Please do not use forums to advertise courses.
like most profesional practitioners that i have spoken to i am totaly feed up with the wholw proccess. talk about regulation has beeb going on since i qualifies back in 1997, and we are still no further on.
during that time the name of the so called profesional assocciation that i joined has been changed ( without reference to the menbership ) no less than four times. i now discover that the name is owned by some media company that i have never heard of.
the information coming from the assocciotions about the regulation procces has at the best been scetchy and at the worst totaly useless.
IT ABOUT TIME WE THERAPISTS STOOD UP AND SAID ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
|Keith A. Meager|
May 28 2009 10:37AM
|When I look at the piece posted here by Raymond, I really feel disappointed. What impression is Raymond giving just by his spelling and grammar? What message is this sending out about the quality of Complementary Therapists?
I think it's time we started embracing Regulation and seeing all the positive aspects of it. It is early days, and it must be acknowledged that there has been much debate, and no doubt, many mistakes made. But the more we strive towards professional standards, the more we are aligned with other healthcare professionals, the more we commit to learning, the sooner we will be accepted as an integral part of the healthcare community. Above all friends, the more we do to improve our professional standards, the more people will benefit from the range of therapies we have worked so hard to become competent to deliver.
So please, let us stop banging on about the drawbacks of regulation, and start thinking about why we are therapists in the first place, and how we can best make a significant contribution to the health and wellbeing of our people.
Keith A Meager
The Reiki Journey
Jul 25 2009 2:25PM
|a big 'hear hear' for Keith! A therapist actually interested in progressing his profession!|
Mar 5 2010 5:25PM
|Tut tut, that poor chap might have dyslexia for all you both know!|
|Keith A. Meager|
Mar 5 2010 5:37PM
Yes indeed he might, a condition with which I have much empathy. However, this is a public forum, and I feel strongly that as professional therapists we should be prepared to demonstrate that we are credible practitioners in the market place. How on earth do therapists expect to practice without high professional standards? No disability should preclude a person being a qualified and professional practitioner, but surely it is vital that we present our credentials in our shop window to the highest of standards commensurate with our colleagues in the medical and allied professions.
Keith A Meager
Ther Reiki Journey. 05.03.2010.
Mar 5 2010 5:51PM
I can quite understand where Raymond is coming from and I think that the anger within him and the haste I suspect he typed the passage probably caused his fingers to linger longer on the keys or perhaps to light and missed a letter.
The issue there was not his misspelt words but the content. I also became a member the same year as Raymond and I also am not happy with the way every thing has worked out. After all, are our ethics not to criticise other professionals?
|Keith A. Meager|
Mar 6 2010 11:25AM
I completely respect your opinion, and indeed, your right to express it.
I am bound to repeat however, that those of us committed to the highest professional standards and Continual Professional Development, are striving to gain equality with our colleagues in the medical and allied professions in order that our patients may receive the very best treatment and a fully integrated holistic approach to what ails them.
It is of absolutely no value presenting to the public anything less than a high standard of data in a credible manner.
As for regulation, there are those opposed, and there are those in favour. Let us all respect one another's opinions, but understand that Regulation may enhance the way in which our various therapies may be more readily accepted in the marketplace.
Sincere, In light & peace
Keith Meager. Reiki Journey. 06.03.10
Mar 7 2010 10:10AM
|well it's taken over a year but my mis spelt message has had some effect.
sorry to offend you keith but i didn't go to a posh school just the school of hard knock's.
angela was right i was angry very very angry, that the holistic therapy industry as a whole is being hood winked by people, mainly from outside the industry, who have a very political agenda.
keith, i would like to say that i have from the time i started training whole heartedly supported and been involved in the regulation procces so that the public is protected from people who, after doing a short weekend course etc., claimed to be proficient in a certain modality and advertised them selves a such.
what has happened to the regulation program is that it has been taken over by non therapist's sponsered by international drug/media companies and people within the industry with their own political adgenda's.
this has been born out by emails i have received recently showing how a body which is supposed to be the regulation/registering body,is ordering the leaders of cetain therapy organisations to support it in the takeover of an other therapy association just because they don't like the people currently running it.
is this realy within the remit of this body????NO.
do we want our associations being told who and what they will support!! the answer is a very definate NO.
i for one will not subscribe to any organisation that is not democratic in it's process.
so fellow therapists i ask you to think hard and long before you join any so called 'regulatory register'
i was thinking of retiring soon but feel i can't abandon my clients to people who place more importance on a piece of paper than their own pride,intuition and profesional skills.
in love and light
PS. WHY DO WE NEED THREE DIFERENT REGISTERING BODIES????????
|Keith A. Meager|
Mar 9 2010 9:26AM
I am so pleased to see your response. I have to point out that I am just one individual. You make some good and valid points which I entirely respect.
I do not feel it necessary to repeat my points, but perhaps others would care to contribute to this debate.
One thing is for sure, we will never improve an imperfect situation unless we speak out.
Personally, my view is that I was to see properly qualified, experienced and professional Complementary therapists accepted and, and working alongside all mainstream health practitioners.
One thing worthy of repeating, and made in your response Raymond, it is the patient/client who should come first, but they need two things; Trust in their therapists, and correct data to make an informed decision about who they should consult. This principal must apply whether we are regulated or not.
In Light & Peace
Keith Meager. Reiki Journey. 09.03.10.
|Keith A. Meager|
Mar 9 2010 9:29AM
|My turn to make a spelling error. Hey Raymond, I went to that school too my friend:
That I want to see properly........
Mar 9 2010 8:21PM
Well, as for these forums being 'public' that is not so, only CThA members can access the forum posts.
I believe that the only trained people who will be recognised by the medical profession will be the nurses or doctors who so happen to have some knowledge of complementary therapies! Complementary therapy is slowly, slowly, slowly by a few medical practitioners being recognised as having some benefits - even if it is a 'placebo effect'!!
Unfortunately there have not been many trials that stand up to the medical/scientific testing required - it doesn't mean it doesn't work!!
Yes, I am for 'regulation' of therapies - meaning that all Reflexologists, Aromatherapists etc are trained to the same standards - however, what I am hearing about the body being promoted heavily by various Associations I do NOT like. I did take part in a therapist survey for the Working party and I do believe that the results of the survey was totally ignored!
We the therapists were supposed to have a choice of Regulating body ie CNCH and the GRCCT. I feel that the Associations should be presenting all Regulatory bodies and giving the therapist the facts on all so we can choose. After all, it is supposed to be 'voluntary'!!
Mar 17 2010 10:22AM
|I'm so glad I have found this forum. Have recieved my renewal form this week only to find a 'request to register' form tucked away in the back. There is on the main letter no explanation as to what this is, it could almost be regarded as 'junk mail'!.
I thought that the point of joining a 'regulation body' was to ensure that all therapist of whatever skill, were trained to a standard that is recognised by all. By Embody's own admission they are the one that members of the public turn to when in serch of looking for a complimentary therapist?
Why do we need to join another 'regulatory body' with more expense incurred especially as we are in a recession with not that much cash flowing?
I need some clarification on what to do, my gut feeling is not to join. But will this stop me from getting or maintaining what work I do, I work in privatly run care homes & from home?
Apr 30 2010 9:13PM
|Ok I am jumping in as a professional Complementary Therapist for over 15 years a teacher of the next generation of professional therapist, and one of the first wave to have joined the CNHC.
For years we as professional therapists have been calling out for fully qualified therapists to be recognised for their skills, the very obvious benefits of their chosen therapy in assisting the healing and our ability to take the pressure of the NHS by maintenance rather than cure. We halve also been crying out to be able to be utilised by the NHS to work along side other health professionals.
Finally the separation from what I call the “weekend trained therapist” So I was delighted when at last a register the CNHC came to the fore. At last a professional regulatory body for Complementary Therapy.
A year on after joining my disappointment is tangible.
Who has actually heard of the CNHC, the general public have no idea what the CNHC is and what it stands for or represents. Hell, even our own professional body and the therapist who belong to it still have no idea. It has fallen short of all of its promises and goals. Just another Government funded quango? Every person who has seen the letters CNHC after my name has had to ask “ what does this stand for”
Where are the bill boards, where is the TV advertising, there is no point promoting in therapy trade magazines and journals. Where are the adverts in the NHS professional trade journals.
After receiving my membership reminder today ; (oooh and the offer of a free badge if I send a SAE ) Today I am sending the following to the CNHC to comment on and I will post their reply :
Please can you advise me why my total registration cost is £45.00 as I am a member of the CThA and this operates a discount scheme?
Please can you also advise me as to when the CNHC will actually be making themselves know to the general public through advertising mediums of any kind? Not one of my clients has even heard of the CNHC. I will be putting this information in my newsletter to my clients sent to over 200 people and asking for their opinion and feedback.
I have not received one client referral from the CNHC web site and none of my students seem to have a clue about the association. so what does this say about the profile of the CNHC what is the incentive for staying a member.
I also would not publicise that you have a membership of 2000, this is an extremely low number in comparison to all of the professional therapists there are in the UK.
Is your database being used by the NHS to source therapist?
Do you have figures of how many hits you have on the web site each day averaging over a week looking for Aromatherapy ?
Why should I and others professional therapists like me stay with the Council .
Finally as for “free badge offered “do you not think that a couple of badges could just be sent out to all therapists on the register and who rejoin rather that this request for the SAE I’m sure with the government funding and the fee that is being levied for our annual registration you can afford to send out 2000 small packets to your members? It would cost about £1000.00 P&P at a ruff estimate, if the CNHC cannot afford this then we may as well give up now.
Apr 30 2010 11:11PM
|Just out of interest I have requested to be an independent witness and a voice of the therapy sector at the next general meeting lets see what the response is. Will keep you posted.
I believe in “Don’t just moan get involved”
May 4 2010 2:47PM
Do you attend local group meetings??
Did you know that Regulation is voluntary and that there is another regulatory body, The GRCCT?? Therapists do not have to register with the the CNHC, they can do so with the GRCCT if they would prefer. The DOH do not stipulate you 'have' to be Regulated with either body, only that they hope therapists will join.
If you wish to look at the GRCCT web site it is: www.grcct.org.
What benefits are there to belonging to a 'voluntary regulation body'??? Will anyone in the NHS take any notice of a 'voluntary' register?
We are as therapists and members of the CThA already being regulated. The regulatory bodies check that we belong to an organization and then are suitable to have 'Regulatory' status with them as we have already been checked.
May 14 2010 9:26AM
Just wanted to say how interested I was to read some of your comments Angela you gave really good advice and Dawn, I feel for your frustration. I am a Complementary Health Practitioner, Tutor, Trainer and Mentor and have worked in the NHS as a patient advocate. I first qualified in 1984, and no that's no typo, I really have been in the business for 26 years. Which presents an interesting view point, as I have lived the history, so to speak. Regulation does not make you a better Therapist, it makes you registered, with proof of having sat exams, which does not necessarily equate with competance and standards. Ah I hear you say, my college had a good programme and high standards, yes I'm sure they have, the question is who set those standards and how did they arrive at what is considered best practice, and who qualified them to set that standard? Sorry guys just thinking aloud apologies no picture, have not got round to uploading, would I be more qualified with a pic? Enjoy your day Francesca
|Keith A. Meager|
May 14 2010 10:39AM
|I completely agree. Qualifications should be the starting point. An excellent training pedigree should follow. How many are training without a teaching qualification and up to date requisite experience (provable). And, how many can prove their effectiveness as practitioners?
This is why I support regulation, let those of us (sorry if that sounds conceited but I have over 40 years in the business) who can prove their teaching and practice effectiveness, and can prove their CPD and committment to quality standards, be held to account, put to the test, then be held as equal to our colleagues in orthodox healthcare.
Sorry to those of you who are really good at your job but who do not support this view. I completely respect your arguments, and can understand where you stand. But for me, at over 60 years of age, I am happy to strive for the highest standards in all respects, and be refused a licence to practice or teach, should I fail.
Keith Meager. (Reiki-Journey).
May 14 2010 2:54PM
I actually do support 'Regulation of therapists', however, the only 'Regulation' that the medical profession will acknowledge is 'Statutory'. I do not believe they will credit 'voluntary regulatory bodies', especially where there is more than one!
You have to belong to an 'Association' to qualify to be accepted on the Regulatory Register - it is the Associations who in fact 'regulate' us already by ensuring that we have the specific relevant certification.
Will the 'Regulatory' bodies them selves be under scrutiny to ensure that they are of a high standard? Will the Directors/Administrators be checked to make sure that they are of a quality that is required??
Who is/will answering our questions?
May 14 2010 3:16PM
|Google David Colquhoun who is on the Board of CHNC's Conduct & Competence Committee.|
|Keith A. Meager|
May 14 2010 3:57PM
|From little acorns mighty oaks shall grow. Let us push for one step at a time and keep pushing.
Aug 29 2010 10:44PM
I totally agree with you
|Rodney Stuart Robinson|
Mar 1 2011 4:08PM
|Regulation for complementary therapy: at best, a sledge hammer approach to crack the proverbial nut, at worst we will see a system that has stood the test of time about to be overthrown to suit the EU, media hysteria, and the interests of a handful of power hungry academic herbalists. In the UK we have a unique historical position in that anyone with the appropriate knowledge can practice as a herbalist. This is a unique historical privilege granted by Henry VIII under an act that has never been repealed. This historical right has served the UK public well for hundreds of years via our mode of herbal medicine. The problem is that the Statutory regulation committee are trying to throw all modes of traditional medicine into the same basket. For example, most of the cases of harm advanced as evidence for the need for regulation, are mainly because of imported, illegal, toxic substances with little to do with traditional herbalism.
On another forum I gave my experience of being a nurse when we had to “prove our professionalism” by moving to a system of yearly registration (previously a one-off fee on qualification), because, the argument went, other professionals like doctors renewed their registration annually. So we changed from the GNC to the UKCC, later to become the NMC. Years later has anything changed? Do we feel more professional? Have we received any benefit? The answer is a resounding no, at least not from paying a yearly fee for the privilege of working.
We were State Registered Nurses (SRN) then we were Registered General Nurses (RGN) or RN's and State Enrolled Nurses (SEN's) were no more. Ironically we scrapped a lower level of registration (SEN) as we were “all professionals together” in the new order, only to be in a situation where, to fill the gaps left by the SEN's we have to train up Health Care Assistants to a higher level. Just like during WWI when, being short of SRN's they trained up auxiliaries and orderlies to become SEN's.. Now we want to (you've guessed it) provide a renewable registration for the HCA's. You couldn't write a farce like it. So what have we got for it? A wasteful bureaucratic quango soaking up all those registration fees out of nurses hard earned wages.
What do proponents of registration want? The sole reason for professional registration is , we are told, to protect the public not to raise the profile of complementary therapies. The GNC does not promote nursing in any way, it just exists to show a nurse is qualified and on the register. As a therapist you don't need registration to show you're qualified, insured or to prove you adhere to a code of conduct your professional memebership does that. Likewise, you will not be more represented as a herbalist or any other complementary practitioner.
There is no agreement about training standards, course standards or anything else. I don't see how there could be for all the different modalities that exist and then all the different schools of thought for each of those, often with real hostility and disagreement between training schools and practitioners. All these approaches cannot be 'lumped' together under one regulatory body.
If we ever see “properly qualified, experienced and professional Complementary therapists accepted and, working alongside all mainstream health practitioners” I will eat my hat. Name calling will always be there from sceptic groups and the medical profession and other vested interests. The point I am making is that we don't need another membership fee or another badge to show our professionalism. Acceptance will only come with overwhelming growing public demand for complementary therapies, but expect the attacks to intesify.
You are right Raymond to question the need for this. Its difficult enough for the most professional therapist to make a living; in this game if you're not professional and don't get results you don't survive in business. Ask yourself, is there any actual evidence that shows we need this regulation? I don't see any advantage at all, its just another fee to pay.
Mar 16 2011 10:14PM
|Robert, here here|