Yesterday it was announced that the American Massage Therapy Association has endorsed the Massage and Bodywork Licensing Examination (MBLEx), the exam owned by the Federation of State Massage Therapy Boards, as the best choice for a single licensing exam to advance the portability of practice across state lines.
That was followed by an announcement today from Associated Bodywork & Massage Professionals, applauding AMTA for making this decision. “We applaud the decision of the AMTA Board of Directors,” said ABMP President Les Sweeney, “This is an important step forward for the profession.”
The parallels in this development cannot be ignored. In the early 1990’s, AMTA provided leadership and financial support to get the National Certification Board up and running—the same thing that the ABMP did for the Federation just three short years ago.
AMTA and ABMP have had a healthy competition going on for more than 20 years. The press release issued today by ABMP states, “For the good of the profession, it is important that the two organizations can complement that competition by working in agreement on important issues like the entry-level exam choice matter at hand.” That’s called playing nice, people. Now if we could just get NCBTMB to do the same thing, instead of wasting certificants’ money on lawsuits intended to bankrupt the Federation. I think this turn of events makes it pretty darn plain that the Federation, and the MBLEx, is here to stay.
AMTA, ABMP and the FSMTB are to be commended for their collaborative sportsmanship, and it’s high time for the NCB to start exhibiting that quality as well. It’s a new day and a new playing field, and if the NCB wants to stay in the game, they’ll have to stop acting like a bully. Bullies usually wind up getting thrown out of the game altogether, and nobody wants to play with them.
The key phrase in all of this is “for the good of the profession.” I hope NCB Chair Neil Delaporta and the rest of the NCB leadership GETS IT. It’s time to drop the lawsuits and the threats, fire the lobbyists and expensive lawyers that they’ve hired to interfere in state board matters, and get on with the business of offering specialized and advanced credentialing to those who want to seek it.
If NCB continues to fight the inevitable changes that are occurring in our profession, they will end up as CHUMPS. However, if they can see the light over the horizon, and use their resources to develop the next level of programs that will actually advance our profession, they could be heralded as CHAMPS when all is said and done. What a choice they have to make!
Peace & Prosperity,
Laura Allen
January 29th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Hi Laura,
I would like to share with you concerns I have relayed to the AMTA regarding this decison. While I can see that the adoption of the MBLex as the exam to be the choice for all Sates will not directly affect continuing education I feel that the indirect effect may be disastrous for the profession and certainly for the NCB.
I would like to explain my concerns.
I feel it is imperative to the continued quality of our profession that both primary and continuing education be regulated. As far as I know the NCB is the only entity that approves providers of continuing education, most States and the AMTA currently accept NCB Approved Providers as acceptable for recertification or licensure. In the case of the AMTA maintaining NCTMB status satisfies the CE requirements for Professional members.
If all States switch to the MBLex their would be no reason for new therapists to take the NCE or for those who have to maintain their NCTMB status. The majority of the revenue to the NCB would be lost. Without revenue the NCB would not exist.
Without the NCB monitoring continuing education providers, the task would be placed upon the shoulders of the State governments. It is no secret that State governments are suffering form the same budget issues as the Federal government. It is not likely that individual States would hire staff to begin monitoring continuing education providers and handling the renewal education information from therapists.
My concern is that States would drop the continuing education component to licensure. Without this requirement most massage therapists would not seek continuing education. Our profession would suffer. I have worked as the Education Coordinator in Wisconsin for the AMTA and know that most therapists only attend workshops because they have to. There are of course those who will pursue continuing education without this requirement but they are not in the majority.
I am also concerned as a provider of continuing education for massage therapists. I am currently and NCB Approved Provider but if the NCB no longer exists neither will my approval. This would lead to providers trying to meet the requirements of individual states. creating a logistical nightmare, not to mention very expensive as approval would likely require a fee from each state, renewed annually.
Illinois and Iowa have or had requirements that CE providers must either be sponsored by an approved school or be NCB Approved. Schools have limited space and either charge a very heavy fee to put on a course or want to pay the presenter an low hourly rate. These restrictions limit presenters to staff from the school.
My experience with many massage schools is they hire recent graduates as instructors. This practice leads to new graduates with a limited knowledge of the profession. The quality of MTs drops. If continuing education is only available from these same instructors the profession will continue to be diminished.
I also feel very frustrated that this decision was made without consulting the State Chapters. We would have polled our members informed them of the benefits and liabilities of each choice and let them voice their thoughts. One of the selling points I use for the AMTA is that it is member driven. I am not seeing that illustrated with this decision.
I hope these things have been discussed and a solution is already in the works.
I appreciate further clarification of the AMTA’s position,
Kay Peterson
January 30th, 2009 at 5:15 am
Hi Kay,
I can’t speak for AMTA, or any of the other entities involved; I can only give my opinion. I appreciate your honesty and concern, but we’ll have to agree to disagree.
I don’t think the states adopting the MBLEx, or AMTA’s support of it, is going to put the NCBTMB out of the business of approving providers; nor will it put them out of business as far as certificants go–plenty of people will still want to pursue that. And if they’ll get on with the business of offering advanced certifications, which they are certainly in a position to do, plenty of people will go for that.
Nor do I think there is any danger of any of the Federation states giving up the requirement of continuing education. None of the parties involved has any intention to let the profession backslide, although that is the propaganda that the NCB has been putting out there.
As for their revenue, as I have said in this blog many times, the NCB BOD has been very reckless with their money–holding their meetings in 4-star resorts from Florida to Hawaii, paying board members exorbitant stipends, and spending a huge amount on lawyers and lobbyists to try and bankrupt the Federation.
The NCB just raised the price for approving providers. And, a few months back when I called to find out why MY certificate was late, I was told it was because they had received FOUR TIMES as many applications to be providers as usual. They have plenty of income. But as is the case with anybody or any entity, you’ve got to have more coming in than you do going out in order to be able to survive. They have not shown good fiscal responsibility, and that is not the fault of AMTA or FSMTB.
I’ve been an AMTA member for quite some time, and I have not always agreed with everything they’ve done, but I applaud this move. I’ve been NCTMB for a long time, and have dealt with them in several capacities for over a decade, on the level of certificant, massage school administrator, and approved provider, and I have seen service go way down hill. Add in all the lawsuits, the wonderful volunteers of long-standing service who have grown disgusted and resigned, and their war against the Federation, and a lot of people have just been fed up.
I hope this is a wake-up call for the NCB and that they will survive and thrive, and that they will accept this as the progress that it is. They also ought to realize that their actions have been a big contributing factor.
January 30th, 2009 at 9:53 am
Hi Laura,
Thank you for the information. I was not familiar with the issues and was on a fact finding mission. I will trust that you are correct in your assessment and see how it all unfolds. We do not have licensure in Wisconsin yet but are ready to present our bill this year hoping to have licensure by the end of 2009.
I have heard of the Federation of State licensing Boards but not heard very much.
Thank you for the dialogue,
Kay
February 4th, 2009 at 3:24 pm
I think this is one of the most important decisions that the AMTA has ever made. I also posted about this and also posted on the various online groups that I belong to and I don’t really think people understand the depth of this decision and how it will influence the future of our profession.
It is as big as getting a black person as president of the US in my opinion.
As far as CE classes – the whole CE thing is really a joke. Kay said that people only take CE’s because they have to. People who are taking classes that they aren’t interested in is really meaningless and does no good for anyone.
And what becomes of the more than 100 hours of CE’s each year that I tool for about 5 years. It doesn’t count for anything.
I do think CE’s should be done away with too and made voluntary. There is no proof that they are improving anything or are needed to be a successful massage therapist.
I never joined AMTA for all of my 20 years as a massage therapist mainly because of their support of the NCBTMB. I was just thinking I might finally join!
Julie Onofrio
http://www.thebodyworker.com
February 4th, 2009 at 5:44 pm
I think it’s too bad when people view the continuing education requirements as a joke, or for that matter, an unneccessary burden. I’ve blogged about this before on a previous post. I enjoy taking continuing education and usually end up with way more hours than I can turn in. CE classes are great networking opportunities in addition to being education opportunities.
When is education ever wasted? I always look for classes that enhance my skills as a bodyworker and/or a business person. If people can’t find a class that excites them, in my opinion, they’re not looking hard enough. Look at all the fabulous teachers on this blog alone!
February 5th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
It will be interesting to see if this change will affect how the NCB approves CEU instructors. Some of the stories I have heard about the NCB losing or saying they hadn’t received the materials that were sent them, Even thou the package was shipped UPS or FedX and was signed for by the office staff and NCB was shown that the packages were signed for.
I would also like to see a requirement for massage schools to have the lead instructors have at least 5 years of massage experience, with at least 12 hours per week of actual massage experience. Plus sometype of education in teaching massage classes.
February 9th, 2009 at 9:16 am
I am very happy about the support of MBLEX, and hope it is just the first step in regulating massage therapy education in the most meaningful way. We’re doing a great job with basic education, but I believe we also need to be better prepared for what happens next. This is where NCB should focus their efforts. I frequently use the AMTA locator service to find a therapist in a city other than my own so that I can make a referral. Most therapists claim specialization in nearly every modality, but many have only been practicing for a few years. Is that possible? I have the experience to to call each of the possible therapists to clarify their qualifications, but most clients do not. It’s a shot in the dark for them. I hope that in the future, regulation will be implemented that makes it necessary for a therapist to prove specialization in order to claim it. NCB would do well to work with regulators toward this end. Let MBLEX focus on basic education and licensure while NCB focuses on advanced education and certification for specialization. This would require that all organizations work together, to formalize the body of knowledge, the requirements for both basic and advanced education and certification, and the means by which we reach those goals. I think this would go a long way to encourage respect for our profession, it would offer new therapists a focused and more meaningful way of utilizing continuing education offerings, and would give our clients a better way of choosing the best therapist for their needs. Not to mention that it would keep NCB alive and kicking.