What proof is there that massage can harm others?
Not much according to Keith Grant who wrote this exceptional white paper on it called “Review of Issues in Massage Governance”
Licensing does little to protect us from harm from any practitioner.
The Seattle Times Article “License to Harm” outlines the various healthcare providers and how many cases were sited of harm being done.
If licensing doesn’t protect the public, then what will?
The only answer in my opinion is to make more massage therapists accountable through the process of supervision. Massage therapists are not trained much in such things as ethical relationships or about the therapeutic relationship that occurs.
Related posts:
- Proof of Harm in Massage Therapy One of the reasons that massage licensing boards and other...
- Proof of Harm One of the challenges we are faced with as massage...
- Colorado Massage Licensing Colorado made an attempt to license massage statewide but after...
- Peer Supervision Groups I just took a look at the latest version of...
- Recession Proof Your Massage Business 5 Steps to Recession Proof Your Massage Business. Just like...
Licensing isn’t really a way to protect the public, although it’s pushed as a way. If you have a licence, and then do something to harm the public, then you may have your licence removed. Although a possible deterrent and useful in possibly staving off harm, licensing is really designed to restrict who can do a particular thing, and how to punish them if they step out of the bounds of the licensing agreement. I had a blog posting covering this which I lost, and I’m in the process of putting it together again.
Supervision might be one of the answers, but the problem is in enforcing it. If the enforcement of it is tied into licensing, then it still will be ineffective because there will always be a first instance of harm (or possible instance) that requires then that you report the offender to the licensing body.
Supervision/peer mentoring is a two way voluntary process and a number of practitioners may not share details or get invvolved. Wanting to be involved in a peer group that monitors each other really will include those that are ethical to begin with, and that have no problem with others commenting on their business practices. There will always be others who chose not to be involved. If peer supervision is enforced then it becomes far too “big brother” and suffers from a number of other problems.