A client [name withheld] asked us if we could help a young man who has schizophrenia and who killed his father and almost the mother. He was off his medication at the time. What are the ethical considerations in doing subconscious channeling with Holographic Memory Resolution for third parties who haven’t been asked for permission?

We agree with you in your inclination that doing a session on his behalf would be a beautiful offering of help. This is what he needs more than anything else that could possibly be provided him. He is in anguish in many ways from many underlying issues putting him in conflict with himself and with the world. This would be a great blessing to have a chance to resolve these dilemmas to the extent time can be devoted on your part. The issue of ethics is important and we greatly appreciate all your careful attention to these considerations. It helps not only you, but many others who will follow you, to see the guidelines you have put down from your careful study and scholarship about the ins and outs of working with divine realm and supporting humans and their challenges in a way that is aboveboard, helpful, and in divine alignment. We ratify the conclusions you have stated recently about your work with subconscious channeling in terms of its do-ability and its ethics both. The reason is much as you thought through on this question, that you are not doing this without their awareness. While it is without their conscious awareness, they nonetheless are being asked to participate and have the possibility to refuse. It is not co-opting them from their life experience nor is it introducing anything new external to them. That is the beauty of the Holographic Memory Resolution process itself. It is not leading. It will not implant any ideas into the person’s psyche. It does not cause, through suggestion, the consideration of any new or additional sources of difficulty or stress and so cannot be accused of mind manipulation or mind control in a negative fashion. So both conditions are very positive selling points and uphold the ethics in this kind of outreach. You are obtaining the client’s permission from that part of the mind most in need of help and cut off from any other ability to communicate with the person themselves. The conscious permission of a client is therefore not the same as giving permission for the deep subconscious, so is essentially irrelevant. It is nice reassurance and handholding to have that in place when it is feasible to do, but that alone is not a sufficient reason to abandon the undertaking if it will help someone and you have the opportunity. You will always have our blessing to proceed. There will be internal reactions to everything taking place during the session and the subconscious has the wherewithal to dig in its heels and be stubborn and refuse to participate even, should that be a concern for it at any point. As you know from working with many, many, people and now working with the deep subconscious and seeing there is no real difference in cooperation, this is what you can expect in the future as well. The subconscious mind is eager to get help for its problems and will entertain any useful ideas that are proposed for consideration. So the ethics here would be problematic to mainstream thinkers. And those looking in from the outside who would apply conventional criteria without really thinking things through and having no feel for nor understanding of the phenomena you work with might see things differently, but you cannot let the naysayers and the ignorant stand in the way of progress when there is divine work to be done. If that were the case, there would be little human progress in a true sense because almost always the lightworker spearheads a new undertaking of some kind and new initiative to bring change that goes against the grain for many. If you waited for a consensus it would never happen.