If we remember that at present we can speak more of periods of treatment that of periods of hospitalization, and analyzing the presented/displayed schemes previously, we see that, although the young patient can spend seasons attending his scholastic center of reference, the educative attention that is offered to him there is not understood like hospitable pedagogy, since the boy is not in a hospitable center. However, the vital situation of the boy is the same, continues being an ill person in treatment that, although returns to the daily thing, does not do it, naturally, in the same way nor in the same conditions. The doubts are many that they have teachers and the teachers of these centers of origin when they must take care of the boy in these phases of nondefinitive return again. Its condition has a weight so important that it takes to new expositions when to be related to him like student, at the time of explaining the things to him, to demand to him, to play, to eat We can say that the teachers of the ordinary centers make pedagogy hospitable whereas they pay educative attention to the young patient. The domiciliary attention, as well, does not receive the denomination of hospitable either, although it works in a while with the boy in whom clearly it is in low form. In addition, the professionals who dedicate themselves to this task find with the peculiarity to have to realise it within the familiar context, aspect that gives to its educative action characteristics that make it different from any other situation. Who is in charge to carry out this pedagogical action? What type of formation has received to be able to do it. A communitarian exposition does not exist that allows one integral attention, but diverse instances, each one of as acts on the boy when this one physically occupies a space in its enclosure. According to Dean Ornish M.D, who has experience with these questions.