Spiritually speaking, how does this Answer violate Community Guidelines?

Someone goofed. Sounds like a great answer, and very helpful to the woman.

As always, you have offered an intelligent, educated answer. It should not have been deleted. The only thing I can think of is somehow Yahoo feels you are offering medical advice. Although, clearly you are not, you are suggesting that they seek out the aid of a professional in a particular field. Which she should.

It seems TyUnsaved a med student agrees with your assessment and although I am not in the medical field, I can relate as I have seen the results that therapy can achieve firsthand. My best friend had a stroke from a birth defect, something to do with her heart. She then received a pacemaker. At first she could not hear properly and had to go to speech therapy, eventually she recovered. Regrettably, her pacemaker had a problem and she had another stroke, the same problems arose. Unfortunately, the insurance company is now trying to deny her claim, leaving her with an $80,000 bill. She is fighting the Insurance Company and back in therapy, she’s not 100% yet, but getting there.

Unfortunately, there are some people who are so devote that they refuse medical treatment in favor of prayer only. Although in some cases parents who chose to deny their children medical treatment due to their religious beliefs have been convicted of involuntary manslaughter. This may or may not be her case. For some although therapy is the best course of action, it is expensive. If they are improperly insured or perhaps denied, she may have thought prayer is her only answer. She may have been so distraught that you offered her rationality instead of hope.

I agree with you, prayers are nice intentions; they can often inspire one to keep fighting. However they should be used in combination with medical treatment, not in place of. And I must admit, I have not once prayed for my friend, instead I have offered her support, and suggestions how to beat that darn insurance company. Solutions not fluff. Hopefully this woman will heed your advice and do the same.

I think you should appeal, as your post should be seen. There maybe others suffering from the same condition as her son that want an educated answer.

What you did wrong was to have the answer read by someone who did not like your answer.

I'd appeal this by stating that the answer did not violate the community guidelines of (state which ones it did not violate).

Your answer is not a violation.

My question is this: was this in response to a "will you pray for my son" type question. In that case, the answer may not answer the question in it's strict contect as the person would have asked for prayer and you are giving them an answer they did not request. However, it is not a violation of the guidelines. If someone disagreed, they should have given you a thumbs down, not reported you.

Well, who can peer into the questioner's mind and heart? And who knows just what is it with the YA censors except is theirs they believe to 'keep peace'. And everyone today fears "politics" [ a euphemism if I ever heard one] and litigation or anything that smacks of ethics violations.

Today people are reaching out and in the course of current events, which today are severe, one may overlook that one can no more medically prescribe or in some instances -- because a spiritually adept Universal, and maybe Soul, Healer 'can' indeed scan an individual and to exacting ends, no matter the distance -- no more spiritually advise a person without him or her being in-person to merit the best odds for diagnosis or in the case of religious counseling, thorough consultation.

Yet, there is, or at least we should hold, that disclaimers should be assumed in effect and implicit in what is put forward on any remove medium such as YA.

Of course again, we can no more estimate what was in the questioner's heart and mind, especially as regards a mother for her son, a deepest of bond that is exceptionally close naturally.

She's very concerned I suppose and felt no recourse. If this were a question put out by her on the R&S section, and not the Medicine or Health section, she may have felt your response to be callous, especially if she knew you to be a medical professional, which profession and industry today is looked at with jaundice eyes by not few patients.

To wit: " Prayers are nice intentions, but --... He may or may not regain complete function..."

Somehow somewhere herein the above rests the operative impasse perhaps. The very first clause, in fact, may have come off as condescending and of the last sentence, rather indefinite if not dark, equivocating; maybe expressing too little hope, and which response attempts to a precise pattern displayed in the medical community, but has-to for certain reasons as pointed out at the outset.

To a disinterested (detached) reader, though, the answer you gave was quite on point.

But -- ... there 'is' a feeling aspect that might be brought to bear to any pomp and circumstance or event today. Some individuals want it very on point, yes, but equally wish an empathy to indicate without the answerer 'gilding the lily'. In short, less is more.

I see no problem ' in itself ' in your response and suppose maybe the problem lies with the ' of itself,' but that again takes in the context rather than the content of a thing.

I had an answer deleted for an alleged violation, and I appealed the ruling, explaining how I believed that my response did, in fact, address the question asked -- the reason given for the deletion being that I had not answered the question. I disagreed with that assessment. Upon review by Answers' staff, my answer was reinstated. I advise you to appeal the decision. It is possible that the judgment against you was erroneous! Good luck!

The rules are a nonsense here. If you're reported by 'reliable' reporters, you're gone. Then you may have right of appeal, which is not judged according to the rules.

I still appeal when my content is removed, but I'm under no illusions as to the fairness of the process. If it were well-monitored, fair and equitable, there would not be 92000 Obama questions sitting up there stanking up the joint like a gangrenous limb.

There'd be no loaded questions, no trolling questions, no pasted rants. Yahoo has lost interest in trying to monitor this site. Perhaps that's why google stopped their answers site. And it may be why Microsoft walked away...hehe...'OMG, you guys, we can't buy this hellhole!'

I donot see any violation of rule to delate such questions. It may possible that Yahoo Q/A donot like that some one tell the right direction asked by the questioner. If so it is not a healthy procedure adopted by the Yahoo,Q/A. In such cases ,Yahoo,Q/A should clarify the reasons sothat the mistake if any do/done by the questioner can be rectify in future or otherwise? Thanks & A Great Day to the questioner.

It's is absolutely ridiculous how easy it is to get something deleted. Yahoo answers is becoming kind of fascist. I'd say about 15% of my Q&A in RS and Politics gets deleted, I think that the SUper christians either all mantain multiple accounts or they e-mail their friends to put in a lot of reports against anything they don't like.

Hod do you like Kafkaesque string robo-replies you get if you try and contest your content being deleted?

I had an asnwer reinstsated once.

The answer just above mine (or below it, I can;t remember) was trash-mouthed

(anyway; it could have benefited from aphasia!)

Mine was like yours;

When I appealed, I mentioned the adjacent answer.

I believe that someone just "reported" the wrong answer.

Mine was reinstated.

I think the "first round" of question/answer elimination is "auto-generated"... If someone in the community clicks the "report" button, the answer disappears, but it can be appealed...

That's just a hunch, based on my experience... (that and the fact that your question is still posted, above)

Appeal the violation. Your answer was thoughtful and should have been appreciated by the asker. It doesn't violate community guidelines.

The reader who objected may lose their influence after Yahoo! reconsiders your answer.

Unfortunately, it made sense.

Who knows the reasoning behind Yahoo TOS; it's a mystery. Someone asked where they could find a specific verse in the Bible. I gave the reference; I got a violation notice with the reason: Solicitation. I don't think there is any logic to the violation process.