Name:
Location: Berkeley, CA, United States

Wednesday, June 27, 2007

We need a lobbyist to serve OUR interests. My letter to the Business and Professions Committee may be falling on deaf or shut off ears.

Dear Senator Oropeza (via fax) and Assembly Committee on Business and Professions:

SB731, as it is written, is not good for consumers or future providers of touch.

I have written extensively (see links below) in opposition to the state level licensing or certification of massage aka massage therapy. Now I want to suggest a licensing program that would be good for all, rather than for the benefit of those providing programs of 250 hours or more of training in a state approved program.

Albeit reluctantly, I agree ALL those providing massage or touch for income should be licensed by the state for the following reasons:
  • It is too easy in an unlicensed environment for activity outside of straightforward massage to be provided by folk involved in illegal activities. Fingerprinting and an application would immediately criminalize those not willing to go through a simple process.
  • A very large pool of folk from all levels of training would reduce the expense of the basic requirements of licensing which I believe should be comparable to those for operating a motor vehicle.
  • It would be beneficial to legitimate professionals because of having an easily acquired ID they could use on a statewide basis.
  • It would be beneficial to employers who could use the system for background checks. Hospitals, insurance providers, Chiros and other licensed healthcare providers could be mandated to employ only those with certain levels of training.
  • Licensing would be beneficial to cities and counties because of having a resource for a background check for those looking to work in their community. It would be beneficial to consumers who bother to ask for credentials.

An online resource comparable to that of the Ohio massage board could be a resource for the public. http://www.med.ohio.gov/MTlicexam.htm Rather than being only medical, the board would be broader.

Following are opening suggestions for state licensing:

First, one needs to acquire a learners permit... Fingerprinting, background check and proof one has agreed to learn from a Registered Class A license holder for at least one hour of formal training or is registering at an approved institution. A test could be created that would test a persons knowledge of the law, very much like the test given to folk wanting to drive a motor vehicle:

  • 1-99 hours of formal training gets a Class C license... Holder is free to market themselves as a Class C provider of touch.
  • 100-499 hours of formal training at a state approved institution gets a Class B license... Holder is free to market themselves as a Class B provider of touch
  • 500 hours of training or more at a state approved institution gets a Class A license... Holder is free to market themselves as a Massage Therapist

I choose the word provider as opposed to practitioner because I do not believe many practice doing massage. One provides massage at all kinds of levels of expertise. Medical folk practice medicine.

In closing, California is the home of the Human Potential Movement which began in the 1960's at Esalen. California has been a bellwether state in many arenas. Make California a bellwether state keeping the field of touch/massage wide open to all that wish to indulge rather than just to those laying out large amounts of money that would benefit the coffers of schools and other industry segments. I have been providing touch since 1986.

My initial training was 100 hours. The training has yet to end.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home