There have been several developments in the regulation of massage in the past few weeks that I personally find distressing. Earlier this week, Florida Senate Bill 584 moved a step closer to passage. This piece of special-interest legislation would amend Florida’s massage therapy law to allow graduates of certain board-approved schools to obtain a temporary permit and practice for six months without a license, until such time as they fail the exam or become licensed, whichever comes first. Although the bill states that they must work under the supervision of a licensed therapist, the terms of that are not spelled out. Does that mean the supervising therapist is on the premises, in the treatment room, or giving an occasional phone call? This is where boards frequently get into trouble and spend a lot of time with something bogged down in a policy committee—when something has not been clearly defined—and in this case, “supervision” isn’t clearly defined.
New Hampshire is trying to abolish massage licensing altogether, as a cost-cutting, government-reducing move. That would of course mean back to square one, where anyone who knows absolutely nothing about contraindications for massage, endangerment sites, or professional ethics can feel free to call themselves a massage therapist. READ MORE….
May 3rd, 2011 at 8:56 am
As a LMT in NH/MA this makes me so mad they say it cost effective but its not! The government is making 95,000 per year from the massage therapist at current rate we have in NH. Which according to all research the number of massage therapists is growing a lot. If you hire two full time people working 40 hours for $10.00 it only $800 a net profit of 94,200 per year should be able to find a room and space to make this work. If they can’t make it work for that about raise the per year price from $50 to $75 which is still less than most states. Okay I went to school for accounting too but shouldn’t someone in government crunch the numbers!