Massage Therapy Body of Knowledge

Comment

Comment by Carl W. Brown on October 26, 2009 at 10:01am

Mike, “If I were the Massage Guru. There would be no rules, no laws and it would be peace. Unfortunately, we can not agree amongst ourselves”. Lets build something that we can all agree with. I think the basic problem is that we have two competing interests. One wants to set standards for massage therapist that will improve the public image of massage in insure that when people graduate from school, that they provide a better quality of service. The other group feels that either a better way to learn is is stages or that these standards threaten their livelihood with significant costs that will not benefit their practice. Others feel that we need a way for people to try the work at a lower commitment level because we as an industry have a very high dropout rate especially among men.

I believe that the MTBOK can be converted into a standard of what the industry would like to see a person who calls them self a “massage therapist” to have. Firstly the document must make it clear that this is not a practice guideline and that this represents only one form of bodywork called massage. Also I think that one can set core standards of skills that all massage therapist must have and that it is expected that a massage therapist have x number of hours of elective training from this set of skills and y number of hours of supervised practice. This take care of the issue like I want to me and MT but I don’t believe in energy or conversely I want to add energetic modalities to may practice and would like to learn them as part of the training I want for my practice.

Setting standards for the term “massage therapist” take to problem of having to prove competency or restricting the practice of other bodyworkers. If we as an industry can state they we have a consensus that massage and bodywork is save but that we need a title act to insure quality we have done what we should do. Because control of prostitution is a factor in the political equation we also should state that we believe that a title act is just as effective as a practice act because if prostitutes violate anything it is the title protection portions of any license.

I think they should change the document to indicate that it is a standard for calling oneself a massage therapist and then identify the core KSAs that they feel are essential for any type of MT and set competency levels for thouse. The rest is elective.

Testing would be easier because the test would only have to cover the core competencies and the electives would be covers in terms of hours. This would be something like I described for basic Swedish. Then if a person wants to do medical massage they could that courses in details anatomy, physiology etc., but if they want to do spa work that they could spend time learning, wraps, hydrotherapy, hot and cold stones etc. and not lots of information that they will forget in 6 months.

Comment by Mike Hinkle on October 25, 2009 at 2:52pm

Not one thing, Noel! This is all our opinions and that's all.

Comment by Mike Hinkle on October 25, 2009 at 2:48pm

Carl,

I am not a lawyer to convince anyone of anything. I don't feel, getting the states to agree to a single set of standards hurts anyone. If you choose to practice an activity, that a state chooses to regulate, that is between you and them. And yes, if the state deems you need further knowledge that is up to them. So scream. People that don't like it probably will join you. Even Brita Ostrom at the institute said she used to rebel at the rules being placed on the profession. There will be more, so expect them.

I do not want to add any meaning to anything. I want one set of standards, instead of the confusion that exists across the board now. If it were left to me Carl. If I were the Massage Guru. There would be no rules, no laws and it would be peace. Unfortuanately, we can not agree amongst ourselves, these activities are happening in states, so boards and legislators will take care of it for us.

Comment by Noel Norwick on October 25, 2009 at 2:32pm

Mike: Please clarify what you think someone in this "Group's" thread has done or said that hinders the MTBOK task force members from achieving their objective?

Comment by Carl W. Brown on October 25, 2009 at 2:30pm

Mike, when I see committees setting standards that hurt people like me and the only justification is that the new laws will make them look better because they can inflate the public view of their profession by padding the requirements then yes I will scream. I am open to a logical approach to licensing. Convince me that I and other like me lack the education needed to do our work and I will be glad to go back to school. But what I see now is protectionism and I do not like what I see.

I can understand that you may want to add meaning to the words “massage therapist” and I can see that as a laudable goal but do so in a way they others who want to do other forms of body work are not hurt. I don’t think that is too much to ask. Lets other who do hands on healing set their own standards as long as they do not present a significant threat to public harm.

Comment by Keith Eric Grant on October 25, 2009 at 2:21pm

Yes Carl. Everything I see in the BC HPC scope of practice review says that their authorization is a title act and that the HPC explicitly noted that they did not wish to allow the College of Massage Therapy to infringe on rights of unregulated practice. I should also note the BC simply uses "Massage Therapist" or MT, while it is Ontario that uses RMT. The HPC denied the reservation of Massage Practitioner, leaving that for unregulated massage.

On another bit entirely, I previously linked to the public data on massage actions available from the National Practitioner Data Bank. The link is the same, but I've updated the file to the currently available data through June 2009. You should see a public file reflecting that data and 49 records, both given at the top. If not, reload the page in your browser.

Comment by Mike Hinkle on October 25, 2009 at 2:16pm

Some schools are tremendous and others need closed down. If a school can not afford to pay teachers enough, they should close their doors. This is not hurting trade, this is improving the profession.

One standard needs to be set. As many states agree could start the process, just like BC started. It wasn't too long ago, no body was licensed. Now, most states are. Agreeing states could have portability. I think this is the way to go.

Comment by Mike Hinkle on October 25, 2009 at 2:09pm

Carl,

The industry has tried to set standards for therapists and schools and when they have you and many have resisted. I have read many of your discussions on massage body politics.

Legislators will be all that is left to set standards, except for the FSMTB which soon will be setting standards. I only wonder how much resistance you will have towards those efforts. But these will also eventually have to be approved by legislators. That is America. Yes they listen to doctors, lawyers, Chiros and everyone just about except for MTs about massage therapy. Why? We don't have a strong enough lobby.

Given the chance, the BOK will deliver what is needed. The industry, as you put it, has chosen a great group to come up with the document. Give them the chance to set the levels and get closer to the finish than at the beginning.

Comment by Carl W. Brown on October 25, 2009 at 1:48pm

Keith, I guess you are saying that the BC RMT is a title act for people wanting to practice in the healthcare field. This does not stop people from doing other forms of bodywork.

Comment by Carl W. Brown on October 25, 2009 at 1:46pm

Mike, I agree that there are some very good schools out there. I also think that they need guidance in the form of standards that are set by the industry. Unfortunately I think they it is a bad idea for schools to teach to the test set for state imposed licensing standards. I also think that we need self-assessment standards for practitioners as well as teacher training. I think that both a minimal proficiency set of standards as well a guide to what an ideal set of skills is needed for massage therapy are valuable to the schools.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 19
• 20
• 21
• 22
• 23
• …
• 51
• Next ›
• Page