Should Massage Be Regulated in Vermont?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Chris L. Widlund on October 12, 2010 at 7:19am

I fully support this action and have been a part of it from the beginning. Please visit the AMTA-VT & ABMP supported blog, Vermont Massage Regulation, for more details on how this process works in Vermont.

Permalink Reply by Kevin Clark on October 12, 2010 at 7:51am

Hi Chris, and thanks for providing the Vermont Massage Regulation link.

I practice in both Vermont and New Hampshire, and I'm a member of the AMTA and ABMP. Since I'm a member of the NH chapter of the AMTA, I've missed out on relevant communications from the VT chapter. I'm working on getting up to speed and had the opportunity to speak with Jean Robinson of ABMP and Sally Hacking of the FSMTB over the weekend.

Kevin

Permalink Reply by Daniel Cohen on October 12, 2010 at 8:02am

Good luck!

Permalink Reply by Kelly Sanders, LMT on October 12, 2010 at 11:45am

While not licensed or practicing in or near Vermont, I believe every State should have stringent licensing laws and that prostitutes fronting as MTs should be brought up on all charges.

Permalink Reply by Chris L. Widlund on October 12, 2010 at 1:26pm

Kevin, I am so glad you were able to catch up with Jean & Sally last weekend. October 29th is the next big date on our agenda. The Vermont Office of Professional Regulations will be hosting the Sunrise Public Hearing on whether there is a need to regulate massage therapy in Vermont. The public hearing is in Montpelier at 9a. Any chance you will be able to attend?

Permalink Reply by Kathleen Emma Coleman on October 12, 2010 at 8:20pm

Hi Kevin: Thanks for the invite. My massage school teacher did not believe in the need for licensing. I am only certified with ABMP. I am not licensed;but feel I am just as capable as someone that is. I think licensing has a lot to do with politics; state wanting more money, etc. Will they have a grandfather clause? Kathleen Kevin Clark said:

Hi Chris, and thanks for providing the Vermont Massage Regulation link.

I practice in both Vermont and New Hampshire, and I'm a member of the AMTA and ABMP. Since I'm a member of the NH chapter of the AMTA, I've missed out on relevant communications from the VT chapter. I'm working on getting up to speed and had the opportunity to speak with Jean Robinson of ABMP and Sally Hacking of the FSMTB over the weekend.

Kevin

Permalink Reply by Daniel Cohen on October 13, 2010 at 8:55am

Kathleen, while I am not a Vermont Therapist your statement raises my curiosity. Don't cities, townships and or counties require a business license to do massage? One of the major reasons that Massage Therapists have pushed for state licensing in California was the disparate laws between cities which charged high license fees and restricted massage by zoning as well as other business problems being regulated as a local adult entertainer. Not only has state certification opened up the market but it has raised professional standards (many localities had no education requirement to register as an MT) and clarified our standing as health care professionals. My question is, wouldn't this be applicable in Vermont?


Kathleen Emma Coleman said:

Hi Kevin: Thanks for the invite. My massage school teacher did not believe in the need for licensing. I am only certified with ABMP. I am not licensed;but feel I am just as capable as someone that is. I think licensing has a lot to do with politics; state wanting more money, etc. Will they have a grandfather clause? Kathleen Kevin Clark said:

Hi Chris, and thanks for providing the Vermont Massage Regulation link.

I practice in both Vermont and New Hampshire, and I'm a member of the AMTA and ABMP. Since I'm a member of the NH chapter of the AMTA, I've missed out on relevant communications from the VT chapter. I'm working on getting up to speed and had the opportunity to speak with Jean Robinson of ABMP and Sally Hacking of the FSMTB over the weekend.

Kevin

Permalink Reply by Sheryl Rapee-Adams on October 13, 2010 at 4:22pm

Daniel Cohen said:

Kathleen, while I am not a Vermont Therapist your statement raises my curiosity. Don't cities, townships and or counties require a business license to do massage?Don't cities, townships and or counties require a business license to do massage?

Nope. Vermont's cities, towns, and counties do NOT require a business license specific to massage therapy. Massage therapists' fees here include liability and malpractice insurance, rent, utilities, professional supplies, etc., but not business licenses or inspections.

If cities, towns, and counties have an onerous piecemeal system as you described California's, the answer would be to eliminate those onerous bureaucratic regulations, not to force bodyworkers to jump through hoops.

Permalink Reply by Sheryl Rapee-Adams on October 13, 2010 at 4:28pm

My husband and I are ABMP members who have had a Vermont bodywork business for over a decade. We strongly oppose regulation in Vermont. We have seen no evidence that regulating massage protects public health and safety or enhances the profession of massage and bodywork.

If someone opposes prostitution, let them push for stronger enforcement of laws against it. States with massage licensing such as Florida have just as much prostitution posing as "massage" as they did before licensing. I oppose burdening massage therapists because non-massage therapists may break the law.

We will stay active to prevent yet another state from falling into the licensing trap. Massage regulation is expensive and onerous for good bodyworkers while utterly failing to prevent the problems its proponents claim it will.

Permalink Reply by Sheryl Rapee-Adams on October 15, 2010 at 9:27am

Michelle, I'm glad that someone who had sworn never to get another massage found it in herself to try again. I am wondering how you see licensing/regulating bodywork in Vermont as prevention for such incidents. As far as I know, it doesn't prevent them in states that regulate bodywork.

Of course, if a bodyworker commits physically or sexually inappropriate behavior, that is a criminal matter separate from professional regulation.



Michelle Robbins said:

I am also fully in support of licensing for massage therapists in Vermont. I am an educator in a massage program and supervisor of massage therapists. I also have worked in the Resort insustry in Stowe for many years. I see somewhere between 700-1,000 unique clients per year due to the nature of my work--vacationers, visitors to the area coming for massage. I have completely lost count how many times I have heard, both from my local population, and from these visitors, stories of abuse and damage caused by poorly trained or ethically challenged mt's. When an "older" woman tells me she went for a massage many years ago, but swore she would never get another one because she was either sexually offended, or injured by a massage therapist, I have one more reason why this push for licensure is important. True, we will never have 100% safety for our clients. There's a jerk in every crowd. But we can certainly get the number down to something more reasonable than what I am experiencing.

Permalink Reply by Peter Johnke on October 16, 2010 at 5:46pm

I am also strongly opposed to regulation in Vermont. There is no evidence that it will make things safer for Vermonter and it will greatly limit the practice and cost more money. I also think there is a hidden agenda going on. Once regulated it is hoped that [eventually] massage therapy will be covered by insurance and "certified" therapists can get reimbursement. This will be a huge mistake as many Nauturopathic Physicians have found out. The insurance companies will tell you what you can and cannnot do (what's reimburseable) and then they take forever to pay -- if at all. So initally you see a lot more clients, but no cash, and have to hire staff to deal with the insurance companies. Ultimately less working with clients and more hassles.
Sheryl Rapee-Adams said:

My husband and I are ABMP members who have had a Vermont bodywork business for over a decade. We strongly oppose regulation in Vermont. We have seen no evidence that regulating massage protects public health and safety or enhances the profession of massage and bodywork.

If someone opposes prostitution, let them push for stronger enforcement of laws against it. States with massage licensing such as Florida have just as much prostitution posing as "massage" as they did before licensing. I oppose burdening massage therapists because non-massage therapists may break the law.

We will stay active to prevent yet another state from falling into the licensing trap. Massage regulation is expensive and onerous for good bodyworkers while utterly failing to prevent the problems its proponents claim it will.

Permalink Reply by Sheryl Rapee-Adams on October 16, 2010 at 5:55pm

Peter, I completely agree with you. I think insurance coverage for massage will turn practitioners into technicians, limited to a homogeneous body of techniques for specified time durations. Bodywork will move away from being the healing profession it can be.

We've worked with a few clients whose treatments are covered by injury claim settlements and state programs. The paperwork required is rarely relevant to the work we do. We want no part of the insurance industry or bureaucrats making decisions about our work with clients.

If some bodyworkers want to be covered by health insurance, let them and the insurance companies set up a voluntary credentialing process and registry. To regulate all Vermont bodyworkers for this purpose is just wrong.


Peter Johnke said:

I am also strongly opposed to regulation in Vermont. There is no evidence that it will make things safer for Vermonter and it will greatly limit the practice and cost more money. I also think there is a hidden agenda going on. Once regulated it is hoped that [eventually] massage therapy will be covered by insurance and "certified" therapists can get reimbursement. This will be a huge mistake as many Nauturopathic Physicians have found out. The insurance companies will tell you what you can and cannnot do (what's reimburseable) and then they take forever to pay -- if at all. So initally you see a lot more clients, but no cash, and have to hire staff to deal with the insurance companies. Ultimately less working with clients and more hassles.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page