Pennsylvania Massage Therapists & Bodyworkers

Comment

Comment by Sherry Maracz Bayda on October 7, 2010 at 11:03am

I'm a recent grad of NMTI, in Falls Church, VA. I have little experience working as a MT. My family just relocated to PA, north of Philly. Looking for any advise abobut working as a MT in PA. Will be looking for part-time work soon. I do have my nat'l certification, but unsure about state requirements.

Comment by Jeffrey A. Lutz on October 6, 2010 at 6:05pm

Thanks Tom - It indicates a date, but I don't see the word "public" anywhere in there... of course I am reading all of this on a phone so I may be missing something

Comment by Tom Florio on October 6, 2010 at 5:56pm

The link you posted indicates PUBLIC MEETING DATE. I would assume Harrisburg, but I don't know for certain.

Comment by Jeffrey A. Lutz on October 6, 2010 at 5:51pm

Do you know if the meeting is public and if so where will it be held?

Comment by Tom Florio on October 6, 2010 at 5:38pm

This is unbelievable. I am almost tempted to attend the public meeting on October 12th.

Comment by Jeffrey A. Lutz on October 6, 2010 at 12:08pm

The PAMT Board just withdrew its Final Form Regulation by request of the House Professional Licensure Committee. They are holding a special meeting on October 12th to consider possible revisions to the regulations.

http://www.irrc.state.pa.us/Regulations/RegInfo.cfm?IRRCNo=2843

Scroll to the bottom under "related documents".

Unfortunately it looks as if MT's will possibly loose some scope as a result because I don't know what else they will be revising?

Comment by Tom Florio on October 5, 2010 at 6:21pm

It looks like the PAMT Board is ready to start accepting applications.

Comment by Jeffrey A. Lutz on September 23, 2010 at 8:41pm

Interestingly they note that the practice of massage therapy in the commonwealth is not one of the "healing arts". That's fine, but massage therapy will be governed under "health related boards" as in: http://www.recovery.pa.gov/portal/server.pt/community/state_board_o...


Also, we know that the board of Cosmetology is not a part of the healing arts and it is under "Business Related Boards" as in: http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/state_boar...

This is a bit of confusion to me. If MT's in the Commonwealth are not part of the "Healing Arts", then where is the need for a CPR course or 'referral to a medical professional' coming into play?

This license, to me, is very muddled in its language. I am actually not so pressed on being able to "order/order the use of a medical device", but would like to at least be able to use it under other orders from a medical provider as many massage therapists do in other states. Also, medical devices in the Commonwealth fall under different scrutiny than pharmaceuticals. There is a distinction between devices and pharmaceuticals in both professional licensure and in their distribution.

Furthermore, "treatment" of anything indicates an healing intervention of some type that does not seem like a 'business' intervention, rather a healing one.

All in all, I am not exactly happy nor upset about this legislation --- more confused than anything. The terminology and language used seems to contradict itself, which is nearly the only thing consistant with the bill. I also realize that they "had to do what they had to do" to get this passed -- 16 years is a long time to try to do something. My gripe is they got backed into a corner by other groups, forcing the language in the bill -- language which makes it 'kinda ok' to practice as we were educated, but 'kinda not ok too".

Comment by Tom Florio on September 23, 2010 at 7:32pm

I've just finished skimming the FINAL Regulation submitted to the PA IRRC. In the preamble the Massage Board addresses the concerns raised by all of the entities and individuals concerning any ambiguities, scope of practice concerns, and wording.

With regard to the PPTA, the Massage Board held its ground and did not back down. None of their suggestions or concerns were given merit. They were also informed that "therapeutic massage" is not solely in their scope, but by law, ours as well. WIN FOR US!

They did however shoot down Jeff's "Spray and Stretch" argument. Sorry Jeff!

Comment by Ray Mingo on September 23, 2010 at 6:39pm

Document-18583.pdf

This document is very troublesome to me as a massage therapist. While it is true that some soft tissue conditions may be caused by diseases and can be a secondary symptoms of disease which takes it out of our scope of practice; there are just as many (maybe more) soft tissue dysfunctions that are cause by repetitive motion, sedentary life style, injuries (occupational, accidental or sports related), etc. and are primarily musculoskeletal conditions.
This is one reason why when a client comes to me with what may seem to be a muscular condition I ask them have they seen or suggest that they seen there doctor; to rule out to rule out any cause other than musculoskeletal. This is what all massage therapist should do who banners under the names of orthopedic, deep tissue, clinical even sports massage therapist.


While I have the utmost respect for doctors some things are just out of their scope of practice too. As a massage therapist who put himself under the banner of "orthopedic/deep tissue/sports massage therapist"; I spend countless tireless hires and money studying how muscles work (muscular anatomy) that means also the nerves and arteries that are embedded through them.

I must apologize, Jeffrey I have not kept up with the state board issues as I should have. Is there anything we as PA massage therapist can do; in a proactive way to express our dislike for this portion of the regulation.

I also must express that I meant no disrespect to massage therapist who prefers to practice relaxation/spa massage; what you do also plays an important roll in the physical and mental well being of the clients we serve.

So what can we do? Does this sound more bureaucratic for the already well established “healthcare system.” wanting to be the only option for the physical well being of men keeping other options at bay?

Again I must personally apologize for not being as involved as I should have been in this process of a career I love so well.

Thanks Jeffery for the eye opener.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Next ›
• Page