Massage Therapy Body of Knowledge

Comment

Comment by Mike Hinkle on November 6, 2009 at 10:46pm

And I agree with both of you. Basic as possible....

Comment by Bert Davich on November 6, 2009 at 10:44pm

Hello Shawn,
Thanks for bringing a "non scientifically quantifiable, medically provable, regulatory necessary" view point back to this discussion.

Comment by Shawn Maria Brinza on November 6, 2009 at 10:36pm

I don't mean to sound like it needs no regulation but lets not complicate things just because the opportunity has allowed us to do so... Students are only as good as the schools that guide them. A basic program that is complete. Isnt that the main goal? Figuring out what BASIC means to everyone... What is enough training to get you out there with basic qualification...

Comment by Mike Hinkle on November 6, 2009 at 10:15pm

Hi Shawn,

There is more to regulation of massage than just because of the injury issue. If you really wish to keep the gentle profession and be able to practice it as is, you need regulation.

The reason is obvious in CA. Because they did not license, they have professions that carve off pieces of their scope of practice and have no state board to protect their profession. Now with the state budget crunch in CA, the odds are it will be a long while before, if ever, they do. The Chiros and the PTs have state boards.

I have heard of damage caused by massage, however it is not common. I agree overall this is a gentle profession, one that needs to be protected, through regulation, to make sure it does stay around. This needs addressed now, while we still can.

Comment by Shawn Maria Brinza on November 6, 2009 at 9:57pm

Guys, massage is the most gental profession on the earth. we are not doctors and I have never know or heard of anyone being injured by massage. I'm not saying that it won't or doesnt happen but the true cases of people injured compared to other professional mishaps are far and few between. we should be teaching massage to our children as a preventive medicine instead of fighting over how many rules we can make up to justify the money we want to charge... Basic massage is basic,,,please keep that in perspective...No matter what state you are from... thanks for listening

Comment by Mike Hinkle on November 6, 2009 at 9:08pm

Carl, we will not stop this process because of whatever special skills you have. You say it is not massage modality anyways. As long as the state doesn't say it is, you'll be in your "hearing mode".

If they deem it is massage, the world will not end if you have to learn Swedish massage. You can unlearn it again, as many regular therapists have proved can be done, hence the question, "Is Swedish Dead?", that is circulating the industry.

You can't cherry pick what about massage you like and want to use, call your self a certified therapist and then be a therapist also cherry picking which rules you will adhere to. You are currently allowed to do just this. I hope others will see this is not a professional way to apply standards and is why we need to set standards and improve our industry. I think you can handle Swedish. You can do it, I have faith in you!

Oh yea- the chinese woman should have come up to you and said, "Hey buddy, if you were agentleman, you'd allow me in front of you." At some point, I hope they do stand up. Ancient customs like these and the way arabic countries treat women is wrong and time will change them. We just need to open their minds. So should ideas change like, it will ruin your ability to do your work. If you approach it like that, it probably will. Open up and grow. I promise, you will be okay.

Comment by Carl W. Brown on November 6, 2009 at 8:35pm

Mike, standing in line a Chinese woman got behind me standing about 4” back. In this country that would constitute an invasion of your personal space. I think that is probably why Asian drivers have the reputation of being poor drivers. Most Americans are aware of things approaches them whether it be people or cars. I have a smaller personal space than most people in this country. I am comfortable in crowded spaces and packed elevators but when I drive I turn off the radio and music and mentally track all the cars around me. You cannot be both.

Learning massage was the same thing. I had to turn off listening to the tissues. Otherwise I would “hear” the tissues screaming at me saying stop what you are doing and pay attention to me. Learning deep tissue was even harder. Using forearms, elbows etc. was like chalk on the backboard. I could hear the tissues screaming.

When I finished my classes the first thing to go was the SOAP notes. Doing an assessment and deciding ahead of time how I was going to approach the problem was getting in the way of listening because my mind had already decided how to proceed. Even more so the role of healer fixing client is a seductive one. I had to change how I worked with clients where it is the client’s body that is doing the work. I am more of a coach listening and giving his or her tissues feedback and suggestion of things that I don’t coconsciously fully understand.

Yes when needed I intervene and use my training to put tendon’s back in place align joints, fix nerves, empty lungs or heal bones but it is not the basic framework that I use.

By forcing people like me to take Swedish training you are forcing people like me to go underground much like your example of how the NC Massage Parlor Law did for massage therapists.

Doing a BOK properly help everyone understand what it really takes to train an MT in a way that really reflects in a person’s performance. This is more than just knowledge but also attitude, way of thinking etc.

Comment by Carl W. Brown on November 6, 2009 at 2:37pm

Keith, before we even consider proving harm from energy work, we should look to see if the model even supposes permanent harm. If the practitioner unbalances a person’s energy, can another practitioner restore it with no lasting harm? If there is not theory of lasting harm from energetic work then we can move on to just focus on physical and mental harm.

However, I think the BOK should focus on what most people thing of when they use the term massage namely Swedish relaxation and Swedish based therapeutic work. It should be clear that the standard does not cover bodywork that is done in street cloths and is not called “massage”. If the standard only covers basic Swedish it is a start but not complete. It it only covers therapeutic work then schools will teach to a standard that most practitioners will forget and become meaningless in real life because it will not be what clients experience in spas and the like.

Bad standards sty around. Look at the NCE. There have been minor changes over the years but it still suffers from the same basic flaws.

. http://www.massagetoday.com/massagepoll/03archive/10_03.php

Comment by Mike Hinkle on November 6, 2009 at 1:59pm

Hi Keith,

I'm sure the BOK will undergo much scrutiny before the project is over. That said, there is a long way to go. Will the MTBOK be finished, upon it's presentation to the public, in May,2010? That, I would say is forgetaboutit!

Your, and others critiques, are forthcoming and will be needed, at different stages of this effort. Again, folks need to read the Task Force Duties assigned to this "initial" task force at www.mtbok.org and understand that levels will be determined later, per stake holders duties, as assigned at present.

Comment by Keith Eric Grant on November 6, 2009 at 1:39pm

Mike, this is not likely to be a "just submit your critiques to the BOK board" matter. If that's your expectation forgedaboutit. That isn't the way science and health care work. Ultimately, I expect to see peer-reviewed critiques of the BOK published in the academic literature. I may even collaborate with others in writing such a critique. All I can say at this point on that prospect is that I would do my level best as a scientist to provide an objective critique looking both at massage knowledge and what I do and will know of health care developments at the time. I would hold anyone I collaborate with in authoring an article to that same standard.

Now, I also hope to get back to extracting something interesting on the structure of massage knowledge using some set of articles and latent semantic analysis, ... (did start some coding on this a couple of years ago).

A lot of this, for me, would also simply be getting back to creating a competency definition library and a knowledge project -- projects that I had to set aside for a while to handle some other vagaries of life, But, expect that there will be different teams of researchers looking at various aspects of the structure and interconnections of massage knowledge and how that relates to competency management.

BTW, the Massage Magazine article on the web of regulation isn't mine. Just a two-part look at the costs and benefits done by the Massage Mag staff a few years ago. It is, I believe, worth the look.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 8
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12
• …
• 51
• Next ›
• Page