• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Mediums offer "Comfort" to bereaved - comments?

rossminster

New Blood
R
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10
I am a sceptic, but find myself torn by the notion that some bereaved people clearly find comfort in the nonsense spouted by mediums. Who are we - sceptics - to deny a bereaved parent, say, the comfort of believing that their dead child is "no longer suffering". When railing agaist frauds like Colin Fry (UK TV medium) I am often asked, "What harm does he do?" and I have no pat answer. Just as i wouldn't dream of criticising someone for being, say, a Christian.

Are they providing a counselling service, of sorts?
 
The big problem to me is when money becomes involved. I dont care if someone finds comfort talking to a priest or rabbi, but I do have a problem with someone making money off of the bereaved. Folks like John Edwards are pond scum.

And no, I don't think they're providing counseling. All mediums do is offer a completely pretend view of "the other side". A real counselor (and many religious figures) will honestly help a person deal with carrying on in this world.
 
There is a grieving process. I think it's best to go through it.

Anyway, harsh as it sounds, one's dead child is also no longer suffering if he is simply dead.

~~ Paul
 
Part of the grieving process is coming to terms with the fact that the person is gone. Mediums deny that part of the process.

Concillors are trained for years to help people in these circumstances and understand the potential problems peopl can go through.

Mediums can just turn up without any training, say "Oh they're still here and they're happy and they're watching you" and the person cries with happiness then leaves. They don't see what else happens to the person out of their presence - they still have to grieve but it is at odds with what the medium has told them so it causes mental conflict.
But the medium just sees the person leave happy and thinks they have helped.
They haven't any more than a shot of morphine would. It is a temporary fix that does not solve the problem.

Plus the person now feels that they still have some communication with the deceased but only through the medium so they become unhealthily reliant on the medium (or other mediums).
Given a glimpse of potential communication with the dead they may repeatedlytedly grasp at this. This may leave them in an even more fragile emotioal state.

Which leads me to the next point (which I read from another poster some time ago) - The most precious thing the person has are memories of the deceased
But the mediums are inventing new ones which may confuse, or even completely contradict those memories.
Also anything the deceased 'said' is really the medium speaking and has nothing to do with your relatives personality or who they were or what you loved about them.
It's like stuffing the corpse and leaving it sitting in a chair to pretend they are still alive. You can look at them, talk to them, see them there, but it's not real.
And an emotional reliance on fantasy is not psychologically healthy.

(This is all obviously assuming the medium is making it up - I can't really speak about 'genuine' mediums because I don't personally believe they exist)
 
And obviously the money issue is disgusting, but that should be prosecutable anyway.

If you are paying for a service there should be proof that you are receiving that service.

Or perhaps the mediums should be required to give people a card first that reads
"I will not really be speaking to dead spirits during this reading. I will be inventing the spirit's responses in order to provide emotional comfort to the customer"

If it is all so harmless they should be legally required to do that, and then we'd see if people are still happy to pay them for the service.
 
rossminster said:
I am a sceptic, but find myself torn by the notion that some bereaved people clearly find comfort in the nonsense spouted by mediums.
Click to expand...

A good injection of morphine would also provide comfort to the paying customers. But you wouldn't suggest that we do that for grieving people, surely?

Bottom line is that mediums are frauds, fraudulently taking money from the people they defraud. Did I mention that they're frauds?
 
I can see where you're coming from Rossminster...

... but I also feel that it is detrimental in MOST cases - maybe not all - grieving is a necessary thing both physically and emotionally. People are not moving forward, just clinging to what the medium has told them. I did see a Colin Fry prog the other day where he correctly guessed that this girl had been having suicidal thoughts and gave her the message - 'Don't be in such a hurry to join me. I WILL wait for you.' Which I thought was kinda sweet. But on the other hand - perhaps that girl would be better served with counselling which she is less likely to attend if she is using the spiritualism as an emotional crutch.
(That Colin Fry seems such an inoffensive guy - I wonder if he is in the complete knowingly charlatan catagory or the self-deluded catagory? Maybe he justifys it to himself as offering comfort...?)

I know what you mean though - it does make one uneasy to think of it as denying comfort. Kinda like tough love eh?

Also, the money is a big issue - some of the 'superstar' mediums make a LOT of money. That also makes me uneasy - well, mad actually...

DeVega
 
Nothing is wrong with Mediums - I'm not just saying that because I believe they talk to the dead - I don't have anything against them at all, not even fraudulent ones.

The only "issue" I can see is the money one - why pay a medium when mediums from spiritualist churches give demonstrations for free ?
 
jambo372 said:
Nothing is wrong with Mediums - I'm not just saying that because I believe they talk to the dead - I don't have anything against them at all, not even fraudulent ones.

The only "issue" I can see is the money one - why pay a medium when mediums from spiritualist churches give demonstrations for free ?
Click to expand...

Nothing in life is free. What these mediums are doing is called "promoting themselves". It is (un)enlightened self interest. They do a freebie to get their names known, and probably get "expenses" from the donations, anyway.

I once tried to book a "fading" football star for a Sports Quiz Night. He said he didn't charge, but would need his expenses paid. His expenses for one night were more than my wages for a month, and I was quite well paid.
 
Savagemutt said:
The big problem to me is when money becomes involved. I dont care if someone finds comfort talking to a priest or rabbi, but I do have a problem with someone making money off of the bereaved. Folks like John Edwards are pond scum.
Click to expand...


Priests and Rabbis do it for money also. Their wages are paid by people who are afraid of death.
 
The question of what may be helpful or harmfull psycologically is only one aspect of the spiritualists's shtick. What about the potential mental anguish and wasted time and resources that result when mediums get involved in missing persons investigations? Or in business/investment advice?

Wouldn't it seem prudent to see some proof of ability before accepting suggestions or advice from a medium in police or business situations? Wouldn't it seem unethical for someone who does the channelling act for "counselling" or "entertainment purposes only" to get involved in life & death or livelihood affecting decisions if they weren't "the real thing"?

I don't see how we can support one and not the other. What is the point of going to a medium if you know they are just pulling your chain? You're better off to go see a real shrink.
 
jambo372 said:
Nothing is wrong with Mediums - I'm not just saying that because I believe they talk to the dead - I don't have anything against them at all, not even fraudulent ones.
...
Click to expand...

You have no problem with fraud, eh? Where do you draw the line? Is it okay to take someone's money to tell them a buncha lies? Which lies is it okay to get paid for? Is it okay as long as you only tell lies that can never be proven? What about later if the sucker finds out you were lying? Should you have to give their money back?

Or are you suggesting we should only consult "free" mediums (who may also be lying)?
 
jambo372 said:
Mediums have given vital evidence in cases like that.
Click to expand...

I may not have had a lot of exchanges with you, Jambo, but I lurk a lot and I've seen all your creduloid arguments in support of psychic assisted police investigations and you haven't convinced anybody else so don't think you're going to sway me now.

I don't have anything against you but, from your previous postings on various JREF fora, I believe you are a very poor judge of what constitutes evidence. You have yet to produce anything but anecdotes, links to anecdotes or stories about links to information about documents about unsubstantiated anecdotes.
 
Personally I think it's stupid to pay mediums when you can have it done for free.
This way, even if they are frauds, you lose nothing.
Naturally being a spiritualist I'm obliged to trust mediums anyway.
 
You're obliged?

Who or what compels you to trust all mediums? Are you saying you will simply believe all mediums, even if they are lying, self-deluded, manipulating or using you, as long as they don't ask for money?
 
This is a sceptic website. The whole purpose of this website and these fora is to promote the idea of being suspicious of that which is not supported by evidence. Why do you hang around?

Don't get me wrong. You are as welcome as myself or anybody else, I'm sure. I'm just curious about what you hope to achieve. Do you really think anyone who subscribes to critical thinking is going to be swayed by your statements?
 
In this case, I think Penn and Teller's answer is one of the best. For a grieving person, the final memories of a dead loved one are cherished. A medium destroys them, substituting his and/or her fantasies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom