Since I have been on staff (from 1992 to present) I have witnessed numerous staff members and public be subjected to what is called an “A to J Meter Check.” I have also seen this being done aboard the Freewinds and at Flag.
This check consists of a meter-trained Ethics Officer or Dir of Processing putting someone on a meter and asking a series of questions based on HCO PL – POLICIES ON PHYSICAL HEALING, INSANITY AND SOURCES OF TROUBLE. During this “meter check” the person is expected to answer every question (regardless of whether it reads or not.) Any reads on questions are noted; however, in most cases reading questions are not fully cleaned or taken to F/N.
In a majority of the cases personally observed, the person doing the meter check was not a trained Auditor (Class II or above) and Confessional Procedure was not applied.
This check is done prior to anyone being able to join staff or be accepted for services. In some cases, where there may be a question as to validity or thoroughness, it is done more than once on the same person. However, there is no LRH policy governing this practice other than the above policy letter (which makes no mention of checking anything on a meter.) Furthermore, there is no LRH reference that specifically states a procedure for how one is supposed to do such a “meter check.”
The following questions are what are asked:
A-1. Have any of your family or friends ever expressed any disagreement with Scientology?
A-2. Is there someone who doesn’t want you to be here?
A-3. Are you here to prove to someone that Scientology works, or to show them.
B-1. Do you have a criminal record?
B-2. Have you committed any crimes for which you have not been caught?
C-1. Have you ever threatened to sue or embarrass or attack Scientology or Scientologists?
C-2. Do you know of anyone who has?
D-3. Is anyone or anything the cause of the way you are now, or some condition you are in?
E-1. Are you here on your own determinism?
E-2. Do you feel obliged in any way or to any one to be here?
F-1. Are you here to see if Scientology works?
F-2. Does Scientology always work for you?
H-1. Do you want to get better?
H-2. Do you know of any other mental technology that works?
I-1. What gains are you expecting in Scientology?
J-1. Do you represent an attempt to investigate Scientology?
J-2. Do you know of anyone who is investigating Scientology?
J-5. Have you ever had thoughts of suing or requesting refund if the tech “didn’t work”?
As you can see, a majority of the questions are asking for overts or withholds. However, this particular form is not published in any HCO PL or HCOB. It is usually printed out on regular paper without any Issue Authority. Furthermore, several of the questions are not formulated according to HCOB – FORMULATING CONFESSIONAL QUESTIONS, e.g. “Are you here on your own determinism?”
When this was reported to RTC as an alteration of Standard Tech, the response which was given was that an A to J Meter Check is considered an “Ethics Interview” per HCO PL – INTERVIEWS and is not a sec check or confessional and therefore Confessional Tech does not apply.
There are several problems I see with this.
1) Since there is no specific LRH procedure for how one is supposed to administer a metered A-J interview/check, it is impossible for Qual to check anyone out on it. This leads to various opinions or random policy and a great deal of variation on how it is administered.
2) A majority of the questions utilized are asking for overts or withholds. Whether they are being asked in a session or not, this creates a potential missed withhold situation if standard Confessional Tech is not applied, i.e. buttons are not utilized and reading questions are not taken to F/N.
3) Performing such investigative procedures on everyone for security purposes regardless of whether they have done anything to warrant it is a gross violation of HCO PL – ORGANIZATION—THE FLAW.
The basic flaw in organization is INSPECTION BEFORE THE FACT. That means inspection before anything bad has happened.
Violations are so harmful they destroyed every great civilization—the Roman, the British, the lot. For every flow is slowed or stopped.
After thoroughly studying the relevant LRH references on this subject I have concluded the following:
1) Leaving a reading question that asks for an overt or withhold without taking it to an F/N is missing a withhold. [Ref: SHSBC Lect. #98, “Sec Checks, Withholds”]
But what is a … what is “missing a withhold” mean? It means that something that falls on the meter and the pc thinks he’s getting away with.
2) Missing withholds is not something to be taken lightly whether it is done in session by an Auditor, or out-of-session by an Ethics Officer. [Ref: SHSBC Lect. #75, “How to Security Check”]
You miss a Sec Check question on him, he gets unhappy.
Now, that’s a very important thing, because there resides the easiest way to get rid of new Scientologists known.
3) Asking a prepared list of questions on a meter is not a standard “meter check.” [Ref: HCO PL – ETHICS E-METER CHECK]
In a State of Emergency, the Ethics Officer may at any time call in any number of staff members and do an Ethics E-Meter check. This consists of setting the meter up, sensitivity 16, and handing the cans to the staff member taking the check. No question is asked of the staff member, and the staff member is not informed of readings. The Ethics Officer records the position of the tone arm and the condition of the needle and that is all. The entire check takes no more than 5–15 seconds.
4) Metered interviews are not part of a standard HCO investigation. [Ref: HCO PL – ETHICS OFFICER HAT]
In a nutshell, (a) one finds an imperfect functioning of some portion of the org and then (b) finds something that one doesn’t understand about it and then (c) interrogates by despatch the individuals in that portion connected with the imperfect functioning.
5) If an A-J check is not a Confessional or PTS interview, then it could not be considered a standard “Ethics Interview” either. [Ref: HCO PL – INTERVIEWS]
An ethics interview is an interview done by the Ethics Officer or the MAA on a student, preclear or staff member. He uses Confessionals, conditions, investigation tech and PTS/SP tech in order to get ethics in in his org or area so that Scientology can be done.
6) Asking a prepared list of security-related questions on a meter out-of-session could only be considered an “HCO Confessional.” And even if it is done for justice reasons, Confessional Procedure should be applied. [Ref: HCOB – CONFESSIONAL PROCEDURE]
The term ‘I am not auditing you’ only occurs when a Confessional is done for justice reasons. Otherwise the procedure is the same.
7) An Ethics officer is supposed to be trained in Confessional Tech and should use it when necessary. [Ref: HCO PL – CONFESSIONAL TECH POLICIES]
Ethics Officers must be ministers and the failure of an Ethics Officer to train himself to hear Confessionals subjects him to post removal and Comm Ev.
8) An HCO Confessional (or any form of investigation for that matter) should not be done for anything other than justice reasons. [Ref: HCO PL – HCO CONFESSIONALS]
The usual circumstances under which an HCO Confessional is done are that the person is already undergoing a Comm Ev or other ethics investigatory action or is working through lower ethics conditions, and the Ethics Officer has requested that the C/S order an HCO Confessional done.
9) Subjecting everyone to this sort of practice for security reasons does not necessarily result in a reduction of criminality. It does however results in annoyance and upset for those that are innocent. [Ref: HCO PL – HCO AND CONFESSIONALS]
POLYGRAPHS, LIE DETECTORS, METERS ONLY REGISTER AT THE REALITY LEVEL OF THE BEING, and the reality level of a criminal is too bad for reads to occur in a majority of cases. Thus the guilty are falsely freed and the innocent are subjected to annoyance and upset.