HCOPL: PTS Type A Handling

HUBBARD COMMUNICATIONS OFFICE
Saint Hill Manor, East Grinstead, Sussex

HCO POLICY LETTER OF 5 APRIL 1972RD¹; ²
Revised 10 September 1983

Remimeo
HCO Area Sec Hat
Dir I&R Hat
E/O Hat
PTS/SP Checksheet
Tech
Qual

PTS TYPE A HANDLING

(Cancels and replaces HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R, PTS TYPE A HANDLING.
Cancels HCO PL 15 Nov. 68, CANCELLATION OF DISCONNECTION.)

THIS HANDLING IS DONE BY THE ETHICS OFFICER OF AN ORG OR THE HAS OR IN THEIR ABSENCE BY THE QUAL SEC.

It is actually an interview with the suspected PTS person. It is often done on an E-Meter to assist the verification of data. See also:

HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING

HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I C/S Series 79 ExDn Series 5 PTS INTERVIEWS

HCOB 24 Nov. 65 SEARCH AND DISCOVERY

Book: The Problems of Work Chapter 6, “Affinity, Reality and Communication”

HCOB 31 Dec. 78RB Rev. 28.10.2000 OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING

HCOB 31 Dec. 78RA II Rev. 21.3.89 EDUCATING THE POTENTIAL TROUBLE SOURCE, THE FIRST STEP TOWARD HANDLING: PTS C/S-l

HCOB 10 Sept. 83 PTSness AND DISCONNECTION

HCOB 8 Mar. 83 HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS

HCO PL 23 Dec. 65RB Rev. 8.1.91 SUPPRESSIVE ACTS, SUPPRESSION OF SCIENTOLOGY AND SCIENTOLOGISTS

If a PTS situation actually exists, the interview must result in a written program agreed upon by the person, with copies to the person and to his ethics file.

As the person does the steps of the program, he reports their accomplishment to the org officer who interviewed him.

If the person fails to do the program or the program results in no real change in the situation, the interviewing officer must investigate thoroughly to find out what the person is doing instead of the program and check for any communication he may have sent which continued the upset, and get this corrected at once. He must also ensure the PTS A person is handling the correct antagonistic person. (Example: PTS person Jones may have thought the antagonism was coming from Smith, whereas Smith’s upset is being kept alive by Smith’s associate, Doakes, who has disagreements with and/or misunderstoods on Scientology.)

If the handling program is drawn up standardly and yet the person is sour on it or “doesn’t want to do the handling” or never seems to quite get around to doing the program, then the Ethics Officer would suspect that either:

a. A wrong item had been found, which would require an L4BRB done by an auditor in session to handle. (Refs: HCOB 24 Nov. 65, SEARCH AND DISCOVERY, and tape 6510C14, “Briefing of Review Auditors”)

b. The program had been misimplemented (the pc didn’t really understand what he was to do, was miscoached on the steps of the handling, or he “did the handling” in such a way as to create further antagonism rather than ease it) requiring a thorough review of the situation and handling of whatever is found. (Refs: HCOB 8 Mar. 83, HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS; HCOB 24 Apr. 72 I, C/S Series 79, ExDn Series 5, PTS INTERVIEWS; HCOB 24 Nov. 65, SEARCH AND DISCOVERY)

If (a) and (b) above have been thoroughly checked into by the Ethics Officer to ensure that any nonstandard application has been corrected and there is still no change in the situation (i.e., the antagonism and upset continue), the PTS person would then disconnect. And if the person does need to disconnect, the HCOB 10 Sept. 83, PTSness AND DISCONNECTION, must be followed exactly.

Fortunately, standard PTS Type A handling does handle the majority of these situations. When disconnection is required, very often that is enough to handle the PTSness.

Should the condition persist, however, then the interviewing officer must require the person to have auditing on the subject (a PTS Rundown given by a qualified auditor in the HGC).

If, after a PTS Rundown the person feels fine but the persons suppressing him are still making trouble, then the Ethics Officer must require the person to have a SUPPRESSED PERSON RUNDOWN.

The first step of any interview must be the balance of this policy letter, clearing up any misunderstood words or definitions in it and making certain the person knows what “PTS” really means.

Part of any handling may include the person being required to take a course that is usually called “The PTS/SP Checksheet.”

But in any case and in any handling, one cannot permit the person to go on being PTS, as it can ruin his life.

DEFINITION

Per HCO PL of 27 Oct. 64R, POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING, INSANITY AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE, a PTS (meaning potential trouble source) Type A is a person “… intimately connected with persons (such as marital or familial ties) of known antagonism to mental or spiritual treatment or Scientology. In practice such persons, even when they approach Scientology in a friendly fashion, have such pressure continually brought to bear upon them by persons with undue influence over them that they make very poor gains in processing, and their interest is solely devoted to proving the antagonistic element wrong.”

A SOURCE OF TROUBLE

Such persons with antagonistic family members are a source of trouble to Scientology because their family members are not inactive. In fact, from direct experience with inquiry after inquiry into Scientology, it has been found that those who have created the conditions which brought about the inquiry in the first place and those who testified before same have been the wives, husbands, mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters or grandparents of some Scientologist. Their testimony has been full of such statements as “My son completely changed after he went into Scientology—he no longer was respectful to me.” “My daughter gave up a wonderful career as a hairdresser to go into Scientology.” “My sister got these funny staring eyes the way all Scientologists have.”

Their testimony was illogical and their descriptions of what occurred were untrue, but the point of the matter is that such persons DID cause Scientology, Scientology orgs and fellow Scientologists a great deal of trouble and difficulty.

DON’T CREATE ANTAGONISM

Many Scientologists in their misunderstanding and misapplication of Scientology create the conditions that bring about the antagonism in the first place. A few illustrations of how this is done are as follows:

Scientologist to mother: “I now know where you are on the Tone Scale—1.1. Boy, are you sneaky!” (Evaluation and invalidation)

Father to Scientologist: “Now, I don’t want you to borrow the car again without my permission. I have told you time and time …” Scientologist to father: “OKAY! FINE! OKAY! GOOD! THANK YOU! I GOT THAT!” (Not an acknowledgment but an effort to shut up the father.)

Scientologist to older brother: “You murdered me in a past life, you dirty dog!” (Evaluation and invalidation)

Mother to Scientologist: “Whatever are you doing?” Scientologist to mother: “I’m trying to confront your dreadful bank.” (Invalidation)

There are so many ways to misuse tech and to invalidate and evaluate for others in a destructive fashion to bring about bypassed charge, ARC breaks and upset that they cannot all be possibly listed. The idea is NOT to do so. Why create trouble for yourself and for your fellow Scientologists, as nothing will have been gained but ill will?

THE WHY

Per HCO PL 7 Mar. 65RA II, OFFENSES AND PENALTIES, it is a CRIME to be or become a PTS without reporting it or taking action or to receive processing while PTS. Further, as per HCO PL 27 Oct. 64R, POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING, INSANITY AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE, a PTS may not be trained.

This means that a person who is PTS may not receive processing or training while PTS and it also means that they had better do something to handle their condition.

In the original (now reinstated) policy, the PTS individual was required to handle or disconnect before he or she could continue with training or processing. Many took the easy course and merely disconnected “temporarily” for the time of their training or processing and so they did not in actual fact handle the condition in their lives which was upsetting them as Scientologists. In some cases, there was a misapplication of the tech, as their situations were totally handleable with the use of simple Scientology basics. (Ref: HCOB 10 Sept. 83, PTSness AND DISCONNECTION)

Now a very workable system for handling PTS Type A situations has been developed, as covered in this policy letter, in HCOB 10 Aug. 73, PTS HANDLING; HCOB 8 Mar. 83, HANDLING PTS SITUATIONS; and in HCOB 31 Dec. 78RB I, OUTLINE OF PTS HANDLING.

Following the steps given in these issues and making full use of all bulletins and policies on the subject of PTS handling will ensure situations get terminatedly handled.

Each PTS individual should, as one step of his handling, report to Ethics and, with the assistance of Ethics, find a Why as to his familial antagonism and then set about actually handling the situation. The Why could be that his parents wanted him to be a lawyer and so blame Scientology that he is not one, rather than the fact that he flunked out of law school and couldn’t stand the thought of being a lawyer!

Or perhaps the Why is that the Scientologist keeps writing her parents for money or the Why could be that the mother has just read an entheta newspaper article.

In any case, the Why should be found and the PTS individual should then do whatever is necessary to handle.

HANDLING

The person who is PTS should be declared as such by Ethics and should not receive Scientology training or processing until the situation has been handled. (The exception to this is a full PTS Rundown done in the HGC.)

The handling could be as simple as writing to one’s father and saying, “I do not complain that you are a janitor, please do not complain that I am a Scientologist. The important thing is that I am your son and that I love and respect you. I know you love me, but please learn to respect me as an adult individual who knows what he wants in life.” Or it could be as follows: “I am writing to you, Daddy, because Mother keeps sending me these dreadful newspaper clippings and they are upsetting to me because I know they are not true. You do not do this and so it is easier for me to write to you.”

Again there are as many ways of handling as there are Whys found. Each case is individual. Remember, too, there is always the possibility of a NO situation. And if the person thinks he’s PTS and isn’t, he can get sick. Or if he insists he isn’t and is, he can also get upset. So find if there IS a situation first.

It is the purpose of Ethics to ensure that the situation is handled.

Nothing in this policy letter shall ever or under any circumstances justify any violations of the laws of the land or intentional legal or moral wrongs.

L. Ron Hubbard
Founder

Revision assisted by LRH Technical Research and Compilations

Notes