 is hereby restored to
use, in the hands of those persons thoroughly and
standardly trained in PTS/SP tech.

HANDLING ANTAGONISTIC SOURCES

In the great majority of cases, where a person has some
family member or close associate who appears antagonistic
to his getting better through Scientology, it is not really
a matter of the antagonistic source wanting the PTS to not
get better. It is most commonly a lack of correct
information about Scientology that causes the problem or
upset. In such a case, simply having the PTS disconnect
would not help matters and would actually be a nonconfront
of the situation. It is quite common that the PTS has a low
confront on the terminal and situation. This isn't hard to
understand when one looks at these facts:

a. To be PTS in the first place, the PTS must have
committed overts against the antagonistic source; and

b. When one has committed overts, his confront and
responsibility drop.

When an Ethics Officer finds that a Scientologist is PTS to
a family member, he does not recommend that the person
disconnect from the antagonistic source. The E/O's advice
to the Scientologist is to handle.

The handling for such a situation is to educate him in the
tech of PTSness and suppression, and then skillfully and
firmly guide the PTS through the steps needed to restore
good communication with the antagonistic source. This
eventually dissolves the situation by bringing about an
understanding on the part of the antagonistic source as to
what Scientology is and why the PTS person is interested
and involved in it. Of course, when this is accomplished
you no longer have a PTS at all-and you may very well find
a new Scientologist on your hands!

The actual steps and procedure of this sort of handling are
well covered in the materials listed at the beginning of
this HCOB.

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.

HOW TO DISCONNECT

How a disconnection is done depends on the circumstances.

Example: The pc lives next door to, say, a psychiatric
clinic and feels PTS due to this environment. The remedy is
simple - the pc can move to another apartment in another
location. He need not write any sort of "disconnection
letter" to the psychiatric clinic. He simply changes his
environment - which is, in effect, a disconnection from the
suppressive environment.

Example: A pc is connected to a person or group that has
been declared suppressive by HCO in a published ethics order.
He should disconnect and, if he wants to inform the SP of
the fact, he may write a letter of disconnection. Such a
letter would be very straightforward. It would state the
fact of the disconnection and the reason for it. It would
not be misemotional or accusative, since this would only
serve to stir up further antagonism. The letter would be
inspected by the Ethics Officer before it was sent and
copies kept for the PTS person's own ethics file and pc
folder.

No attempt would be made to establish communication with
the declared SP "to clear matters up" or to seek to reform
the SP. The SP's reform is strictly in the hands of HCO.
The PTS simply disconnects.

Example: One discovers that an employee at his place of
business is an SP - he steals money, drives away customers,
wipes out other employees and will not correct no matter
what you do. The handling is very simple-the PTS fires him
and that's the end of it right there!

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.

And it must be so labeled. (Ref: HCO PL 23 Dec. 65RA,
SUPPRESSIVE ACTS, SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY AND
SCIENTOLOGISTS)

SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN

There is of course another technical way to handle PTSes
and that is to get them through all problems they have had
with the terminal involved and the PTSness will disappear
(Ref: HCOB 29 Dec. 78, THE SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN).

But it still requires that during the handling the person
disconnects.

SUMMARY

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.

Nothing in this HCOB shall ever or under any circumstances
justify any violations of the laws of the land. Any such
offense shall subject the offender to penalties described
by law as well as to ethics and justice actions.

L. RON HUBBARD
Founder