A new pricing model for healings – crazy or could this work?

In the past on this blog I’ve addressed questions around being a practitioner like how much to charge, the problems with charging too little (or free) and so on. 

I was thinking about this again today in the light of some really insightful comments that Shane made on a recent post.  One of Shane’s points was that when a patient stands to receive insurance for their injuries, they heal much slower than a patient with the same medical trauma who has no insurance claim.

This is the well known problem of secondary gain, and it is important in RPT, and absolutely central to our New Technique to be launched here in 2012.

Money (paying it or receiving it) has a huge impact on our ability to heal.

This got me thinking, what if there were some way to reward the client for healing faster?

And I had this crazy idea.  I don’t really think it will work in practice but I want your opinion.

What if I know that I could heal a client in one hour if they are 100% cooperative, but it will probably take four hours because of their secondary gains?

What if I charge that client up-front for four hours, with an agreement to refund the client for every hour that they don’t need?

So imagine if I charge $200 an hour, so the upfront fee is $800.  The client gets better in 2 hours, and I quickly refund their $400.  Total cost: $400 for a fantastic results-based healing.  And what’s more I’ve probably saved them another $400 because it would normally take four hours to get that result.

In a perfect world, this makes logical sense.  But it’s full of problems like: how do you explain to the client why this is important? (I mean a new client who doesn’t know about secondary gain.)  What if the client doesn’t have that much cash together up front?  How does the client know to trust you to do the refund?  And how do you know for sure that the client has healed and not just saying “I’m great, refund my money please”?

Well there are lots of issues, but I think it’s a great idea for starting a conversation between us.

My question to you is simply: could this work?  Do you think that a client would ever agree to go along with this model, instead of your usual pay-per-hour approach?  How would you personally react if I told you “$800 less a refund of $200 for every hour we don’t spend together”?  Would you be more or less motivated to heal? 

I value your thoughts.


December 19, 2011 in Being a Practitioner, Financial freedom / Lifestyle design
Tagged , , , ,

37 Responses

  1. Too complicated (for reasons you stated). Doesn’t work in practice.
    Also, you have to draw a line Simon – faster is not always better! Microwaves are a good example!


    Simon Rose Reply:

    I agree with your first part – yes it’s too complicated to work in practice. It’s just a thought experiment to get people thinking.

    I don’t know about your part 2 though. I think faster is almost always better, I cannot think of an example when it is not better to fix problems faster (provided you do it properly). Obviously don’t take short cuts… but all else being equal, faster is better.

    Also microwaves are OK. The problem is heating food, not microwaves. We should all eat as much fresh raw fruit and vegetables as we can. That’s the real lesson here. But if I have some leftovers to heat up, it’s actually better for you to nuke it than to fry it or bake it. That’s because the microwave is faster. Faster = less damage. I think that’s the lesson for today kids.

    Read here for some real science: http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2006/03/23/1597903.htm



    Ben Ralston Reply:

    Ah you bugger, you’re right. Faster is better.
    Actually, you made me realize that my aversion to microwaves is really pure superstition. I have no basis for my microwave phobia other than mistrust.

    And the ‘slow is good’ thing – this is a real echo of my old mindset (very much enforced by my yoga studies and the resulting old attitude I had to spirituality)…
    BUT. Nature is slow. And nature is good. Do you know what I mean? There is a rhythm that the natural world has, and I can’t help feeling that if we upset that rhythm, we step out of line somehow… but actually, that rhythm is the rhythm, of life and (coherent) consciousness. Do we have to take time coming back slowly to the right path? No, we can do it NOW if we want to. I suppose our Beingness should be slow – but our doings can be lightning fast if we allow them to :)

    I answered my own question. There you go. Thank you Simon for a very thought-provoking ‘lesson’ :)


    Simon Rose Reply:

    Hi Ben,
    I slept on this question (I suppose a more spiritual person would say “I meditated on it.”)

    I have to admit that this blog article, and my microwave comment, were a brain dump -> random idea to keyboard without the care and thought that I put into my usual blogs. Thinking aloud as it were. But last night I sat back to think about (a) how to solve this secondary gain problem; (b) microwaves; and (c) faster=better/worse.

    My initial thoughts were that faster is not always better. Examples: sex, eating, sleep.

    That got me thinking about Being versus Doing, or the Journey versus the Destination. Sometimes the focus is the journey, sometimes it’s the destination. Speed is a bonus where the destination matters. Slower is a bonus where it’s the journey.

    Examples of Journeys: sex, eating, sleep. [all "doings" for the most part]

    Examples of Destinations: being healthy, being happy, being fit, being where I want to be physically, being wealthy [all Beings]

    So my considered conclusion is that speed gets us through the journey and to the destination, if that’s what we want. Since being healthy is a destination, it makes sense to speed through the healing journey.

    I would just hate to speed through sex, food or sleep because the destination is not that interesting compared to the journey.

    best wishes


    ps you were spot on about the microwave thing being the very definition of superstition. I couldn’t have put it better myself. I have been working on a list of New Age superstitions and beliefs, all of them wrong. The funny thing is I used to hold all of these beliefs, as recently as 3-4 years ago.

  2. What about the secondary gain for the practitioner, because they would make more money if it takes longer. Not that the practitioner would intentionally sabotage the length of the healing but, perhaps subconsciously?


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi aya – yes an excellent point. I didn’t think of it because I don’t have that secondary gain. I am happy when someone cancels because I value my free time more than money! (but then being a practitioner is not my job or income so I am a bad example.)

    You’re right, there are lots of practitioners (in all modalities) who charge too much money. I can see where this idea would fail.

    OK let’s go back to my original idea of charging a fixed amount for the healing, not per hour, so the healer has no incentive to take a long time.

    I still think there needs to be some benefit to the client to heal faster. Any ideas?


  3. THe only thing I can think of is for each hour that the client does not heal, he or she must pay additional money to someone else, perhaps a donation (on top of the fixed amount paid to the practitioner). That way, the client benefits from healing faster. And the practitioner does not benefit from healing slower.


    Simon Rose Reply:

    I love it!
    That could be my new pricing structure! My price is fixed but if you take more than 2 hours of my time you must contribute to the Vanuatu animal welfare charity!

    Awesome idea

    ps the charity is real and pays for health care and de-sexing of local village dogs/cats. It’s called “Sam’s Animal Welfare; Port Vila.”


  4. what if the client genuinely struggles wth faster healings


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Cara and welcome to the blog.
    I am not sure that I understand your question correctly.
    My question to you would be “how are they possibly worse off”? My idea (which is only a discussion topic) rewards “easy clients” but it does not penalize the difficult ones. These people would always have taken the 4 hours, so missing out on the refund does not make them worse off.

    Or am I missing something?

    Where I am coming from is that my current pricing structure (fixed price without strong time limit) is broken. The “easy” clients are subsidizing the “difficult” clients too much. We need a better system. I don’t really like the strict pay-per-hour system but right now I am returning to it unless we come up with something better.



  5. Good idea!
    But I don’t know if it’ll work because it’s a lot of money people have to pay at once….

    Perhaps it would be better if the sessions were offered as a package f.e. get 6 pay 5.
    Your example: get 6 sessions (usually 1200$) for 1000$
    And if you make it whithin 2 sessions I’ll refund 600$

    So you don’t have to talk about secondary gain. ;-)

    I don’t know if I like aya’s version….
    For me it builts up a lot of pressure and perhaps I would be so focused on “doing it right” that that’ll block me.


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Michaela, I like your idea of the package but I wonder is it actually different to what I said, or the same thing but just “marketed” differently? Because it seems to me that you have solved my question of how to communicate the idea to the client! Good one.

    best wishes


  6. Hi Simon,

    I think it’s not really different to what you said but perhaps you avoid some resistance about paying at once and the clients don’t have to think about secondary gain.

    Sometimes it’s hard to understand secondary gain.
    Or to understand that it’s UNconscious stuff.
    Most times people feel like they are doing wrong, they are a mistake or they don’t want to let their problems go.

    That there should be some part or “reason” within them that’s blocking them from what they conscuiously want soooo much.
    That the situation they really don’t like and want to get rid of with every fiber of their body should be something they “choosed” and “wanted” to hold on….

    So talking about secondary gain can cause a lot of resistance and you can get this out of the way in offering packages. ;-)



    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Michaela

    I feel like I need to point out that talking abotu secondary gain is AT LEAST 50% of RPT and the new technique. So really it cannot be avoided. I would say that clearing secondary gain is the number one most important factor in the success of a healing technique.

    However, what I think you might be getting at, is that there is a difference between talking about secondary gain DURING a healing session, versus talking about it before the client has committed to doing a session (and paying for it).

    With the package idea you have mention, it might be possible to get them “in the door” so to speak, without talking about secondary gain yet. However the idea that I wrote about in the article would require some explanation before it made sense to the client.

    I do hope this makes sense!

    Best wishes


    Michaela Reply:

    Yes! That makes sense to me. ;-)


    Michaela Reply:

    It sounds interesting that secondary gain is 50% of the new RPT-Work.
    Will there be an online course available?

    Simon Rose Reply:

    Long term I think we will look at something online or DVD. However the experience is not nearly as good as learning in person.

    Do you know we have several teachers near you in Germany; Tamara, Oya and Giulia, as well as Bernadette in Switzerland. Their details are all on our website.


  7. Hey Simon
    This reminds me of something my husband (chiropractor) once told me about traditional Eastern doctors — people pay them UNTIL they get sick, when they stop paying them because ‘they haven’t done their job properly/successfully’ ! Not sure if this is strictly ‘true’ or if I have expressed it accurately but… interesting nonetheless :-)
    Secondly, I just can’t let all that microwave stuff go by. OK, so maybe we don’t have the latest scientific study to ‘prove’ that microwaves are yuck. But there’s only about, oh, a kazillion other things in the universe that science is completely in its infancy to even begin to explain. I mean seriously, it wasn’t that long ago that science/doctors told people that smoking was good for asthma! As for Dr Karl (your link above), well, he always goes with the popular mainstream feel-good version. All I know is, I have innately felt for my entire life not to ‘nuke’ something from frozen solid to mouth-burning hot in a few minutes, then eat it. That’s why I’ve never owned a microwave and never plan to. It’s all just too nuclear-weird for me. I believe ‘fast’ and ‘slow’ both have their natural place, there is of course no ‘better’ one than the other, it’s a very human thing to obsess about the timing of stuff anyhow. :-)


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Rebecca! I always apprecaite your input. When you have a chance please ask your husband about that quote, I’d love to hear how he expresses it. I didn’t get the meaning of seeing the Chinese doctor until you get sick, as not many healthy people try alternative healing (which is a shame, prevention is so much better than cure).

    About the microwave thing, you should know that I was just winding my friend Ben up (what are friends for?). I barely use the microwave myself although that’se mostly because of how much electricity they use (we are all diesel generator here).

    I know Dr Karl is very blinkered. But there is a point here. For instance many healers say “don’t use microwaves because they destroy vitamins/enzymes” and Dr Karl showed that the opposite is the truth. This is a good example of where Dr Karl’s approach works.

    I minimise the microwave use for reasons which I think are compatible with yours. It has to do with taste, texture and feel. I am a “foodie.” These reasons are valid without having to dress them up with pseudo-science about fast versus slow or preservation of vitamins, or the aura of the food, etc etc.

    So you see, I’m not advocating microwaves, rather I’m advocating a philosophy of life like “if you are going to avoid X, be very clear about why and don’t accept nonsense explanations.” I know I should have been clearer but I wasn’t really expecting people to read the comments in such a minor article.

    By the way something that I love about microwaves: take bread, cake or brownies that’s gone a bit too dry, 10 seconds in the microwave and they are soft and fresh. Love it!

    Always great chatting to you,


  8. Dmitriy Vinetskiy

    Hi, Simon:) “What if I know that I could heal a client in one hour if they are 100% cooperative, but it will probably take four hours because of their secondary gains?”

    I think, you just speaking about pressing on client (I mean your article at all).

    What is this “100% cooperative”? May be that he doing all of healer’s instructions well?

    Sure (like Shane mentioned) client doesn’t always want to be healed, sometimes he just need to receive some visa from a doctor, to receive assurance, or smth. It is not hard to recognize this case. Couch can simply ask the patient, what he needs – healing, or some kind of official paper, or somebody to listen… And then to deal in accordance with it. So this aspect is obvious now.

    Let’s look on secondary gains about the client’s problem. And again, what means “cooperative”, or “with secondary gains client”?
    If client has no, or almost has no secondary gains, why he still is ill? May be the only reason is, he cannot allow to himself to make a recovery. May be, he nead a visit to healer for this. In this case healer is like live placebo, or authority the client needs in.

    Well, let’s take a look on the real case, when client has a real pack of associations from his personal and ancestor’s history, how to behave… When this association is not 100% adequate in some situation today, it makes a problem. And when we trying to change some part of the pattern, it touches some secondary gains.
    And that was you, telling us on the training, that it’s a question of balancing – what is better for client’s safety – to change something, or not to change…
    So i think, if healer can be really connective with all of client’s feelings, gains and associations, he can show, or lead the way to client to make safety in his life in better way… It is impossible to client to have something against this. But if a practitioner doesn’t want to be with some of client’s energy, he can speak that it is something wrong with client… And easy way is to make a press on client… With money, refusing to work, making some kind of pain or deadlock.

    Another case I want mention in the topic, is the reason of practitioner, why he makes his healing work. This may be a key question to money ideas, too. For example, if somebody likes to feel his connection with a power, receiving love from healed clients, or raising own value, making cool and quick healings. Then he will think, there are “good”, or “easy” clients, and “bad” or “heavy”.

    Well, is a sponsorship of “easy” clients to a “heavy” a real problem? If somebody makes something easily, isn’t a good thing to help to other, who is not so good in this case? All we know, helping people from the heart returns in multiple…


  9. Dmitriy Vinetskiy

    Hi again:)
    An insight has come up with me after some time. So I want to add something.

    “…there is a difference between talking about secondary gain DURING a healing session, versus talking about it before the client has committed to doing a session (and paying for it)” -
    very good point.

    Going half step back. Let’s remember, all this talking is about what? – Some clients are (100%) cooperative and some are not. So the total question is how to make a client highly cooperative to the moment, when we starting session? Sub-question is how payment system can help. Sure, higher costs is, at overall, more motivating, as well as paying ahead, money saving and bonuses. But there is the difference between money system and motivation, money is only one of the ways to motivate. And some people are motivated with money, some with other things.

    Sometimes money motivation also makes some kind of filter, selecting easiest clients and most ready to changes. And all of this brings question about motivation, about the difference between cooperative and non-cooperative clients. On my quick glance, it is all about motivation.

    Small example. When I was on trainers training, we was taught about first thing in the whole training, and in starting of any mutual affair, like new topic, or an exercise. You have it, it’s motivating.

    Trainer has to speak, or to do something else, until all members will be more and more motivated. Good level is when participants cannot wait any more, they feel and believe, that it is so good, what we wants to achieve, what we are waiting for? Please, stop to talk, say us what to do, we are happy to start this road to all of this good things you are talking about!

    This trainer’s ability to motivate is very important. How one can create motivation? We have to show to client things, he feels and believe, they are good for him. One step is finding good things according for his personal beliefs. Like “you will be healthier, happier, richer, after this”. Other is reaction in his body, if it is positive, it is also good thing. Sure, trainer himself has to feel him good, while motivating others. (It is not easy, if he is waiting to others to motivate him. So this is also about leadership).

    Finishing with example, and returning to healing. Motivating of client is the first stage of the work. If healer is not conscious about this, or has no ability to motivate client, the only way he have to make good quick healing is to find already motivated clients. Or to organize something to motivate them, like payment.

    So my point is, that creating motivation (before, or in the beginning of the process) is part of the whole healing process. And money motivation is not enough, if we want to heal ANYBODY in this speedy and effective way. If one excludes this, he excludes all clients, who have a lack of motivation as a part of their problem. May be this can be a helpful piece in creating of your new most quick and effective method.


  10. Hi Simon,

    i think there were no way to get the client to heal faster. But it is possible NOT to get him to heal LONGER.
    My oppinion is: the model “pay for a session” motivates clients to get more out of the session, then they have charged.
    So, the model “pay for an hour” is in practice better. But this model could motivate clients to make the session shorter (in negative sense). For example, when the client sees that one hour is over and the problem is not solved, he could sabotage himself suppressing some feelings. That´s why I inform potential clients on my website, how many hours I usually need to solve different problems (for example 2-4 hours)
    I also offer my clients packages “5+1″ in addition to the paymant for an hour, with an agreement to refund them for every hour that they don’t need. But in practice it is not very popular. Probably every 10th client makes use of it.


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Tamara, thanks for contributing on our blog,
    As you have highlighted, there is no simple answer. That’s because human nature is so strange at times, the way we react to different “carrots” and “sticks.”

    The reason for this article was really my way of admitting that my current model is broken. It’s great that I can get suggestions from people like you about what works and what does not.

    Hopefully we will find a good model for all RPT practitioners to use. It should be affordable for clients and get them the best results.



  11. Usually in the presence of fast working off of a trauma I hold additional session, instead of I return half of sum. Thus I motivate the client well to work. In your offer there is a sense…


  12. Hello!
    I thought it first sounded like a good idea, but.
    Say the client is new to the technique and feels a bit disappointed in not having a successful healing. Opening up in a session can feel like one’s put in a vulnerable position (although of course, the RPT practitioners are skilled and thoughtful enough to not abuse that!). Disappointed + vulnerable and then add having to give more money, perhaps to a charity you haven’t ever heard of, seems like it could equal being pretty put off from the technique, the RPT community and perhaps even alternative healing all together.
    I might be over-thinking it, but it bugged me.


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Viv I understand what you are saying but… how is it any different than the regular pay per hour approach?
    I mean in the traditional model (the one I’m moving back to), the client pays $x per hour for help. And yes there are vulnerabilities, and the client, once “opened up” has to pay more to finish. All the things you said are true. But they are equally true in the traditional model as in my hypothetical system with the refund that I suggested in this article. So, I admit to being a bit confused about whether you are disagreeing with my hypothetical idea, or with paying for healing in general.

    The other approach, which I’ve done for about 4 years, is a fixed price healing, where we fix a problem for a fee and don’t look at the clock. It is the only solution to the problems you identified. I think it’s a wonderful model and healers should use it. It just isn’t working for me personally at the moment as I have wound up feeling taken advantage of by a few clients. That’s why I wrote this slightly whimsical hypothetical, it’s about shifting responsibility (and benefit) back to the client.

    > I might be over-thinking it, but it bugged me.

    I can see what bugged you, but I think you should think about it some more and let me know your conclusions about how we can best help people.



    Scott Reply:

    Hi Simon

    Great to see you continuing to explore alternative approaches. I see benefit in providing various price offerings to clients. Each client is different and each will have a different sensitivity to pricing. Adding a pricing alternative would appeal to some current clients but the greater benefit should acrue from attracting new clients that are attracted to this type of option.

    Kindest Regards



  13. Well, as a non practioner, and would be client, I feel the amount of money you all charge is extraordinary. In economic times such as these in the USA, money is almost a luxury to have. I’m a single mom on a part time income and unemployment, paying a mortgage and regular household bills. I’ve had experience with RPT in the past but could NEVER afford a session.
    Perhaps lowering your prices would be of more benefit to all. Lower prices would help so many people who need your help.
    You say you are not of secondary gain but they way i see it, 200 dollars per hour is extreme and the cost of living on some remote island is very high. I’m not sure where other practioners live but nevertheless, that kind of pricing puts help out of so many peoples reach.
    I know RPT could help me but i can’t afford it.
    Its a damn shame you keep something as good as this out of so many peoples reach.


    Simon Rose Reply:

    hi Merry,
    Thank you for sharing your insights and experience.

    I agree with you about the importance of making sure this work is available to all. That’s why (for instnace) Evette and I run a free clinic for local people in Vanuatu. We do many other things to make sure this work is available to all. I can honestly tell you that no one has been turned away from my clinic because of money. They may not see me personally but they get the support they deserve.

    I think perhaps your objection is due to taking things out of context a bit. How many practitioners in the world charge $200 per hour? Many NLP (neuro linguistic programming) practitioners do, but I think there’s only 1 RPT practitioner charges that. (Me.)

    So you seem to have built an argument based on a price that only one person charges. That doesn’t seem fair to me.

    To be fair, I might have misunderstood you (in which case I apologize profusely). I don’t really understand when you said:
    > You say you are not of secondary gain but they way i see it,
    > 200 dollars per hour is extreme and the cost of living on
    > some remote island is very high.

    I’m confused because I don’t know what “not of secondary gain” means. We all have secondary gains, me especially! :-)

    Also I don’t know what it has to do with the cost of living on islands. My clients don’t live on islands. I do, but that has nothing to do with my fee as RPT is not my source of income.

    Pardon my confusion and back to your comment. You said:

    > Its a damn shame you keep something as good as this out of so many peoples reach.

    This makes me sad Merry.

    I acknowledge you feel excluded from RPT. However this isn’t about money, it’s about worthiness, or knowing how to ask the right questions.

    I am really glad that you posted this so that I can clear it up for you and others.

    I would say that most of the RPT sessions done in the world are done for free! They are done as practice sessions in my free clinic. They are done by new graduates desperate for people like you to practice on. There are perhaps 2,000 RPT graduates looking for people to work on, but maybe 50 of them charging money for sessions (I just guesstimated the second number, don’t quote me).

    My point is, it’s a bit presumptive to say that I’m keeping it out of people’s reach, when what you really mean is “how do I contact a practitioner who is less expensive than the founder of the therapy?”

    That’s a good question and I’m glad you meant to ask it. Here are 2 answers:

    1) contact an RPT teacher and ask if they have any graduates looking for people to practice on. Offer a energy exchange like $20. I bet you’ll have a lot of volunteers.

    2) Visit the RPT forum – big red button on the top right of this page, I guess you overlooked it. There’s a public forum where you can request a healing. It’s not used that much, and maybe I need to promote it more. But it’s there and I made it for people like you.

    I really hope that you get the time and acknowledgment you deserve.

    I hope you take this feedback in the spirit of love and generosity with which it is meant.



  14. Healing seeker

    Dear Simon,
    you stated that:

    Money (paying it or receiving it) has a huge impact on our ability to heal.

    Can you please explain this to me in which way it has an impact on out ability to heal?
    I believe that healing can only be given from whole heart and out of the wish to heal.

    Which would mean if someone comes to me to receive a healing i could only say yes or no but it would spoil the healing when i would have half of my heart demanding money and half of my heart wanting to heal.

    Which means automatically i should not rely on any money coming from healing as i could not demand money.

    On the other hand it would surely have a impact on the healing if the healed gives a donation out of free will and decision or show how much he value the healing in some other way.


    Simon Rose Reply:

    Dear Seeker,

    Thanks for visiting this blog and taking the time to comment.

    I appreciate where you are coming from. I differ from you with regard to the role of money in the healing process. My perspective is not based on ideology but rather on my own experiences as a practitioner. Put simple, I tried what you described and while it might work for me (healing is my hobby not my job/income), it does not work for my clients. And that’s what this is about – clients.

    Money (paying it or receiving it) has a huge impact on our ability to heal.

    I believe that healing can only be given from whole heart and out of the wish to heal.

    The confusion in this sentence comes from the fact that you are reading it from the healer (“given”) perspective, whereas my comment was about the client. In fact this entire page was about finding a model that provides the correct motivations for the client. You may be right in all the things you said about the healer (“healing can only be given from whole heart” etc) but that’s not what this article was about.

    With regard to the client’s best interest you said:

    On the other hand it would surely have an impact on the healing if the healed gives a donation out of free will and decision or show how much he value the healing in some other way.

    My experience would disagree, and this really was the focus of this blog and the ones I’ve written in the past about the relationship between money and healing.

    What you said sounds right, spiritually speaking. But it fails to account for the complexity of our psychology. In short, given a choice, most people are stingy and will pay what they can get away with, and that is the value they will get. Given a choice between paying $10 and paying $1000, most people will pay $10 and they will get $10 worth of results (i.e. not much).

    Please understand that this observation is not my own (not limited by my own stuff), but is widespread in the experienced healing community. For instance one of my best friends runs a healing clinic in Los Angeles set up as a Ministry of Healing accepting healings on a donation basis, with a recommended price of $200. He told me that many people pay about $20-50. Not only does he feel disrespected (which is a totally separate issue for a different day), but these clients don’t really heal. It is the clients paying full value that heal.

    Why? I think it’s psychology.

    If you are forced to pay $1000 for something you make sure you get $1000 worth of value from it. If you pay $10 you get $10 worth of value from it. It really is that simple.

    Countless healers around the world have tried the idea you proposed and seen that it does not work for their clients best interests. Also countless healers from different modalities have told me that when they increased their prices for a session their clients healed faster.

    There are two interpretations of this:
    1) When you increase the price, the client has to pay more, so they value the session more, so they heal faster; or
    2) When you increase the price, the “healing tourists” (the ones who check out healers but aren’t committed) disappear – it’s easier to be a tourist for $20 than $200. So you only get the clients who really want to heal.

    When I started as a healer I charged about $5 for a half hour session because I figured they were doing ME a favour (it’s true, they were). Now I charge $200/hr and I know that some would pay 10 times that. What has changed? The only people who see me for sessions are the ones that want to heal and they heal really fast.

    [For completeness I should say that in my clinic in Vanuatu I still require payment, but it could be in the form of a piece of fruit or laplap (a local specialty). It doesn’t have to be money but the same principles apply – for THEIR benefit. Free / donation healing don’t work in RPT (or any other technique I have tried).]

    What I urge you to contemplate about your pricing system is whether you are getting “tourists” or people really wanting to heal. Secondly what results are they getting? I don’t mean you usual spiritual healing feel-good factor results (very short term). I am talking about serious diseases (emotional or physical) being healed from 1-2 sessions. If you are getting these results from a donation-basis system then I take my hat off to you because I certainly couldn’t get that.


    PS if you want to discuss the other side – the healer’s motives around money and having half a heart in it as you said, then I am happy to write an article about it. It would help if you expanded on the question and your experience here so I know what to address.


  15. Healing seeker

    Hello simon,
    I understand what you write and its a bit sad somehow.
    I am not a healer in this life i don’t have the experiences and certificates i would need to create a doctors office even if i am sure i could quickly learn and even master spiritual healing.
    What i described are the ethics that belong to my deep feelings what i would do if i focus on the this way. I would feel not good to earn money with something that in my mindset should be always just given like the air we breath its a bit like someone sells air so one can breath.

    My feelings come from a totally different culture and i think it really might not work with your clients so i agree with you, the westernized world is completely different from my set of feelings and from what i WANT to know.

    Lets say it like this: The modern american man will not appreciate it enough and will not heal when the healing is given for free. While the African native lives in a society where the shaman looks after all people and would not even think about taking anything in return – he would fully appreciate it.

    So most likely there would be no way around this detail.
    I did think about how to A) make everyone appreciate what you do and B) don’t shut people out who need healing but would not be able to afford it (if this is an issue at all…)

    So one idea would be to charge after income. So the People who would pay 2000 dollar to value it will pay so much because they can afford it and it will be happy on the other hand the people who can barely handle their daily costs will not be shut off from the service. You also could try to scale or limit it so it will not be too much or too less.

    hopefully your customers are not so greedy that they would lie about their income…

    best blessings to you


    Simon Rose Reply:

    Dear Seeker, thank you for your reply.

    I really agree with you completely about the difference between ideal ethics and the practical reality of Western life. I also agree that many aspects of Western psychology are “a bit sad.”

    I like your idea of charging based on income. I see no real problem with this. I feel that in a way I do already do this by having one price for Western people and a different price for Islander people. We also have a range of our students charging different prices in different countries, so when someone writes to me for help there is always someone I can refer them to who is in their price range.

    There is a broader issue you bring up which I have not written about for a long time. It’s about healers and charging money.

    I respect the idealized image you paint, but I also disagree with it, at least in this Western context. Here are just a couple of my concerns.

    (1) What I do (RPT) is essentially a counseling technique (based on psychology and neurology). Why should prices for an RPT session be free let alone different to the price for an hour of a psychologist’s or neurologist’s time? Your comment may be better aimed at people doing energy or prayer healing – but doesn’t apply to RPT unless you think that your doctor, dentist and lawyer should also be free.

    (2) The shamanic model you describe (the shaman supports the village and the village supports its shaman) works great – in a village. It might even work here on my island. But in a big city – not a chance. I have known several healers who tried to surrender to this philosophy and to describe them as struggling would be an understatement. Unfortunately their grand ideals were not met by the realities of human nature. They either didn’t have enough clients (people didn’t value what they do) and/or the clients they did have just didn’t pay them enough to survive (bread for a day but not rent for a week).

    (3) Money works as a boundary, like opening and closing the floodgates. When prices go down, demand can be too high. If prices are too high, the stock doesn’t sell. Finding the “clearing price” is important in any business and this includes healing. If I decreased my price, I would have too many clients and I wouldn’t be able to do my day job (or be with my family or whatever healers do when they aren’t with clients). If I increase my price then my services will be unfordable and I won’t be succeeding in my goal of helping lots of people. So contrary to the shamanic view, money for healings isn’t evil or bad, it’s just a boundary, a way of balancing the floodgates to keep my work-life balance perfect. If I have a quiet month I can always cut my price (or vice versa). Understanding the role of money helps to destigmatize this whole subject of healing and money.

    I hope that these comments help to explain for all readers where I’m coming from. It sounds like we live in different worlds, and that is fine.

    Thanks again for your time


    Ben Ralston Reply:

    I think it’s also really important to understand that the Shaman is highly respected, and has his needs met by the village. The only way a healer can be highly respected in the West? If he makes a lot of money! Money = power = respect in the West. I don’t like that, not at all. In fact, I would very much like one day to live in a money free community (and I believe one day all human society will be, as in the ‘Culture’ novels of Iain M. Banks, where technology is advanced enough that money is simply no longer needed). But the reality, in most of the world today, is very different.
    It’s an interesting discussion…


    Healing seeker Reply:

    i am pretty sure our technology would be advanced enough. Money is only about power and political power as well.

  16. Healing seeker

    Dear Simon,

    Well in my home country doctors and dentists are free as there is a social insurance which is mandatory for everyone. i think it is not a bad system. And i really think lawyers should be free i would even think this might be even more important as a free healthcare because it would give the normal person a possibility to make a case if his rights were violated without loosing too much money or having too much risks, if lawyers are too expensive it is for poor people not possible to insist of their rights which are given from the law (and big companys using this to do whatever they want)

    Well the shamanic model would only work in the cases where to be a doctor is not the first source of income. Ofcourse i cannot expect every doctor to be a finacial expert and generate money with the stock market.
    So the first income might be something like a fund.

    Lets take a more realistic approach to it. I think in the western society it would be possible in this way: Some doctors charge the clients after their income. They put the money together and share it evenly. This would be the approach for the small wallet, for the big wallet there could just be a sponsor or a government organisation. (or even private donations? I heard the us citizen have some culture of donating at least small amounts.)

    When the price is too low and demand is too high then the factory could expand and produce more (for a real company it might be better to even set the price high instead of producing more it would keep the risk down and the gain rates might be the same but a charity organisation this would not be the first approach)
    I terms of rpt it would mean you try to train some stuff if the demand gets too high.
    Of course this might bring other problems.

    Where we are back to the original topic.
    Most people in the ultimate financial world expect expensive things to be good and unexpensive things to be bad. So lets say you train a staff who takes all the people who want free therapy and he is as good as you are he would still get worse results because the people expect him to be second class and not so good and not so expensive and because of the medical tourists.

    This is a very complicated topic where the solution might be not that easy.
    One approach might be
    A) talk to the clients about money and make them aware that their view on money is a bit wrong maybe you could even actively try to heal the stinginess and put a donation box on the floor. If you really did heal the stinginess they will put something inside and if not you was not successful at least in this concern. Also i think if looked closely many people have a huge issue with money coming from the culture as doctor one could try to fix this as well.
    B) For medical tourists i would say one could try to filter them by take a close look on the person before accepting him as client. Of course this will need a good eye or some clairvoyance and maybe even some extra staff who would be capable of this as it might consume time – maybe the biggest issue…
    C) After all i asking myself would you have other serious clients if you would only charge a small amount? Will the poor neighbor come to you at all who really want healing but cannot afford it? Actually this would be one of the biggest questions.

    best blessings

    p.s. i allways get a could not find the captcha tocken file.


  17. Hi Seeker,

    I agree to a lot of what you’ve written. From a spiritual level. ;-)

    As I started my business I used the approach you mentioned about taking money in relation to the clients income. So I had three different prices on every bill – one for people with low, middle and high income.
    I dind’t want to control or see their paycheck because I thought they would be honest.
    But at the end nearly all people paid the lowest price.

    And – interestingly – the people were okay but hadn’t the got the results I was looking for (even though I’m not offering RPT but other healing modalities). The few people who paid the middle price had better experiences.

    But I also had free teleclasses with great results…

    I want to add that I know a lot of people who work in the “healing field” and some of them charge high prices.
    But none of them – including me – wouldn’t dismiss a client who couldn’t pay the full price. There is always a way to help the client!

    For me it’s important that the client has something to do or pay to see the value in it.
    That he didn’t have to feel as a freeloader or ashamed.

    But I think I digress…



Leave a Reply


Using Gravatars in the comments - get your own and be recognized!

XHTML: These are some of the tags you can use: <a href=""> <b> <blockquote> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>