Complementary Therapists Association - Forums
Posted by Edith Maskell, Sep 2 2007 4:13PM

Please do not use forums to advertise courses.

Forums Disclaimer



With all the disturbing things that are going on within Regulation at present, I would be interested to hear CThA's response to the fact that Reflexology, Aromatherapy and Reiki have been excluded by the Foundation for Integrated Health from participating in further discussions on the Federal Working Group.

I am also aware that the Foundation for Integrated Health have been communicating with individual practitioners asking them "if they are aware how their professional associations are acting on their behalf?". The appropriateness of which remains a mystery to me.

Perhaps I can use this Forum to ask whether CThA are in support of the Foundation's unusual act. Additionaly, how would CTHA advise we should respond if we get such an email from the Foundation (Kim Lavely, Chief Executive?.

I am aware that John Dent (though retired and not a practitioner) is the "alternative" FWG representative on the Massage Council. I am confused about the fact that although he and the main representative participated in separate meetings with the other 3 professions (Reflexology, Reiki and Aromatherapy) as a result, the other 3 professions were excluded from the FWG? I should like to hear John's views as to why he thinks the Massage Council were saved from exclusion?

I gather that the Foundation are pursuing a model of regulation which may prove quite expensive for the multi disciplined practitioner to register and likely to be detrimental to the future of the professions themselves. As in, they will lose control of educational matters and accredition etc.

As a multi disciplined practitioner (who would very much like to register in all the therapies in which I am qualified) I should like to know what reassurance CThA can give me that my best interests will be kept very close to their heart with regard to their input on all the regulatory and that commercial interests will not be uppermost.

I am ever mindful that past GCP members are aware that John Beney (as a practitioner himself) had immense passion and energy that the best interests of the multi disciplined practitioner was paramount, (which was the reason we joined CThA in the first place)! As a representative of CThA on the regulatory front for almost 10 years, that was always my mandate.

The future of CThA members lay in your hands John - can we rest assured that you and CTHA - in general - are acting as energetically and passionatelly as John B in "fighting our corner" across ALL the professions - on all the regulatory councils - in which CThA is involved? John B was not a popular man in some circules. It didn't concern him, his interests were the best interests of his members and their professional future.

My missive is to beg that a professional organisation in which I have been involved for a very long time has the courage to speak out with passion and confidence in our support.

I appreciate that we find ourselves in difficult and highly political times where there are fears of commercial failure. However, I feel it's definitely not a time to be sitting on the fence. Our organisation (to which many of us have been very loyal over the years) owe it to us to fight our corner. It's time to stand up and be counted.

Edith Maskell

PS Anyone who wishes to contact me for more information on the current regulatory situation or my personal views or would like me to make a presentation to their local group - please contact me on on or telephone 01689 879280

Patricia Taylor
Sep 6 2007 2:42PM
Am I the only person who is completely baffled by all this?
Mariette Lobo
Sep 6 2007 5:28PM
I am baffled, ashamed, embarrassed and feel very let down by those claiming to represent members' interests.

This whole thing is fast descending into farce!

I am thoroughly fed up with all the in-fighting, egos, and hidden agendas that have nothing to do with the interests of the wider membership - whatever the therapy. I have that jammy vu feeling (haven't we been down this unholistic road several times before?) and I would not be happy for us to break off into splinter groups.

If this is the future, it's grim, a damned shame, an opportunity lost, and I vote we stay just as we are.

Mariette Lobo

Joyce Laurie
Sep 7 2007 7:32PM
I have had an email forwarded from the SIR from what appears to be the representatives of the Reflexology Forum.

Even after having read it I am still very, very unclear as to what is going on.

Frankly i don't know who IS representing us. As an aromatherapist, reiki master and reflexologist I guess it is in my interest to investigate this more thoroughly

Mariette Lobo
Sep 7 2007 9:09PM
There seem to be concurrent discussions on the same topic on 2 different forums 1)General Discussion and 2) Regulation and CAM, which makes responding to comments or adding one's own a bit tricky!
Patricia Taylor
Sep 11 2007 8:12PM
I agree: let's move to the CAM and regulation forum for all further debate.

Post Reply |

| Back Up to General Discussion