"Mac, you're right that the difference between the U.K. and the U.S. is pretty striking when it comes to mediums and belief in the afterlife. One interesting thing is that mediums here are incredibly overpriced and often they are frauds. In the U.K., they seem more reasonably priced, at least. The one that I saw was very inexpensive and I am sure she was authentic."
As we appear to have many 'lurkers' reading the Afterlife boards I thought it might be particularly helpful for them to look at certain issues. Regular contributors will likely have firm views about them.
The central theme of this section, copied from one of Bella's threads, is that of payment for services offered by practitioners. (I use that word deliberately because there's much confusion about psychics, channelers and mediums so I'm not going to use any of those words to avoid the distraction they can cause.) In the UK there are regular and often heated arguments about this on discussion boards and in the press.
In one camp we have those who say that mediumship or healing etc are 'gifts of the spirit' and their benefit should be given freely or with minimal charge. Others argue that practitioners have the same bills to pay as the rest of us and often give their time to the extent they are unable to hold down regular jobs as well. Somewhere in-between there are arguments about what constitutes a reasonable charge!
There can be no doubt that high-profile, platform mediums (as we call 'em in the UK) often spend large amounts of time on tour, traveling to venues and giving performances like any other public figure. Such tours are expensive to run and entry charges must reflect it. Then the medium needs an income and how much that income should be is unlikely ever to be agreed upon! Even with practitioners who work in private there are likely to be widely differing views about what constitutes a reasonable charge. Add to that an expectation influenced by confusing advertising (eg, medium or psychic) and things can get ugly when folk feel they've been short-changed.
25 years ago as a newbie I found myself defending a very well known touring medium when some of our group were bad-mouthing his ability and his life style. I made the point that even if he was not at his peak every night, at every venue, even at his 'worst' he might still make more reliable and predictable contact with the departed friends and family of those in the audience than those who criticized him!
plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose...