I sent a copy to the editor of Castle Cary's 'Visitor' monthly - but he said it was too long.  John Brookes kindly wrote back with encouragement however.

I rang him up this evening for the permission to use it on my site - and on here - and he not only gave it, we chatted for quite a little while and he's sending me a book of his poems. 

He was featured on TV by the BBCs series on the war poets recently (he's nearly 80) and was on the short list for the Honour of poet laureate, which, however went to Ted Hughes.

He said he wouldn't have wanted it anyway!

This little exchange is quite relevant really, for something that came up on GWELL recently.

G-WELL is the Glastonbury online community which was originally opened in the spirit of the San Francisco WELL community - one of the first online internet discussion groups in the '80's - however, in the manner of everything else Glastonian, it has spent so much time in introspection that I find little gets posted about anything other than interior dynamics and politics - all in the name of progress of course. Sigh - human nature...

However, Palden, a local Astrologer, mythologian, computer buff and all round awoken person, joined in a discussion posted by Margaret Kimber (whose clothes shop in the experience bears its own label - one of my favourite skirts ... oh sorry, I digress, - ) about the Siamese Twins... And I thought of the inevitability of death, sooner or later (though how hard to be one who must chose to take a life to save a life.  May their hearts be lifted and may they allow themselves forgiveness. )

The inserts without arrows are my own (Jane's)

Single arrows are Palden's,

Double arrows are Margarets...

 At 23:09 24/09/2000 +0100, Margaret wrote:
>
M> >Medicine now insists on keeping alive regardless of nature.  And we remain
> >confused as to the morality.
>
P> Much of this problem arises, methinks, from the belief that there is only
> one life and one chance for a life.  I believe there is another way.
>
P> In the 1980s I performed a number of 'psychic abortions' (only when
> requested - following on from some years home-delivering children, in
> Sweden in the 1970s).  This involved probing deeply into inner honesty for
> the mother/parents, a full acknowledgement of the facts of their situation
> and their perceived capacity to give a child a good life, and a full inner
> dialogue, without prejudice, with the child-soul in question.  Such
> dialogue is not as difficult or obscure as it might seem - most aware
> parents have intuitive dialogue, and this is just a slight step further on.

J: An interesting adjunct to this is that children who were not wanted before birth (either in my own or other known cases) were later  (if born anyway) subject to various levels of self-doubt and accordingly to needy or lacking behaviours - resulting in addictive, bulimic/anorexic, psychotic or depressive tendencies - among others.  The many children who chose not to come in at the original  time appeared to enter the life of the possible parent at a later time - in the form of potential son/daughter-in-law, child of a friend, neighbour or relative, or in some other way.  As if the original pact - to be in contact - had still to be resolved In another way. 

This leads me to believe there may be some karmic resolution, some outstanding or 'unfinished business' which requires a connection to be made at some later time
. 
P> In some cases, this process enabled the parent(s) to accept the child into
> their life.  In other cases it led to a decision by the child to withdraw
> its life-spark and try again elsewhere or, most often, with the same
> parent(s) at another time.  This decision included positive commitments
> from the parents - either to welcome the soul at another time, or to
> support it in finding a new parent and situation - or even to meet it when
> it is incarnate.

J: See above - but then again there is also the unconscious side to this - where it seems that some maternity wards/wings have seen fit to induce birth or to arrange a caesarian either to fit in with the administrative complications of an overworked and under-resourced staff, or for even less justificatrion, for parents who would like a child born at a certain phase of the moon or whatever - for any kind of reason - irrespective of the lessons that incoming soul had already been scheduled to undergo; more or less, in fact, for the parent's, or staff's convenience or whim. 

This must surely, if it is the case, and if the birth moment is all-important, cause strange permutations in the outworking of the heavens in a person's life - even to causing them to 'miss an appointment' with destiny - their original destiny - in favour of an arbitrary imposed life of which those responsibe for its diversion are entirely ignorant.
It is perhaps this kind of interference - messing with the great Plan or scheme of things, learning curves and what not, life partners and so on - (they miss the train, or catch another bus, don't meet, etc) that those parents who refuse all intervention (Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons,  and others opposed to medical intervention) are avoiding?
The conclusion I came to in the debate over free will and predetermination was that you have to act as if you had free will in order for predetermination to work, but sitting waiting for it to 'blink' is like trying to see what you look like in a mirror with your eyes closed...

P> This worked not only in physical terms, *when appropriate*, but it also led
> to remarkable emotional breakthroughs, and in some cases it resolved a
> parent's emotional reservations/doubts allowing the child to live.  The key
> decision rested with the child/soul, though not only so.  In my experience
> this technique cannot work if the child/soul is 'not wanted' or 'chucked
> out', and this is morally unethical too - it's more a process of mutual
> discussion utilising all of the same principles as any conflict-of-interest
> mediation process might engage, treating the child/soul as a fully
> responsible equal in the situation, and aiming for a win-win
> outcome. 

J: It is possible, however, that rejection is part of the lesson an incoming soul has to deal with - whether from a sense of learning about their own past behaviour, or as preparation for some future task which is going to depend on emotional separation.  This is not to be confused with emotional resilience which comes from a secure sense of self worth, engendered by love, welcome and acceptance, as rejection cannot lead to true independence, only a buried neediness, resulting in dependency!

P>Children bring their own karmic blessings and resources into
> life, even if physically disadvantaged.  (The Siamese twins in question
> have mobilised full media coverage - that's power!).  Despite the
> conditioning or ideas of adults, child-souls are perfectly capable of
> fixing life-systems to support their progress - especially when the parents
> and other concerned adults allow/support it, and sometimes despite lack of
> support!
>

J: It's incredible how resilient some children are in spite of the most incredible experiences - no two people are alike in their response to equivalent levels of difficulty or pain...

P> The salient assumption here was that a soul's life can succeed, whatever
> the circumstances, if that soul and its parents are deeply willing to go
> through whatever process is involved.  This decision/commitment needs
> making consciously and emotionally.  Without such wholeheartedness, or
> willingness to generate it, problems can occur.
>

J; There's always an ideal - however I think we all (children included) have to learn to deal with the world/society we have, rather than the one we feel we ought to have - which rather challenges new-age thinking... especially in terms of affirmations etc.

P> I'm aware that the above might press some buttons.  I have already been
> accused of new age eugenics!  However, before reacting, please consider the
> moral implications involved in not taking such a route too!  Also, please
> assume that all concerned parties genuinely and compassionately mean the
> best - as I believe is the case in this current Siamese twins case.  If
> such techniques are used to force one person's will or preference, there
> will be a price to pay (and I would not participate either, for my own
> ethical reasons).

J: If we did not have the facilities to carve up a conjoined twin into a pared down version of itself (or his or herself) we could accept these little people as having learned the lesson; that we have to come in and leave as individuals however much we may wish to share a lifetime - maybe to live and to die together was their opportunity to fully grok this fact without losing the opportunity to learn the lesson together.  There are many kinds of love.

P> I believe that one-life spiritual ideology blocks resolution of the
> question of the Siamese twins - and many other medical-ethics
> questions.  No one knows the inner, for-themselves reasons these twins
> might have chosen this tricky path, or what they (or their inner helpers)
> might truly be looking for in the sense of soul evolution, until they probe
> within to find out.  Whatever decision is made (and this is open at the
> beginning of this process), the final decision, methinks, needs to come
> from the children/souls.  It concerns what is the *most realistically
> manageable and achievable* evolutionary path forward, for them, and for the
> parents and other closely-involved people.
>
> In my experience, pre-birth and immediately post-birth souls are well
> capable of making fully aware life-decisions, especially if supported
> through it.  Judges and doctors can certainly clarify the mundane, general
> issues at stake, but in the end it is the child-souls who choose whether or
> not to take on the challenges before them.

J: In the early 1970's I had the opportunity to go to a rebirthing workshop with Mike Tanner who was the host at an ashram in Combe Martin, North Devon.  The experience was incredibly transforming for me as I was aware of my own process through the birth canal of my mother, and of the room in which I was born.  I was conscious of my mother's struggle, and of mine (I had the cord around my neck three times, was in breech presentation, and was navy blue, almost asphyxiated, when born.  I had to be revived by being swung upside down by the heels and thoroughly slapped.  My first coherent thought (later translated into English) at the moment of my birth, was a wail of dismay and the sense of  'Oh no, not again!'

I was aware of the room, the fireplace and the french windows to the garden, and of the position of the bed in relation to my crib. I was also aware of the plump, grey-haired midwife in her fifties, in a light blue uniform with a belt that disappeared into the rolls of fat around her middle.  She was sitting on the edge of the bed, on the side nearest me but with her back to me, facing my mother who was propped up with pillows against the head of the bed, wearing a pink crocheted bedjacket, and drinking a cup of tea with a saucer. 

My father (a policeman) came in the door at the foot of my crib which was against the wall; my mother's bed, on my right, was behind the door.) He had his helmet under his arm, having taken a few moments off duty to see me, and leaned over my crib.  He saw how dark I was, and the fine covering of hair down my back.  'Looks like a little monkey!' he said.

The experience was so vivid and real, that two or three years later, when sitting in the back of a car that my mother was driving, I began to tell her about it; mainly I wished to ascertain if my memories of the experience were accurate.  Her response was astonishing to me.  Instead of being amazed and quizzing me closely as to the extent of my memories (as I would have done,)  she was filled with horror to think that I could describe the room and the events so accurately.  She was so strongly affected that she said she must have described all the details to me at some time; paradoxically, however, she couldn't bear to speak of it, or for me to do so, as it was too 'uncanny' - it frightened her and she asked me never to refer to it again.

This reaction made it even more unlikely that she would ever have mentioned it to me in the first place. It also meant (to me) that my recollections, apart from being real, were demonstrative of a maturity of vision, and of understanding, that was at the time unable to communicate as the apparatus (the brain) and its functions (language, speech) were as yet undeveloped.  Like a stroke or coma victim, the consciousness was fully present - an old soul indeed - but unable to communicate the fact, my parents left me to discover my abilities piecemeal, as is the case with all of us not brought up as Lamas or in an especially conscious manner.

The relevence here is that yes, indeed, Society does ignore the in-coming wisdom of the child (how else to indoctrinate and shape into its own cultural reference) - but that does not mean that children, when born, are bereft of sense or feeling, or of consciousness for that manner.  I believe a psychic or spiritual counsellor (as in the new 'spiritual midwifery) should be on hand in all maternity units to ease the passage of infants into the world, and that part of the preparation for childbirth should include the assumption that some may be traumatised from their last exit or from the enormity of the task they have taken on in this life.

It is good to meet parents who have been open to their children's agendas as being every bit as important as their own, who don't just trot out the 'You chose to come to me so stop whining about it' line of justification for all kinds of neglectful parenting.

P> But all this requires society to have a sense of reincarnation and the
> implications of it!  Hmmm. There's an account of Sheila's and my pre-birth
> dialogues with our son Tulki at
> http://www.isleofavalon.co.uk/local/h-pages/palden/p4-tulk1.html
> if you're interested in pre-birth matters.
>
> Palden
>
>
J: Thanks for sharing, Palden - this is an issue scarcely touched in contemporary medicine although not unfamiliar to new agers - and thank you Margaret, for bringing it up.
Jane

Back to the present (ongoing)

I can envisage this dialogue provoking various reactions among the Domers here - Grant may well take issue at all the begged questins, and consider the entire conjecture a lot of piffle (sorry to be suggesting your reaction, Grant, but you have a fine, logical and scientific mind.)

Shona may feel that I sound like a lttle Hitler bandying about the issues of a cool response to what is technically murder - and the apparently dispassionate way in which I discuss the issue.  Please be assured I do have feelings about it, very strong ones in fact, however for a subject as emotive as this to be properly debated we have to accept that many opinions may diverge considerably yet need to be expressed for all that, so it is necessary to take a less emotive stance in a wide-based discussion such as this one.

I look forward to hearing what members of the Dome have to say over these issues, and would like to offer a heartfelt prayer for the children, their parents and family, and for those involved in the awful responsibility of making a decision in this case.

I have deleted my msn web community WHEEL (Winged Heart Eventual Expiry of Life,) as no-one appeared to wish to address these issues, but here are a few poems from that site:

PS - In the words of the Archbishop of Canterbury...

"I call God 'Him' because He isn't an 'It'..."

(It still demonstrates ingrained patriarchy, but what the heck, it's what I'm used to - Jane)

May all Being be ecstatically blissful, conscious and free...

Jane :-)

home

back to welcome page

The music playing is Beethoven's 'Fur Elise',
Sourced from a midi music site