Editing Narconon (section)

===Jocelyne Dorfmann, Grancey-sur-Ource, France (1984)===
In 1984, a 34-year-old French woman named Jocelyne Dorfmann died from an untreated [[epilepsy]] [[seizure]] while undergoing treatment at a Narconon center in [[Grancey-sur-Ource]] (near [[Dijon]]). The assistant-director of that center was convicted<ref>County Court of Dijon: judgment of 9 January 1987 (No 118-87)</ref> of lack of assistance to a person in danger. The Narconon center was closed. Medical experts reported that her death was caused by "an epileptic seizure due to the absence of sufficient treatment at its beginning and of emergency treatment during the seizure". Narconon staff failed to call for medical assistance, as a result of which Dorfmann died.<ref>{{Cite report |first1=Alain |last1=Gest |first2=Jacques |last2=Guyard |display-authors=1 | date = 22 December 1995 | title = Board of Inquiry into Cults |language=en | url = http://www.cftf.com/french/Les_Sectes_en_France/cults.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050306180648/http://www.cftf.com/french/Les_Sectes_en_France/cults.html |archive-date=March 6, 2005 | publisher = [[National Assembly (France)]] | quote = The County Court of Dijon, in addition, was brought, in a judgement of January 9, 1987 (No 118-87), to condemn the director-assistant of the Narconon center of [Grancey-sur-Ource] for nonassistance to someone in danger. This center, created by the Church of Scientology, proposes detoxification by applying the methods of Ron Hubbard, namely the procedure of "purification," based mainly on several hours of sauna per day, "auditions," and a significant absorption of vitamins. In this case, the victim had been in long-term treatment for epilepsy and had addressed this organization because she wished "to be released from drugs." The center A, without preliminary medical examination, placed her in a "weaning" room. However, the medical experts showed that her death was due to "an epileptic seizure due to the absence of sufficient treatment at its beginning and of emergency treatment during the seizure." The judgement does not leave any doubt about the responsibility of the center: "That if Jocelyne Dorfmann had made the decision to reduce her consumption of medication, then to stop it with the risk of compromising her health, the defendants had not at any time prevented it of the need for a medical examination of admission, which would have probably made it possible to contra-indicate the cure of weaning; that it is inconceivable that the victim could be accepted without this examination and serious treatment in spite of her declarations as to her health and her epilepsy, whereas the defendants admitted knowing that in the event of serious illness, medical treatment was not to suffer from interruption; "That if at the time the first crisis occurred, the defendants could mistake its exact nature, the repetition of the crises and their increasing intensity were to evoke to them an origin distinct from a state of lack which, according to medical experts, cannot be confused with an epileptic state; "That they did not consider it useful to directly ask the victim, while she was still conscious, if these demonstrations could correspond to the epileptic fits to which she had referred or to call upon the nearest doctor (...)"}}</ref>