Disconnection — Scientology’s Nasty Secret



While Scientology spokespeople have routinely denied that “enforced disconnection exists”, anyone who is familiar with the Corporate Church of Scientology knows only too well about disconnection. Like so much else in the Corporate Scientology empire, its an ugly truth to be hidden from the “wog” world through a game of carefully worded deception of the same order as Bill Clinton’s infamous “I did not have sexual relations with that woman.”

When you see a church spokespeople emphatically state “there is no policy of enforced disconnection” in Scientology, the language is carefully chosen. (You can see Tommy Davis doing even worse than that here though frankly, he is a pretty poor example of the art of careful wording, he set records for horrendous blunders in his short career that will never be surpassed).

But if pressed on the subject, the response is further dissembling in this wise:  “those who disconnect CHOOSE to do so” followed by “everyone has a right not to communicate with someone who is harming them, like an abused woman has the right to leave her abusive spouse.”

It sounds reasonable, but it’s not reality. And the church believes they can just keep asserting this and nobody will notice they are lying.

The Facts

Let’s start with some indisputable FACTS:

1.      There is a fundamental theory of “disconnection” that is based on common sense. Like the oft-used abused wife example above, the idea is that if there is someone who is causing you grief in your life and you cannot deal with it, then get yourself away from the source of grief. “Everyone has a right to communicate and conversely you also have a right to not communicate”. Fair enough. And when this is used for the benefit of the individual, it can be a helpful practice.

2.      There IS policy applied by the Church of Scientology that REQUIRES someone to disconnect from anyone declared by HCO as a Suppressive Person. HCOB 10 September 83 PTSNess and Disconnection states the following:

“To fail or refuse to disconnect from a suppressive person not only denies the PTS (person connected to a Suppressive Person) case gain, it is also supportive of the suppressive – in itself a Suppressive Act. And it must be so labeled.”

The “Suppressive Act” is specifically stated in the Introduction to Scientology Ethics book (taken verbatim from the PL Suppressive Acts Suppression of Scientology and Scientologists) as:

“Continued adherence to a person or group pronounced a Suppressive Person or Group by HCO.”

This is now no longer for the benefit of the individual, but intended to benefit the organization.

3.      An individual labeled a Suppressive, even if only due to continued association with someone ELSE who has been labeled a Suppressive, faces the reality of immediate family members (spouses, children, parents), friends, business associates and even employers who are Scientologists disconnected from them. Lost jobs, divorce, kicked out of school, refused service by doctors and many other ramifications from life altering to merely annoying.

4.      It is church policy that anyone who is declared has forfeited their right to participate in the activities of the church and is no longer eligible for auditing or training. This is the Scientology equivalent of being condemned to hell. It is a powerful motivating force.

If I Hold A Gun To Your Head Are You Choosing Freely?

The statement that the church does not enforce disconnection is similar to the rapist claiming his victim “consented” after he held a gun to her head.  “It was her choice, she could have refused….” So too with the victims of enforced disconnection in the church of Scientology – they could refuse to disconnect from someone the church deems a trouble-maker and have their own life destroyed by being labeled suppressive themselves. Or they could “go along with it”, save their own neck and let the other person fend for themselves. For most, it is a practical decision, not a moral one.

This Is Constitutionally Protected Activity

The church claims the moral high ground (though this only after they have been forced to admit that they DO enforce disconnection).  “This is our right” guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the US. “We can practice our religion as we want and if anyone doesn’t like it they can go to some other church.” (Though it is quite incogruous that if this IS their “sincerely held religious belief” they don’t like to admit it in public?)

They are technically correct. Legally, they are protected by the law. But morally, there is nowhere to hide when in the name of religion and touting themselves as “champions of human rights” they are sundering families, friendships and livelihoods.

Those who seek to justify and explain this as their “right” are little different than slave owners before the Thirteenth Amendment was passed or the subsequent “separate but equal” segregationists who proclaimed the moral and legal high ground before the Voting Rights and Equal Rights Acts of 1964 and the subsequent Supreme Court decisions that put a permanent end to government and court sanctioned discrimination in any form. Until then, they correctly claimed that they were “following the law” and were “protected by the constitution.”

Abuses that assault the sensibilities of decent men and women do not survive in a civilized society.  Eventually, the checks and balances of an elected government, the press and public opinion conspire to outlaw abhorrent and abusive behavior.

The sooner Corporate Scientology recognize that enforced disconnection puts them on a par with the Segregationists of the first half of the 20th century who proclaimed God and the law was on their side, the better off the church and anyone associated with it will be.

 What Does Scientology Fear?

Corporate Scientology is terrified that allowing people to remain connected with Suppressives will erode away their base of faithful followers by filling their heads with lies.

But isn’t this an admission that the followers of the church are incapable of making up their own minds and that if they have found something of benefit in Scientology it is so lacking in benefit they could be shaken in their faith by “lies.”  (The church vehemently proclaims that EVERYTHING negative said about them is a LIE).

Other religions operate in the marketplace of free ideas. While Scientology claims superiority over all other religions – producing standard results and having a technology like no other faith has – why would it fear that “lies and bad news” would undercut its membership? Surely such an advanced and strong religion would be far better able to deal with criticism or negative statements than others? You can find a virtually endless amount of negative information about Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism or any other of the major belief systems on earth. And despite that, they all survive and do not try to control their adherents by seeking to remove anyone who may be negative or critical of their faith  from their lives. Only some of the newer, smaller religions shun as a control mechanism – Mormonism to some extent, Jehovah’s Witnesses to a greater extent and Scientology to the extreme.

How Will It End?

The same way segregation ended. By bringing attention to the abuses. By the Rosa Parks’ of this battle refusing to agree to sit at the back of the bus – Lori Hodgson and Catherine Von Ach and Cindy Plahuta and others fighting to recover their children and raising public awareness as a result.

By the media doing stories and making the truth known.

With testimonials on the internet and in social media.

And eventually by elected officials being goaded into action.

Institutionalized abuses of human rights all come to an end when enough voices are raised in protest.

If you have a story of disconnection and are willing to have it published on this blog with your name, send it t0 the Contact Me  page. If I can, I will publish it.

Remember the words of Howard Beale in Network: “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take this anymore.” Speak up. Speak Out.



  1. says

    This was exactly the blog post I needed on the exact day I needed it. Incredible!
    I’ll make it known why later. Many thanks for posting this on that special day (and it’s not because it happened to be my birthday as well). :)

    • Roy Macgregor says

      Well Happy Birthday Anette, There are many wonderful people out here who will wish you well whether they agree with you or not.

  2. Aquamarine says

    I keep thanking you, but its your fault because you just keep delivering :) An outstanding article.

  3. The Machiavellian Asthmatic says

    Echoing Tony at the top and SKM, a most excellent piece, that cuts like a knife across the face of DM’s sociopathy. Bravo!!

  4. says

    As a reminder, we have an on-going strategy to break the back of disconnection which is simply by getting so many people out and “declared” that it no longer makes any sense to declare people because no one is paying any attention to it any longer. That is the purpose of the Indie 500 List. And already that is working. There are actually a number of people who have been on the list for more than a year, who have not been declared.

    The CoS was like a big tree full of people. Each time they found a person they didn’t like, they cut off a limb. Well, guess what? They are running out of limbs. In fact, the tree has become a telephone pole, and the only branch left is the one they are clinging to.

    So if your name is not yet on the list, please send it to me at indie500@nyms.net along with (so it’s not just a meaningless name) the year you started in Scientology, auditing level, training level, any years on staff, any recognitions or awards.

    There are currently 462 people on this prestigious list—veteran Scientologists, OTs, Clears, ex-staff with decades of experience, award winners, and opinion leaders. It’s a Who’s Who of Indie Scientology.


    • Gayle Smith aka TroubleShooter says

      Hi Steve, That list was one of the things that helped me greatly as I was going through my own trip through my valley of darkness. I was speechless to see how many long time, highly trained or clearly highly dedicated people were on that list. No doubt if everyone out put their names up it would have to be the Indie 5,000,000 list to account for the millions cob said we were to the numbers reflected today in orgs around the world.

  5. allie oops says

    My heart still aches and I am so sad. My husband of 27 years “left me” and I know he was told to do so by the Scientologists he was always confiding to. He is on staff./ I was a Scientologist. I am some how declared, but never got the full story. Just third party garbage from the ex-husband….He tries to continue to constantly punish me monetarily; since I am dependent on the alimony to survive.

    Thanks for this blog, and for the brave souls out there. May our pleasant dr4ams come true.

  6. Jim Logan says

    My story of disconnection was published as part of the Truth Rundown series in the Tampa Bay Times. The initial issues related to that became the subject of a farcical Comm Ev done by Warren McShane, the President of RTC at the time, and under the approving eye and demanding glare of the upper echelons of that same group, RTC.

    When it came time for me to choose how to deal with this destructive idiocy, I discussed it with my father. He too suffered under this evil, having his own daughter-in-law forcibly “disconnected”.

    What I chose to do was to exhaust “within org avenues”, rather than storm the gates. My rationale was that if I put in that order, if I did what was called for in policy, then surely this would lead to a saner response and eventual clarity and resolution that spread throughout.

    I did A-E. When I did eventually finish, and had that in writing on CofS letterhead, I asked for a Board of Review on the entire cycle. This was deemed to be an indicator that I had not done A-E. I wasn’t “repentant” if I requested a BofR. More nonsense and gibbering lunatic babble.

    So I plotted to gain access to my wife on other lines. She was now ill, with cancer, and time was running out. More obfuscation even on the “other lines”, as I worked them, and tried to exploit any viable means to see her and release her from that environment, to recover or to leave in peace and with a kiss on her lips.

    We finally did reconnect, but only in the death of that body. We have risen above the surly bonds of physical necessity and the vias of MEST, to be aware.

    I know the circumstances of the re-introduction of “disconnection”. I also have experienced as much as any being, the harshness, the permeating pain, the crushing weight of that disconnection.

    I have no doubts or qualms that were the man still alive, and on the lines, that re-introduction of disconnection. having wrought more destruction, more enmity, more vilification of the decency that Scientology really is all about, and despite any momentary quelling of disorder, would with NO quibbles bury this Dark Age “Ordeal” of that exact paragraph quoted in the Opening Piece.

    Disconnection as a right of an individual, without a gun to their head, is sacrosanct. It is part of one’s Code of Honor, to give or receive communication when one themselves desires it, and with no other compulsion or compunction.

    We do not live isolated lives. There are exigencies and requirements to deal with them. Should those exigencies continue past the handling, then they are arbitraries, which are in a group – engrams. Those engrams are the held down computations that derail the survival of not only the group, but every Dynamic.

    Cancel that HCOB, as written. The calculation of the greatest good for the greatest number of Dynamics in the absence of a fixed idea, ANY fixed idea, other than optimum survival across the span of life, is the Optimum Solution. I have no question that L. Ron Hubbard would do exactly that, applying as he always did, the principle of workability in achieving the ultimate aims of this whole game.

    The Data Series calls for, in the HEART of review of one’s actions, the humility to honestly view the results.

    The results of the impossibility of that paragraph of this HCOB, PTSness and Disconnection, are plain.

    CANCEL THE BULLETIN, as written.

    • Gayle Smith aka TroubleShooter says


      I know this pain. I’m so sorry that you felt it. I also know you’ve risen up from the ashes and have a new life you share and use what you learned to help others. Thank you for giving us more. My thoughts are that Annie is proud of you doing what she could not can not. You can’t stop truth.


  7. SunnyV says

    Great concise, factual article!

    Since so many other people here can comment personally on the destructive disconnection policy, and I cannot, I will call attention to mention of Howard Beale, and the movie Network, at the end of your essay.

    Network was made in 1976, it is about the media and corporate control of public opinion and mindless consumption. What is amazing is that a move made over 30 years ago about the corporate media is even more relevant today that it was 3 decades ago. It’s spooky in its accuracy*. A work of art being MORE relevant as time passes is the true sign of a work of greatness or genius. I encourage EVERYONE to see Network, multiple viewings if possible.

    * Example: They produce “Reality TV” shows for a mindless public and mock it – 25 years before it was a real fad.

  8. Persistence says

    In the Admin Dictionary there is a definition for “REFORM CODE.” It says “The Reform code of Scn. We sent out mailings and we received back anything that people thought that should be corrected. This resulted in ‘reform code’ in which the sec checks were cancelled and all old folders on this have been burned and disconnection is cancelled as a relief to those suffering family oppression. It’s no longer required in SP orders and the person has to handle. The fair game law was cancelled and the prohibition against writing down a recording of professional materials was made and this was the extent of the ‘Reform Code.’ (Ron’s Journal 1968). Mike – What happened to this Reform Code? Wow! This is a great thing. I bet it won’t be in any newly revised Admin Dictionary. I have a first edition of the Admin Dictionary from 1976.

  9. SadStateOfAffairs says

    The problem is the divergence between theory and practice. The theory of disconnection, as explained in the 1982 PL (alone) is logical and sensible. That would be self-determined disconnection based on a rational assessment of someone/something concerning which being connected is actually harmful. However, in practice it is used/abused as an enforced punishment based on corrupt politics within the Church (the Miscavige regime) to stifle rational criticism and dissent which have the intent of airing out abuses of power and perversion of tech and policy. The policy, instead of being followed as explained, instead is based on the unwritten Miscavige policy that anything negative about Miscavige and his organization, even if true and real and constructively intended, is automatically a “lie” which must be stamped out with cruelty and force.

  10. Joe Pendleton says

    Well, Mike… there you go, policy straight from LRH himself. I was in comm with and in support of you and Marty, so I was declared an SP. Then friends and loved ones who have known me for upwards of 40 years almost all disconnected from me. And I assume that many of them did that thinking that if they didn’t, they would be declared themselves and disconnected from too. A very, VERY evil policy from Ron. It is certainly not the only policy of the CoS that is discreditable and loathsome to most thinking people who used to be potential Scientologists, but will no doubt be the one that is the absolute deal killer for most who even consider getting into Scientology (and there has to be very precious few of these – you’d almost have to be a hermit like the Unabomber to not have heard much of the truth about the CoS). Where will it end? Uhm … pretty clear I think to most people ….. the CoS will slowly diminish over the next 10 years and as the folks from the 60s to 80s die off, all that will be left will be the mind controlled few who have been in the SO since they were teenagers. But unlike the Amish, they have no cutesy costumes and horse carts and down home Pennsylvania Dutch restaurants for tourists (yes, I have to been to one – there’s even an Amish restaurant in the Reading Terminal Market in downtown Philly).

  11. TrevAnon says

    “Speak up. Speak out.” Well said.

    If you consider speaking out: you’re not alone.

    There’s a list of more than 2,000 people who have spoken out against organized Scientology. Although some of them still believe in the validity of the core precepts and practice them outside of the Church of Scientology, all of them have denounced the legitimacy of the organization itself.

    The list is here

  12. Persistence says

    The policy “An Essay on Management” has some very telling details on what happens when ARC is cut within a group. It foretells what will happen to the group or individual who cuts an affinity line or a line that contains truth. This ties directly to the church’s disconnection policy.

    Under the section on LAWS it says: “Communication lines are sacred and who would interrupt or pervert a communication line within a group is entitled to group death—exile. And that usually happens as a natural course of events. Communication lines are sacred and must not be used as channels of viciousness and entheta. They must not be twisted or perverted. They must not be glutted with many words and little meaning. They must not be severed. They must be established whenever a communication line seems to want to exist or is needed…A line is as dangerous to tamper with as it has truth in its channel….If there is much truth in that line, it does not give authority to the cutter, it explodes him….A management which will pervert an affinity or sever one may gain a momentary power, but the laws here are the same as those relating to communication….A management which will pervert or suppress a reality, no matter how ‘reasonable’ the act seems, is acting in the direction of the destruction of a group….A management which will hide data, even in the hope of sparing someone’s feelings, is operating toward a decline of the group…A true group must have a management which deals in affinity, reality and communication, and any group is totally within its rights, when a full and reasonable examination discloses management in fault of perverting or cutting ARC, of slaughtering, exiling or suspending that management. ARC is sacred.”

    Then under “POWER” the policy says: “There is an intriguing factor involved, however: ARC lines. When they are slightly interrupted they deliver power to the individual that interrupts them. True, it is authoritarian power—death power. But a very faint tampering with a line gives authority to the tamperer since he is obscuring to some slight degree a section of theta. This group is trying to see the theta and reach it and if they can do so only through the tamperer and if they are convinced that the tamperer or tampering is necessary (which it NEVER is), then the group tolerates the tamperer in the hope of seeing more theta. Mistaking this regard for him as something he is receiving personally, the tamperer cannot resist, if he is a narrow and stupid man, tampering a little more with the ARC line. He can live and is tolerated only so long as the theta he is partially masking is not entirely obscured. But he, by that first tampering,, starts on the dwindling spiral. Eventually he is so ‘reactive’ (and he would have to be pretty much reactive to start such an operation) that he obscures the theta or discredits it. At that moment he dies. He has put so much tension on the line that it explodes. If it is not a very theta ARC in the first place, he is relatively safe for a longer period. The pomp and glory he assumes are not his. He makes them enmest and entheta and eventually corrupts them utterly and corrupts himself and all around him dies as management.”

    There is a lot more in this policy letter and I would recommend reading it in its entirely.

  13. Aeolus says

    LRH gave the label of SP to what he identified as the ‘antisocial personality’, which aligns quite closely with what the rest of the world knows as a sociopath. And quite often the only effective way to deal with a sociopath is to get them out of your life, and out of your group. Fair enough. However, he then went on to apply this label “SP” to anyone who refused to toe the line and who committed any of a long list of offenses within the Ethics system he created, including anyone who leaves the group in any manner other than silence. This has resulted in a lot of good, decent people being labelled as sociopaths who are nothing of the sort.

    And of course in the paranoid world of David Miscavige this has been carried to absurd extremes. I have a friend who was declared for writing a KR on off-policy actions by upper management. Her husband left her and she became a non-person to most of her acquaintances. One acquaintance though refused to remove her from his Facebook page, and for this small act of integrity he was declared in turn. And promptly became a non-person to many of his acquaintances.

    Rather than taking justice to a higher level of civilization as LRH envisioned, what the Church has going on now more closely resembles the witch hunts of the Middle Ages.

    • Mike Rinder says

      Another in the series on Disconnection is coming on this subject — who qualifies for the disconnection treatment these days….

  14. says

    Good post, Mike.
    The vicious disconnection is purely and simply the Co$ response to having their various and sundry witholds missed. They lie. They can’t do a correct black-propeganda handling because they can’t tell the truth. They can only keep the money coming in thru blackmail, lies and disconnecting someone who tells the truth.
    Basically, at this point, it’s all about protecting Dave and his tomes of lies and hiding HIS crimes. Pretty simple.

    The Co$ is right up there at the top of the “least ethical groups” on the planet. It’s a good thing that they no longer have a monopoly on workable tech.

  15. KFrancis says

    A great article-It clearly shows the wide chasm between the church’s dogmatic dramatizations and well-reasoned, sensible application of policy.

    Regrettably, there is no room in the C of S for anyone who would author a piece like this. Pausing to look closely at policy and how it should be applied fairly would just get dismissed as weak-minded Q and A.

  16. Silvia says

    Thank you Mike. You noted above “Corporate Scientology is terrified that allowing people to remain connected with Suppressives will erode away their base of faithful followers by filling their heads with lies.”
    It is correct to state that- if they were really delivering services they would have nothing to fear as people would not even look for other things- they will be hapily becoming more able, sane and self determined.
    However, I believe another factor is involved, the “obsessive control” that generates from the “leader” where everything has to be known and approved by him plus another characteristic of an SP- STOP. Anything that assumedly threatens his obsessive control will be stopped, yet, this has become a generalized stopping everything and anybody, thus a suppressive behaviour.

  17. Graduated says

    The Fairmans set a legal precedent for service providers denying someone service on the basis of forced disconnection. See the article on Marty’s blog at: http://markrathbun.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/fairmans-disarm-scientology-disconnection. Their pleadings are also accessible for use as models.

    I believe there are similar precedents where employers have dismissed employees on similar grounds of religious discrimination. Can anyone cite some specifics on this?

    It would be interesting to see if there is any Family Law that could be used to set a precedent for ending this coercion of family members.

    The practice of coerced disconnection must end.

  18. Schorsch says

    As I joined in 1976 my family and relatives and friends at that time had been very negative about Scientology. Thus I had been moved out of Scientology and had been told that I have to handle this situation. But actually my family, relatives and friends disconnected from me as me being considered crazy. I did not disconnect from them.
    If someone is a Scientology hater then there is no way to handle this person. I guess if not actively disconnecting from this person this person will do it on his own will. I never could change a mind about Scientology. There is no other option; you simply cannot communicate with him. (it ist not the fault of this person alone. As I would also not change my mind about Scientology. Thus we both or „guilty“ of „not changing ones mind“ and thus stay in conflict with each other)
    Have a look at our society. We do have 6 billion people on Earth or so. But you cannot talk to everyone of them. Depending on your part you have in society you have to deduct from this list e.g. women, blacks, whites, mormons, non scientologists, scientologists ….. lots more of. Then what is left? Maybe only you? And then you cannot talk to yourself because you ….!

    • Graduated says

      Schorsch, it sounds like you had a simple PTS Type A situation (intimately connected to someone antagonist to you about Scientology) and the idiot who was “helping” you arbitrarily maintained that situation was not resolved until your family members changed their minds about Scientology. That was NEVER the EP of PTS Type A handling – only a cessation of the antagonism. And many, many people got stuck in the no-win situation you described precisely because of that arbitrary.

      Done correctly, he would have helped you discover what you were doing to create the antagonism in the first place and coached you through re-establishing ARC with those family members (perhaps by not discussing Scientology at all with them) with “good roads and fair weather” communication, ignoring any antagonism, validating only the theta and appreciating their concern for your welfare. Before long, the antagonism would have abated as it would have had nothing to stick to and they would have respected your right as an adult to have a viewpoint that didn’t necessarily match theirs, appreciative of your care and love for them and thus willing to respect you as an autonomous individual without further adieu. And having witnessed such a change in your character, they may have even concluded that maybe Scientology wasn’t so bad after all without having to admit it.

      Too bad you got stuck with that arbitrary instead of getting standard assistance. But at least now, you don’t have to deduct anyone from your list except those, in your estimation, who are full-fledged sociopaths.

  19. statpush says

    Wow, Mike, great article. Where to begin to comment? Not only is the practice of disconnection unworkable, unethical and, ultimately unenforceable, but underneath it contains a lie. That lie is that the church-declared Suppressive Person is a 2 1/2 percenter (anti-social personality). PTS/SP technology is designed to deal with anti-social personalities; disconnection being part of this technology.

    In what may have been one of LRH’s greatest blunders, using the same terminology and label – The Suppressive Person, to describe both The Anti-Social Personality and The Social Personality who finds themselves the target of church jurisprudence (often wrongly and unfairly).

    By permitting the church to willy-nilly declare someone a Suppressive Person – without evidence of anti-social characteristics, neither “saves” the individual or their connections. Instead it creates the church’s most formidable enemy – The Former Member. Psychs and the Government don’t hold a candle to the trained Clear or OT who has been served an injustice by the RCS group bank.

    Dissidents and whistle-blowers ARE NOT automatically Anti-Social Personalities. However, they could APPEAR to be if the accuser were SUPPRESSIVE. Issuing a proclaimation on a colored piece of paper does not make it so. It is interesting to note that the church no longer distributes SP declares, but are closely held by MAAs and Ethics Officers, and only revealed to create the desired effect on a church member. Why is that? I thought the discovery and labelling of an SP was to be BPI, for the welfare of the public? No, the church KNOWS this is wrong and is demonstrating MWH phenonema. What are they ashamed of? Shouldn’t they be proud? HCO did it’s job locating the bad guy, making the evironment safe once again, order is restored. Kudos. Could it be they know it is immoral, unethical and quite possibly a violation of human rights? Hmm…

    Another thought which I’ve been considering is, why declare some of your best and brightest members? Clears and OTs and highly trained auditors? Long-time members and veteran staff? Doesn’t make sense does it? The way this makes sense is if:
    1) Purge the group of real Scnists and LRH loyalists, so you can usher in squirrelled Scn to an unsuspecting public.
    2) Create an enemy which is capable of putting the group’s ethics in.

    • Jane Doe says

      Stat Push, I vote for number 1 in your post. Purge the group of real Scns and LRH loyalists so you can usher in squirrelled Scn to an unsuspecting public. And thus destroy the church, which is the real intention.

  20. jim cherkas says

    If they fear lies and bad news then why do they always have theIAS events and briefings which are going to make people scared into giving up their money they are inconsistent if they want to live without any bad news hidden away because they tell you don’t look on the internet don’t read that book don’t listen to the news because you might get upset then they give you the bad news so they can collect money out
    of you of all the people trying to attack Scientology

    • Jane Doe says

      Yes but they get to give you “all the bad news” in each IAS briefing. I think they drum it up and make it up out of whole cloth some of the time and then exaggerate the existing facts other times just to scare you into donating to the IAS to make it all go away. So they can talk about “entheta” but anyone else who talks about “bad things” is a heretic, bad news, an SP or a “bitter defrocked apostate.”

  21. Formost says

    I’m a bit unresolved about these SP declares. I’ve seen some which were absolutely necessary, others which seemed ridiculous and yet others way over the top.

    I recall one sup threatening various org terminals with revealing the EP of a given process strictly prohibited by LRH with indicated consequences he was fully aware of. He got declared and I have no issue with that, otherwise you’d lose complete order within a group.

    Also, a situation a staff member was involved with that should have called for handlings instead of a declare, which ended up being lifted later on. Incompetent E/Os jumping the gun, and justice went astray.

    And still, someone messing up on his metering or blown from course should not be declared and disconnected from by his family. More sensible courses of action exist such as taking him/her off the auditing line or forfeiting his course depending on the circumstances. A declare in this instance has nothing to do with justice, it’s completely overboard.

    Yet others blow the whistle on non-standard tech application on seniors and then get done in by them via a declares. Justice often doesn’t work the way it should.

    Re: ‘HCOB 10 September 83 PTSNess and Disconnection’ … you come into LRH’s house and those are the rules. If one doesn’t like them, he is free to leave. But then when one is an SO member with no money to leave, he can be manipulated under the threat of a declare. Thus, not all that black & white.

    Each situation is unique and I don’t think a blanket answer exists. I have seen plenty of downright destructive personalities and if they weren’t removed, the group would have gone to hell. So I have mixed feeling on this, but I believe instances exist where SP declares are necessary for the survival of the group.

    Now, I have also heard that some folks were declared on the spot by others. Well, that’s not Scientology, as a person by policy is entitled to present evidence to the contrary in a ComEv. Even LRH himself violated this from time to time.

    Should one use the public communication channels to expose the corruption of the church which is enroute being run into the ground by a small clique of criminals although LRH calls for an SP declare specifically for doing that? Well, if no viable communication line exists to affect a remedy for the suicide course the church is on, well, what are ya gonna do? I guess blowing up central headquarters is one option. It’s unfortunate the organizational ‘checks & balance’ structure has been unmocked and it has to come to this.

    • Roy Macgregor says

      I think these questions SOUND complex but are in fact simple Firstly the most heavily abused practice in Scientology is SP Declares. According to policy, before a person was SP declared they would have a Committee of Evidence who examines the person’s entire personality and the person’s entire production as regards Scientology. This is then supposed to get approved by a separate approval body that is supposed to be impartial and outside the push and pull or daily church activities and without an agenda. In general I would say only one in fifity SP declares have a Committee of Evidence first. Also I have been myself been a member of such a Committee and told HOW TO RULE by a member of RTC and further told that I would find myself the subject of a committee of evidence if I did not rule in accordance with their instructions. But that’s just the one in fifty. The other fourty nine get SP declared without trial. So that’s point number one. With a psychopathic monster in charge, the normal paths and avenues of justice disappear. Second. It’s not the getting SP declared that is the heavy problem. It’s not even the disconnection that is the problem. Its the tightly ENFORCED disconnection with SEVERE penalties for not disconnecting. This is what tears families apart. And under David Miscavige, the ethics officers are incredibly strict and work family members over and over till they disconnect and if they do not they are ferocious in punishing such a person. I am personally sure that if Diana Hubbard was the leader of the Church of Scientology there would be Comm Ev’s prior to declares and family members who did not wish to disconnect would not be hunted down by teams of ethics officers and have their lives destroyed. They would perhaps not be able to do Scientology services, but they would not be themselves aggressively destroyed. A lot of the evil in the way this policy is applied comes directly from David Miscagive and his orders to punish, punish and punish some more. Remove David Miscagive and the whole thing would soften and relax and people lower on the chain would start making their own decisions. There would be at least more humane decsions being made and less viciousness.

      • Formost says

        Yes, so true, most abusive and corrupt ways to utilize SP declares and disconnection. The above issues you had mentioned might have been far more pervasive in either the SO or other areas, as I have personally never witnessed any of it. Mind you that was 20 years ago, so the scene may have been different then than it is today. Based on my experiences though better than 50% of any given declare ended up being lifted, so at least that is an index how easily justice runs astray.

    • Odd Thomas says

      Foremost, an interesting point.
      I got into SCN in 1972 and during the 70s, witnessed every type of ethics handling one could imagine. For the vast majority of them, common sense ruled. Ethics, was the contemplation of optimum survival. It was the overriding principle that drove this subject and created a safe environment within the field and within every org I entered. If a person was declared SP, it was presumed, and accurately so, that a great deal of concern and consideration went into the process. That a declaration was the very last step, on a generous runway, before allowing a person to do himself in. Time and again, declares, lower conditions and such were proven to be the correct actions, which gave all of us in the field a sense that Ethics belonged to the individuals and Justice to the group. And both were carefully being maintained and monitored.

      Somewhere around 1982, this all changed. Ethics ceased to be for the individual. Ceased to provide a safe environment in which people could contemplate change and actually carry it out. Ethics became Justice and Justice, essentially ceased to exist. It’s this change that created the uncertainty that most of us have experienced since then.

      It’s been mentioned before in this blog and others, that SCN terms are continually being redefined. An SP is no longer someone who commits egregious crimes against the group, but is someone who disagrees with command intention. Who voices, thoughts or ideas contrary to what has become acceptable within the group. Let’s face it, an SP is anyone, the Church points a finger at.

      None of this actually changes the subject of Ethics or its usefulness. All of these alterations have created a false subject; a holographic replica of SCN and Ethics and everything else. What we see, for the most part these days, has little to do with the original subject and shouldn’t be confused with it. This confusion is intentional.

      • TheWidowDenk says

        Beuatifully written! I concur. Might I add: This area of altered ethics (and thus justice) has mushroomed much as regging, personnel transfers, etc., have also mushroomed.

      • Jane Doe says

        Mike, the best article on disconnection I’ve ever seen or heard. I’m saving it for future reference. Thanks. And Odd Thomas, yes you are so correct in your posting of: “It’s been mentioned before in this blog and others, that SCN terms are continually being redefined. An SP is no longer someone who commits egregious crimes against the group, but is someone who disagrees with command intention. Who voices, thoughts or ideas contrary to what has become acceptable within the group. Let’s face it, an SP is anyone, the Church points a finger at.”

        None of this actually changes the subject of Ethics or its usefulness. All of these alterations have created a false subject; a holographic replica of SCN and Ethics and everything else. What we see, for the most part these days, has little to do with the original subject and shouldn’t be confused with it. This confusion is intentio

  22. says

    The disconnection policy was written to protect Hubbard himself.
    Nobody should find out about him.
    There is a slight and unmentioned NUANCE here when comparing Scientology Inc. with other religions.
    I guess all antagonism and all attacks have their roots in Hubbard’s personality.
    In general people do not attack his tech unless the tech was part of his darker personality.
    Who attacks the tech? Who attacks the religion?
    People attack the effects of parts of the tech that should be removed.
    So the choice for Scientology Inc. is to squirrel or die.
    The freezone has chosen already.

  23. Hapexamendios says

    Great post Mike – really lays the subject bare with logic and rationality.

    On the subject of disconnection this is really heartbreaking. The handiwork of the Church of Scientology in St Louis MO http://myjeremy.wordpress.com/

  24. Sindy Fagen says

    Thanks Mike. I think a place for all to tell their stories of disconnection would be powerful and cathartic. I look forward to hearing them and more forward to the day when all the severed connections are mended.

  25. Steve Poore says

    Mike, brilliantly written post on how the church abuses the Disconnection Policy!

    Your logic and perfectly positioned analogies cut like a laser through the illogic and insanity practiced by the church of micavigology.

    But I believe this will prove out to be just be one more squirreled policy resulting in the exposure and undoing, not the protection, of dear leader and his continuing reign of terror in his quest to suppress Scientology and Scientologist.

    And I agree, the one big solution is to SPEAK UP AND SPEAK OUT! And not be afraid.

  26. Cristian Landivar says

    I will send my story Mike….thanks for the chance to tell the truth to the world

  27. gretchen dewire says

    This always kind of scared me when I was in the church, because boyh my mother and my son thought scientology just wanted my money…go figure. I spent alot of time avoiding mentioning them in auditing. That was probably really productive right? Oh and by the way hi Tony. Always glad to see you r comments, knowing you are still alive and well.

  28. Tony DePhillips says

    I hate to keep validating you in public like this.
    This is one of, probably the best crafted and clear thinking statements on disconnection I have ever read.
    The cult really lost a valuable asset when they lost you.
    This is an article that if it was sent to the RCS field, it would shake the rafters!

    • Mike Rinder says

      Thanks Tony. IF you have anyone you can send it to — be my guest. I know that you are pretty much persona non grata in the Vulture Culture these days, but perhaps you have ways… :)

      • Tony DePhillips says

        Heh,heh,heh,heh…..(rubbing my hands together with an evil grin on my face)

    • says

      I was going to say roughly the same thing.
      Mike, you really hit it dead center on this one — the best summary of the facts of disconnection that I’ve ever read. Nicely done.