Massage Therapy Body of Knowledge

Comment

Comment by Mike Hinkle on October 30, 2009 at 12:37pm

Carl,

You and yours have argued against regulation almost to the point of not being able to practice. Please look at what you have done and how few choices you actually have left. There are good people trying to help you and you are still yelling, "not in my back yard." You abilities are deminishing because of it. Please, join forces with your agency that is trying to help you and try to come up with solutions other than the course you have chosen thus far. Other professions are trying to make you non-existent and your present course is serving them well.

Comment by Mike Hinkle on October 30, 2009 at 12:30pm

Well thought out, Keith. I wish you well towards these goals. I understand your two-tier method and the reason you need it. It will go a long ways and may be the only way for CA to practice massage. And if there is anyway I can help please let me know. You are doing a great job of keeping the state together.

Comment by Keith Eric Grant on October 30, 2009 at 11:56am

Mike,

What we can do is what we are doing in organizing the profession under the current certification law. This is, in my opinion, the best strategic action currently accessible. Whether or not you personally like the two-tier model, a survey done by ABMP had indicated that it substantially increased support for state regulation and decreased opposition to the same. The higher tier, for all practical purposes is simply a marketing distinction -- it carries with it no additional rights other than title and does not guarantee training in any specific competencies. The two-tier model increased support in large part because it aimed to keep negative economic impacts to an extensive base of existing practitioners and independent schools at a manageable level, something I discussed fully and supported with statistics in the report on California training.

What we also can do is work toward evidence-based practice and outcome-based education, at least as the practice is oriented toward health care (not all is). In that sense, we will have definitive task competencies that can be placed before a legislature. That can go a long way toward countering misinformation and toward leaving egg on the face of those who propagate it.

If the FSMTB can be persuaded to also take the position of evidence-based practice and outcome-based requirements, then it helps to counter turf grabs on the national level. As I've blogged, the chiropractors and PTs have been engaged in an aggressive turf war will willingness to impinge on athletic training and massage therapy as side issues. This is a battle being carried on both in the legislatures of the various states and in the courts.Here is a court case from Arkansas that I recalled, with the Arkansas Supreme Ct ruling. The best defense I see is to be able to point to regulatory requirements and certifications that assure competency is the scope of practice under contention. Such turf battles are, btw, among the reasons that I'd like to see all of health care regulation move toward the kind of overlapping scope regulation used by Ontario, BC, and advocated by the Pew Commission on Health Professions -- essentially title acts except for access to items on a centralized list of specific reserved acts. the motivations are laid out in the BC HPC document on Safe Choices.

Comment by Carl W. Brown on October 30, 2009 at 9:54am

Mike my point is that even when you go to college you have no idea how long it will take. Then there is the issue of hours creep. PT’s used to be 900 hours now it is just about at the master’s level soon to be a doctorate level. Are they better than they used to be? How long will it take before we get to a doctorate in massage?

CEs are a part of all professions that as a part of what they do have to stay current to avoid harm to the public, Doctors need to know about new drugs and procedures and CPAs need to keep up with tax law. What in massage is needed to stay current to avoid harm?

Comment by Mike Hinkle on October 30, 2009 at 9:47am

Noel,

After staying up all night, and going through CA with Keith, I'm not sure you are in any situation to accomplish much. I think I have studied CA enough to say, you have kept regulation at arms distance so long that now, you are on the outside, looking in. Your choices are slimming fast. Without the existing certification...

Had you gone for licensure, back in the sixties, you could have a powerful association and be able to counter the efforts of the Chiros & PTs, that are now carving up what is remaining of your practice. You can't even create your own scope of practice without the CCA directly affecting it.

But with your state in the financial situation it is, even if you wanted to license, it is too late. If therapists sent in money to pay for their own Massage Therapy Board, it wouldn't work. The state would take your budget into it's coffers. I really don't know what is left except certification.

The swipes, as you put it, are based in fact. Because something can not be argued does not make it a swipe. Name a modality that is practiced in CA that would be lost by licensure (If it could exist). There are none. Fact!

CA is one state. And I can appreciate your situation. But from what I have seen, it has been, to a large extent, "self imposed."

Comment by Noel Norwick on October 30, 2009 at 9:16am

Greg: Re definition of massage modalities. Personally, I include all self-proclaimed forms of therapeutically motivated touch based therapies. Predatory commercial self-interest/scope of practice issues present social/legal challenges that make it difficult for us as a field to agree on the definition of massage, much less what constitutes a massage modality.

Comment by Noel Norwick on October 30, 2009 at 9:10am

Mike: Re your "swipes" copied below. What I'm saying is that in CA alternative modalities are innovating/thriving and the cost of entry remains lower than in states that went with licensure and it's scope of practice limitations.

Re "voluntarily quitting", martyrdom for a lost cause is painful. Be careful what you wish for.

I completely agree with your wish for reciprocity between the States, so massage practitioners (regardless of modality) wouldn't be forced to jump through hoops to continue their practice when moving from one state to another.



"This is the healthcare field. Are you saying there are no therapists doing the same modalities done in CA, anywhere else in the U.S.? I bet I can find someone for every modality that you have there. Esalen. energy, reiki, attunement, tuning forks, crystal work pick something. Only those, voluntarily quitting, will stop practicing.

Licensure will not stop any existing modality. I would not support it, if it did. The path, I follow, is for portability of licensure. I want therapists to be able to practice without having to recertify in every state as they move. Therapists have been asking for this for decades. It is going to happen."

Comment by Noel Norwick on October 30, 2009 at 9:01am

Carl: From what I have observe in CA, PTs typically think of us as infringing on their scope of practice given that their licensure permits them to perform massage and rehabilitative exercise. Chiropractors typically think of us as competition (performing gentle/slow passive joint re-alignments) or as potentially inexpensive labor.

Market demand will sustain "alternative" (complementary/integrative) healthcare practices regardless what happens with licensing/certification.

Comment by Mike Hinkle on October 30, 2009 at 3:36am

I got that Carl. Don't you mean" the only way CCA won't oppose?" The legislators vote right, not CCA?

Then there is one answer. Lose passive stretching until you can get it back in. Sounds like the CA therapists need to organize. Is this a restraint of practice issue?

Comment by Keith Eric Grant on October 30, 2009 at 3:27am

Nurses operating within their licenses are nurses. They, as I recall, have considerable leeway within a medical setting, even if they may not have the time.

Nurses have a board under the Department of Consumer Affairs.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 11
• 12
• 13
• 14
• 15
• …
• 51
• Next ›
• Page