An LRH letter on disconnection (UPDATE)

Update: A couple of commenters have submitted comments pointing out that there is a lot more to disconnection than just this letter. We are well aware of this. Disconnection is a complicated issue in terms of what was issued, what was cancelled, what the prevailing and continuing culture has been and, importantly, LRH’s role in all of this.

There was no intent in obfuscating the issue by publishing this letter. It remains an important document and it is certainly not all there is to the story. We acknowledge this but we are publishing this letter for its own sake.


One of our commenters discovered this gem and has sent it to us. It has been on the Internet for some time but we are publishing it here since it has massive relevance for the Scientology community right now as the church is actively demanding disconnection.

Disconnection has been the single most destructive practice in Scientology. It is this practice and it’s ruthless enforcement that has allowed corruption to take root within the church because the fear of disconnection prevents Scientologists from questioning too loudly or from going “against the grain” or from even looking on the internet. Let’s not forget that.

This is a letter L. Ron Hubbard wrote to the New Zealand Commission of Enquiry into Scientology on the 26th of March 1969.


29 thoughts on “An LRH letter on disconnection (UPDATE)

  1. Good one Scnafrica! This gem needs to slammed down hard on slappy’s desk, with the collective fist of every single person ever abused by threats of or actual disconnection!

    • This is wonderful to see and a mighty tool to use to show those we love who are enturbulated by being pushed to compromise with their reality to end long tem friendships against their own better judgement and violating their own integrity and power of choice.
      Thanks you for letting us have this precious letter, Scnafrica.
      You are doing such great work!

  2. Hi Scnafrica,

    For those Scientologists who currently have the heartache of being forced to disconnect from family members who are declared and cannot “go under the radar”, where can they find the cancellation of the policy dated 15th November 1968, as mentioned in LRH letter? In other words backing up this letter.

    Is there perhaps an LRH reference that is know about, that reinstates the disconnection policy after this letters date in 1969?

  3. Disconnection will never be cancelled. dm is only too aware that the only reason Co$ still exists is due to disconnection. There are people still jumping through his hoops because they do not want their families split apart. If all these people were free to leave, the church would hemorrhage members like never before.

    It is, and always has been, an evil policy. No one on earth should have the right to tear families apart like this. Of all the abuses, this is the worst. There are families all over the world that have not seen or spoken to mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters etc for years or even decades. Just imagine someone abducting your child and you never see him / her again! This is what is happening – it is obscene – no other word fits!

    The “church” has always been in the business of secrecy and not allowing members to talk to one another in one way or another. Whether it is not discussing your case, or being disconnected due to “ptsness”, it all has the effect of hiding truth from members.

    GAT2 is being released this weekend here in Jhb. How many people do you think will talk to one another freely about how they really feel tonight after the event? Too many will not dare voice their disagreement with these latest development due to fear of losing family or jobs.

    For those of you still “in” and under the radar – no need to do anything drastic, JUST STOP SUPPORTING CO$ WITH YOUR MONEY AND YOUR TIME. Do not donate, do not pay for the “new” bastardized training, do not attend events. Do not give any of YOUR energy to keeping this thing alive!

  4. All of these policies by LRH reinstate disconnection:

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

    HCO PL 3 May 72R Exec Series 12 Rev. 18.12.77 ETHICS AND EXECUTIVES

    HCOB 10 Aug. 73 PTS HANDLING







    HCO PL 20 Oct. 81R PTS TYPE A HANDLING Rev. 10.9.83


    • Correct. Suffice to say that at the time I was in Scientology in the early 80s I saw no instance where anyone was unjustly declared, and more often than not lifted sometime shortly after. It never occurred to me even once that anything was wrong it, because by and large it was not misapplied. Only within the last 30 years did it become rampant abusively used often as a political tool to quench dissent unjustly. Squawk about the IAS enough, which is not even any Scientology entity or point out LRH never mentioned a blessed thing about it, one can expect the blocks to slam in sooner or later, never mind the current rumour-line declares. Where such injustices have occurred, the victim of these actions tends to blame the wrong target, the LRH issued materials themselves. In this wise tech get invalidated, and the declared individuals viewpoint injured. And that is the modus operandi of the current church: Abide, or get hit hard. As far as I’m concerned, the church hasn’t existed in decades, but either one or more persons unknown to us besides DM they support has taken it into a completely different direction for the purpose of extracting as much money as possible before it all collapses. It’s long over, man, long over, only the drama of blind fools left.

  5. Great references Robert and you are very correct.
    I have also listened to the original, uncensored. RJ 68 ( I think it’s this one) where Hubbard reiterated the cancellation of disconnection. I will check my files for the website and post it here.

    Regretfully we need to credit the correct author of disconnection policy. Although DM practices this policy ruthlessly, he is not the originator.

    Commentors, over the years have speculated that the letter was a PR project to appease the N Z government , who at the time were considering a ban on Scientology.

  6. If people leaving Scientology are coming out against disconnection, that’s good. If they claim that LRH canceled disconnection, I care only a little bit. You won’t disconnect, and you speak out against disconnection in Scientology? Let’s do lunch!

  7. It is a great pity that the matter of disconnection seems to only be of interest to Scientologists and their connections because it is factually the equivalent of legislated Apartheid.
    A declared person may not eat with, sit next to, befriend, work with, talk to, have sex with,kiss,marry, associate with, travel with, live with, care for,help,phone,hold hands with or allow their family to talk to that higher grade of human ,the non declared Scientologist. Let me tell you that is harsher than Apartheid! It is a human rights abuse and South Africa is definitely a place it should not be allowed as a practise.

    • Joshua you are quite correct. It is discrimination and per the SA Constitution is illegal. But these arrogant zealots think they’re above the law. They don’t realise that they’re not protected by the 501(c3) here as they are in the USA.

    • Hello Joshua, I thought it was important for you and all the scientologists you are in comm with to know that the subject of disconnection is NOT only of interest to scientologists. The cruelty of disconnection is the prime reason many, many never-in general public despise Scientology, and the reason many became active critics. We absolutely care that parents are forced to disconnect from children, brother from sister, husband from wife. We’ve seen lots of very distressed people on our news media programs. It makes us very angry and upset that this is still going on – and WORSE, that the official church still denies it. The toxic PR from disconnection is a key reason your numbers are falling and so many critics are speaking out. Disconnection IS a human rights abuse and should be abolished in ALL it’s forms immediately.

      What I see as a terrible irony is that critics who’ve spoken out against Scientology for exactly the same reasons you have – disconnection – have been ruthlessly fair gamed. Not ‘fair’ at all.

      • Hi Noni
        Yes you are correct in terms of the data I have. Having woken up late to all the insanities, I have been appalled at what I have learned about the activities of the church in recent times. The Church of Scientology is certainly not my group and I welcome the falling membership. One of the ways to encourage this is to expose any atrocities committed.
        While they deny disconnection they are covertly calling in Scientologists in Joburg and issuing them ultimatums (they are being very “sweet” about it) to disconnect from any one or more of the 18 they may know and the implied threat is declare for you too.
        I think that any group has the right to exclude any individual who’s intention is severely destructive, but the church has taken that right and turned it into an assassination tool aimed at anyone who has the backbone to question the churches actions.
        Do not despair,actions such as the mass declare that occurred in Joburg have woken many,many more to the realities of the hijacked Church of Scientology

  8. In my view, the problem is the “declaring” of people who are clearly NOT suppressive and then demanding people disconnect from them. Committing a high crime does not an SP make. If this were the case, then anyone who has ever been on staff, on course or in the auditors chair is suppressive. Why did LRH even bother writing the 12 characteristics of an SP? It seems ANYONE committing just one high crime is now an SP – and this on a whim, based on reports from 3rd parties and without facing the accused with his/her accuser or so-called crimes.

    And the same goes for the term “squirrel”. From what I have seen, the number of squirrels IN the church far outnumber those outside of the Church. This term is bandied about by Scientologists without even understanding what it actually means.

    And incidentally, it is also a high crime to pronounce Scientologists guilty of the practice of standard Scientology. (Note, it doesn’t say RTC-COB approved Scientology – it says STANDARD Scientology). How many people have been annihilated for trying to get LRH standardly applied in the Church?

    • I should mention since I keep coming back here to chat that I’m pretty suppressive. I was in the Lisa McPherson Trust and have tried to suppress the Church of Scientology since about 1992. Just so you know, I think I’m pretty safe to talk to, and I’m happy to be in comm with you guys.

      • Well, the silence is deafening. I didn’t come here to piss in your sandbox. I just wanted to make it clear who I am and where I come from. No pretenses.

      • Hi Rod, You are welcome here.You are a highly trained auditor and have delivered many hours of excellent auditing for decades.I for one would like to hear any opinions you may want to express.

      • Hi Rod ,On checking I discovered you are not who I thought you were. My mistake, but that does not alter the fact that I would like to hear what you have to say!

    • Justice cannot possibly function in a suppressive environment such as the church, as a failure to abide by it’s suppressive programs makes you suppressive in their eyes. Either removing the suppressive influences (which is not easily affected) or leaving are pretty much the only options left. But why worry … no impediments for anyone out here … no mandatory IAS attendance, no other donation harassment, no re-training for the third time, no arbitrary BASIC studies, no 7-intensive eligibilities, no MAAs sending you home for the third time to handle your psych brother-in-law … and all at the fraction of the price. I could never ever see the OT levels at the church, the prohibitive costs made it next to impossible. And here I am today OT V. This is heaven, and all that is required are trained folks out here which practice standard tech. What else could I ever ask for, it’s never been any better.

      • “Formost”I concur completely! Once you leave the church and just get on with the bridge outside,everything flows better, amazing once you realise its all down to unaltered tech practiced without INTENSE suppression! Its incredibly apparent just how messed up the church is only once you have left it. From that perspective outside lookin in, I cant help but be reminded of the Jerry Springer show. Everyone lands up hitting each other. Church wise there may be few fists but the verbal abuse still makes no sense!! Neither does the forced disconnections or the blind stupidity displayed by suppressive DM or his PTS minions. In so saying I still find myself drawn to this blog in the hope that other less fortunate souls who speak scientologese, will glean information that will assist them break free. Cheers to that then!

    • Thank you. I was never an auditor. I like chatting here, but I thought I should let everybody know of my SP Status, which is probably Patron With Honors or something. I have two SP projects at the moment, I’m working to reconnect a former member with her children, and I’m mapping Scientology locations in Google Earth. I think associating the episodes of abuse with particular locations is important. One person was abused at the Int Base, another lost her children at Los Gatos org, or somebody was mistreated at Narconon Melbourne. Some are hard to find, like the former Mace-Kingsley Ranch. My ability to find locations in Africa is limited because addresses are frequently vague or Google doesn’t have an accurate map, so if I ask about where things happened, that is the reason.

  9. Fascinating. Great doc, thanks. I’d be really interested in knowing how you guys make sense of the information Robert Bennington provides in light of this. Did LRH suddenly decide that disconnection was no longer harmful to his followers? How could he so clearly acknowledge its harmfulness and then reinstate it? For us ‘never-ins’ this document looks like a cynical attempt to portray Scientology in a more benign light than is deserved. The fact that so very many policies that reinstated it came into being so very soon after this letter seems to support that notion, but I’m willing to consider an alternative explanation if someone would care to offer it.

  10. There is such a thing as freedom of association. People have fall-outs and “disconnect” all the time out here in the real world. People get divorced, business partners have fallouts, and so on, and it is human nature for people to part ways when they find associations to be no longer beneficial.


    Adults are capable of making their own decisions on this. It is not for some third party to dictate to them what they should do. Nor is it the right of some organization to intervene and spiritually blackmail people or families to disconnect from each other.

    The Church basically uses a lie: “Your only path to spiritual freedom is through us” to blackmail people to choose between “eternal spiritual freedom” and those they love, and this is *purely* for purposes of information control. But what kind of “spiritual freedom” is that? Obviously, that is not spiritual freedom at all.

    The Church uses Disconnection as an attempted Firewall against what it sees as the Virus of Free Speech and Free Thought, which are deadly to its revenue stream.

    What kind of “Church” would cause untold pain to so many over the decades, tearing apart families, friends and associates, so ruthlessly?

    The more the Church blackmails its members to go against their own integrity on this, the more people leave.

    Note to Miscavige: Definition of insanity: repeating an action that does not work, over and over again.

  11. I took away from this letter a completely different conclusion. On reading it, I strongly suspect that Hubbard wrote this as a willful, bald-faced lie to the Commission of Enquiry in response to questions about the practice of disconnection. Given the geographic distance involved and the difficulty of communications between NZ and London in those days (ruinously expensive telephone charges and no Internet/e-mail), it would have been difficult for the Commission to develop evidence to the contrary. Google and e-mail didn’t yet exist. So there was really no great chance that the Commission would have been able to catch him in a lie.

    With that in mind, I think this letter, as interesting as it is, should not be taken as proof that Hubbard intended disconnection to be cancelled. He was trying to derail the inquiry, using all the techniques of Fair Game that he described in various GO documents. Whether Hubbard truly intended for disconnection to be abolished should be determined by the totality of documents, but those, in turn, should carry less weight than credible accounts from people who left Scientology before about 1981, when Hubbard was still “on lines.”

    Actions speak far louder than words.

    • I agree JohnP. I do not have my research notes in front of me but if one datelines the inquiry proceedings (date it was officially convened in NZ Parliament, date it was due to complete, etc) one can see exactly what that letter was about. Also if you read the inquiry report (which is online somewhere and which I verified for my own peace of mind as a true copy of actual hard-copy publication), you will see exactly why Hubbard wrote this letter. It was plain and simple to thwart the NZ Inquiry.

      Hubbard did NOT intend to discontinue “disconnection” with this letter. He intended to rip the rug from beneath the feet of the NZ govt. inquiry. Disconnection continued in NZ, though it has since been done with zero paper-work. Prior to the NZ Inquiry disconnection was usually done with “disconnection letters”. It was done boisterously, with superior arrogance. This letter writing practice stopped after the NZ inquiry but disconnection was “business as usual”, just done with less noisy fanfare.

      There was no way the NZ Inquiry personnel could verify if what the letter stated was true or not. Hubbard lied and got what he wanted – minimal impact/sanctions on scientology in NZ – and any potential international ramifications. It was to that degree, a clever move on his part.

      There remained a wide body of instructions (polices, etc) within scientology which promoted and encouraged disconnection and fair game. The NZ Inquiry did not have the jurisdiction, the time, the budget, or various other resources, to thoroughly investigate the bigger picture. One brief “fcuk you!” letter to an inquiry does not maketh the whole picture.

      p.s. I am a kiwi.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s