Just as an auditor can Q and A so can a C/S.
As you know Q and A is the incorrect 2-way comm action of wandering off the question by feeding the pc what the pc said as a Question, the Answer is taken as the next auditor's Question. Many various outlines of what Q and A is already exist and this is just to refresh the subject. Example: Student Auditor is ordered "2-way comm on cities," by the C/S which is okay. But it can be Q and Aed like this: Student: "Tell me what you think about cities. " Pc: "They're cold. " Student: "What about cold?" Pc: "I don't like it. " Student: "What else don't you like?" Pc: "Well…… old men. " Student: "What about old men?" Pc: "They're obnoxious. " Student: "What else is obnoxious?" Pc: "……" Well you remember all about that. It's maddening and shows no auditor control and certainly doesn't handle the original C/S subject of "cities".
There are three main ways in which a C/S can Q and A in C/Sing.
Pc goes to Examiner on own volition and says, "I am ill. I need my ruds flown. "
A C/S Q and A would be "Fly ruds. "
Pc on his own goes to Examiner and says, "I am upset about my job. "
C/S writes "L1B on job. "
You get the idea. The first one is therefore Q and Aing with Exam statement of pc.
This is varied by taking a pc's note or letter or report and accepting what the pc says is wrong. Like "I'm PTS to my husband. " And then C/Sing "2-way comm on husband. "
Naturally the ancient law applies here. If the pc knew what it was it would not be wrong and would as-is. Pc coming up to Exam saying, "It's my husband!" with F/N Cog VGIs would be what would happen if it was the husband. And that would be great but of no real value to C/S except pc has had a win and not to now use "husband".
Give you an actual example: Pc in Solo ruds found she hated George. It F/Ned. Next audited session pc was saying she hated George. Wrote a note about George. C/S did not notice the outness. Ordered LIB on George and in a 2-way comm got little or no TA, continued to be ill. The fact is it wasn't George at all and not even a terminal. Pc had gone up one grade too many, hit an overwhelm, the earlier 6 grades were out! Correct action was to have done a general repair the moment a pc suddenly and mysteriously caved in and got ill on a new level! The pc never should have been going on up grades for the last 6 grades!
The tendency to toss it all off with a Q and A not only didn't handle but obscured the real situation.
The second Q and A is to C/S a pc win.
Pc in 2-way comm mentions cats and more cats and cats and finally at the end of session has a big F/N Cog VGIs on cats.
The C/S sees all this "cat" mention and orders "Prepcheck cats. "
That is a very cruel sort of Q and A.
Another version of it of course is to see a pc reach a full End Phenomena on a series of processes like an unmistakable pc-volunteered valence shift and keep on going into an inval. Correction is to rehab of course.
Yet another version is to pull a w/h and then keep pulling it so the pc doesn't think it's gone. Correction is to rehab of course.
The TA often goes high or low on these Q and A actions and Inval-Eval actions are ordered and the release point rehabbed.
The third Q and A a C/S can pull is to agree to the pc's demands for the next grade despite all contrary indicators.
"I'm ready for Clear now!" says the pc full of somatics whose R6EW wasn't really done and who can't talk.
The Registrar, execs and others push on this also.
The D of P and C/S have total authority on this. They should be diplomatic. "He can have the grade of course but I will have to prepare him for it," is the best answer. "Please make arrangements for Clear preparation — 25 hours. "
If the C/S doesn't hold the fort on this the pc put into the next grade who isn't ready will fall on his head.
If this pressure from the pc (in any version) continues, have him sign a waiver "I will not hold the org or any principals responsible and waive any refund if I am put on next grade. " That either gets home or he says okay and signs. So put him on the grade and hope he doesn't fall on his head — and if he does, now demand he get the hours needed to get fixed up so he can really make it.
A D of P or C/S often have other pressures exerted on them that are not technical in nature such as economics, ambition, status symbols (of having a high grade regardless of a headache) and have to cope with these diplomatically. But any but tech considerations are dangerous to entertain.
Of these 3, 2 are concerned with letting someone else C/S. Like an engineer letting someone else plan the railroad.
And the third is also slightly in that nature, consisting of not noticing the pc's wins and using them with which to C/S.
This doesn't mean the pc is always wrong. He is generally right when he says he's overwhelmed or upset. He's almost always wrong when he says what overwhelmed him or what BPC was out when simply saying it does not correct the case or produce F/N VGIs.
You always use the pc's data one way or another in that you are paralleling what the Mind does. That's reads. Not what the pc says.
Remember that what's really wrong lies in the field of mass, energy, space, time, form and location. As these are eased up (by Standard Dianetics and 18 years of Scientology actions and processes) thoughts come to view. So if you Q and A with thoughts already in full view, you never really ease up the bank. That's why Q and A with significance is not done.