The Massage Pundit

I’ve been on vacation…I took a deliberate ten-day break from the Internet and from all the politics of massage while I was enjoying my annual sojourn in Ireland. I didn’t visit any Internet cafes. I didn’t read the paper and I didn’t watch the news. I left my cell phone at home, too. It was quite refreshing and restorative to be unplugged for that period of time, but now it’s back to the grind. From the look of things, it would seem that the powers that be are enforcing a news black-out as well. They have apparently been sworn to secrecy. It looks like a covert operation from the CIA.

The press release from the Leadership Summit, held in Chicago May 1-2, and attended by the leaders of our national organizations, was released May 9. I was expecting a white-washed version of the events, and I was not disappointed.

Out of nowhere, the press release mentions casually: “An ongoing discussion of the Entry-Level Analysis Project (ELAP) occurred and input from the leadership organizations was discussed.”

Wait just a minute… isn’t this the very first public mention of this project? No one outside of the inner circle of secret-keepers knows what the ELAP is, who the driving forces are behind it, and what its real purpose is. They can’t just drop a profession-altering project onto the landscape like it’s a known quantity, wave a little flag that promises us some future opportunity to have input into the project, and then expect us to salute the results whatever they may be.

The Leadership Summit press release mentions that massage therapists are going to get some input into this project—through a “companion” survey to the FSMTB Job Task Analysis. That may sound promising, but let’s remember that FSMTB is an exam provider, and their major focus is on the MBLEx. The Job Task Analysis survey is not necessarily the best way to determine what an entry-level massage therapist needs to know….READ MORE

From the title, you might think this blog is about The Client List, the trashy new show on the Lifetime Channel that gives massage therapy a black eye. No such luck; the event I am referring to is the upcoming Leadership Summit #2, set to take place next week in Chicago.

The first Leadership Summit (to clarify: there were summits in 2003-04 before AFMTE and FSMTB existed) took place last September in St. Louis, with the executive directors and chairs of ABMP, AFMTE, AMTA, the Massage Therapy Foundation, FSMTB, COMTA, and NCBTMB in attendance. It was a historic event in that it was the first time all seven of these organizations had come together in the best interests of the profession. The purpose, according to the press release announcing the meeting, “was to hold a beginning conversation about major structural issues and impediments to profession progress. The desire is to have candid exchange about core challenges, quality concerns, consumer expectations and organizational roles.”

Apparently, one of the hot topics at this week’s meeting is going to be the number of required entry-level education hours. Although this was not on the agreed-upon agenda at the first meeting, it was introduced anyway by ABMP Chairman Bob Benson, complete with a thorough proposal prepared by Anne Williams, Director of Education at ABMP. Basically, the proposal was for a task force to be formed immediately, and using Job Task Analyses that have been conducted by the NCBTMB and the FSMTB, to nail down a definite number of hours that should be required for entry-level education. This was contrary to the facilitator’s recommendation—and the group’s agreement— that they would spend the initial meeting identifying problems, and would address possible solutions for these problems at meetings to follow. READ MORE...

Last week, Massage Today President Donald Peterson published an article entitled The CAMTC Money Grab. It cast the CAMTC in a very unfavorable light; to make a long story short, it appeared to expose excessive financial wrongdoing at the organization by stating that the CAMTC was paying the expenses and per diem for no less than 14 board members to attend the American Massage Conference. The AMC is a moveable event that is held each year in a different location, and this year’s event was taking place in San Diego.

Peterson backed up his claims of financial excess with a table showing who voted to spend the money and who didn’t, and also stated that Massage Today Senior Associate Editor Kathryn Feather had actually been on the CAMTC conference call when the vote was taken about spending the money. The criticism was that although it was not unanimous, that for the most part the people who voted to spend it were the people who were going to receive it. In reality, that’s the way it goes on all boards; board members vote on things, and that includes where and when to attend events and how much money will be spent on it, so there’s really nothing unusual about that.

I shared this article on my Facebook page, and immediately started hearing from board members of the CAMTC that Peterson’s story was very biased and not telling all the facts. Since I initially shared it and contributed to giving a bad impression of the organization, I made the offer to them that I would give them equal time on my blog to present their side of the story. The fallout from this has been swift, not the least of which is the resignation of Keith Eric Grant from the magazine, which he has been contributing to since 2002. Grant is a CAMTC board member, and someone I  have admired as a writer, a scientist, and a person from afar. READ MORE…

I’ve spent the past couple of weekends teaching at AMTA meetings; first in SC and this past week in Alaska. One of the classes I taught at both meetings was “Using Research to Market Your Massage Therapy Practice.” I’ve been on my research soapbox for a while now. The big question is, “Who gives a flip about research?” My answer to that is, inquiring minds want to know.

Except when they don’t want to know. Consider this: IF research validates an idea, a theory, or a belief you’ve had, doesn’t that make you happy? Don’t you want to give a thumbs-up and shout “Yes! I knew it all the time!” That would make anyone feel good, wouldn’t it?

So when research shows something that’s contrary to what we believe, we don’t like that. We don’t want to accept it. We don’t want to listen to it. We want to act as if it doesn’t exist, or that it applies to everyone except us.

I’ve been surfing PubMed this afternoon and reading interesting studies. I don’t have any research to back it up, but my educated guess is that maybe, just maybe, 20% of massage therapists actually read research studies…or even know what the difference is in a peer-reviewed study performed within the parameters of scientifically accepted procedures, as opposed to website hype making all kinds of unfounded claims. READ MORE…

Last week, the Federation of State Massage Therapy Boards presented their long-awaited proposal for a new national continuing education approval program. They are calling it Maintenance of Core Competencies – or MOCC for short. As I indicated in my previous post, this proposal not only failed to deliver on the original promises made by FSMTB, it has turned the entire professional landscape on its ear by recommending that most continuing education should be voluntary, not mandatory for license renewal.

Under this “MOCC-ERY” of a plan, the only mandatory components of continuing education would be those FSMTB deems to be relevant to “public safety”. If that’s not bad enough, FSMTB is proposing to take control over the design and delivery of these courses. Except it isn’t continuing education … it’s proving that you still know the things you should have learned in entry-level massage training as it pertains to protection of the public.

As a licensed therapist, do you want to be taken back to subjects like Ethics 101, principles of hygiene and sanitation, and the naming of unsafe massage practices – EVERY TIME YOU HAVE TO RENEW YOUR LICENSE? I’ve been teaching professional ethics for 14 years, and frankly, I find this proposal to be an insult to my intelligence.

I was very gratified today to receive the press release from AMTA denouncing the plan. In part, important communication states:

“AMTA reviewed the proposal and has many concerns with the approach of the FSMTB, the proposal itself, its inconsistencies and the lack of support provided for their view. Some of our specific areas of concern are:  READ MORE…

Last week, the Federation of State Massage Therapy Boards published a document outlining their proposal to jump into the continuing education market. They are calling the new program Maintenance of Core Competency – to be abbreviated as “MOCC”. I don’t know what planet this thing came from, but it sure ain’t from this solar system.

Coming fast on the heels of the unresolved conflict-of-interest mess with the FSMTB President spearheading legislation in her home state of Iowa that would eliminate the education hours from that massage law, the timing of this MOCC release is strange, to say the least.

But let me get to the main event here: When you have a problem on your hands, there’s nothing more aggravating than a solution that is worse than the original problem itself. That’s exactly what has happened.

For many years, those of us who teach continuing education courses, as well as the sponsors of continuing education, have had to put up with an absurd and ineffective system for CE approvals. Most regulated professions have a single national entity that handles this function; we have the national provider approval program run by NCBTMB, as well as individual approval processes operated by about 10 state massage boards. The standards are inconsistent, and it forces CE providers to go through redundant and costly approval processes to be able to offer their courses in more than one location.

There was a cause for hope when we started to see some activity about this last year at the national level. In a press release entitled “FSMTB to Establish New Continuing Education Approval Program” (dated March 29, 2011), the organization announced:

“…the launch of a project to develop a new national program for the approval of both continuing education courses and providers. Once it is established, the program will provide state regulatory agencies with a centralized quality assurance process for all courses taken by massage and bodywork therapists for the renewal of State licensure or State certification. READ MORE…..

Iowa House File 2342 has been on my radar for several weeks (initially introduced as HF 2126). Yesterday, I received a further communication on it, which stated that “the bill as written will not be brought up for consideration unless Matt Windschitl (the sponsor of the bill) requests it. The understanding is he will hold the bill until next year so there will be time for positive feedback from the profession and new language can be, at that time,  introduced with the support of the massage community.”

That’s good, because at this time, it doesn’t have the support of anyone except the misguided person who set it in motion, nor should it.

I was initially stunned at the poorly-written and  ill-conceived bill that eliminates the education requirement for massage therapy, which is currently 600 hours. The first draft of the bill I saw just struck through the education requirement altogether, although line 25 still says “meets or exceeds Iowa’s educational requirements.” This upset me to the point that I called on several Iowa residents and people in the know, who basically assured me that it was a “placeholder” bill….a simple explanation of a placeholder bill is that “the deadline for introducing any bills is imminent, and we’ve got to get something in there now that we can revise later”….one of those quirks of politics.

As of February 21, I hate to report that the revision doesn’t look any better. The language getting rid of the 600-hour requirement is still there, and nothing to take it’s place. READ MORE…

I’ve had a few meltdowns over e-mail in the past couple of weeks. In spite of my attendance at one of Michael Reynolds‘ brilliant presentations on how to be an e-mail ninja and have a “zero inbox,” I confess I just haven’t gotten there. And I’m wading through a field of spam.

I have a good spam filter on all my email accounts, so basically most of those trashy emails advising you on how to enlarge your anatomy, how to collect the $40 million that the dead person in Nigeria has left you in his will, and offering to sell you cheap prescription drugs get trapped there.

What usually doesn’t get trapped there are all the unsolicited mailing lists and newsletters from massage therapists and other health practitioners who have taken the liberty of adding my name to their list. Most of them are people from Facebook or LinkedIn…they apparently just harvest the e-mail address from everyone they see on their networks, and add them on. That’s not a good thing. In fact, it’s just plain spam.

You have to ASK me in order to be added to any of my mailing lists. My websites have the little click-on feature for that, if you want to be added, but just visiting my websites is not going to cause you to receive any e-mail from me.

I use Constant Contact for my newsletters and group e-mail. I have it set to automatically give people the link to unsubscribe if they wish, and to allow people to share it on their networks, if they desire. It’s $30 per month, but I don’t have to be concerned  about removing people who ask to be removed; it’s done for me. If you are sending group e-mails to anyone, whether it’s from a company like Constant Contact or just through your own e-mail, you should have a simple link for people to unsubscribe. Some companies make it such a hassle, by sending you to a new website to create a new account and answer a couple of captchas, before they will allow you to unsubscribe to something that you never subscribed to to begin with. I think they count on it being such a hassle to unsubscribe that you’ll just choose to stay on the list. READ MORE….

This year I wrapped up five years of service on the North Carolina Board of Massage & Bodywork Therapy. Anyone who has ever sat on a board will probably agree with me that disciplinary hearings involving massage therapists are one of the most stressful parts of that job. It was for me. I estimate that during my time on the Board, I had to sit through approximately fifty of them. It was very distressing to see my fellow massage therapists trying to defend themselves–and in a few cases, just outright admitting to the violation–whenever they were accused of something.

Nine times out of ten, the accusation was of a sexual nature. 99 times out of 100, it involved a male therapist. I’m dead certain there are female therapists out there performing sexual favors every day, but most men won’t come forward to complain about it. Go figure.

My question to myself at those hearings was always this: “Did this person have an intent to do something evil, or was this a communication breakdown or simple mistake that could have happened to you or me?”

If you’ve been practicing longer than a year or two, the chances are good that in spite of your best efforts, you have accidentally exposed a body part. Or you have said something that the instant it left your mouth, you thought “why did I say that?” The very first massage I ever gave, I accidentally touched the man’s penis. I went to tuck in the drape, and all I can say is there it was. He was supine on the table, his eyes were closed, and when my hand grazed it, I saw his eyebrows shoot up. I said “I’m sorry,” and carried on. If I had made a big deal out of it, I could have just made it worse than what it was.

If your only intent is to give a therapeutic massage, then your major obligation is not just about giving the massage; it is clear and direct client communication. READ MORE….

If you’re an employer of massage therapists, or you are a massage therapist who’s is employed by someone else, who “owns” the client? The short answer is, no one. People have the right to go where they choose, and to patronize whatever massage therapist they choose to patronize. The long answer is a little more complicated.

A friend of mine who employs other therapists in her practice was upset last week when an employee gave clients a reminder call from her own cell phone on her day off, instead of calling them from the office. The issues there were ownership of the client’s information and a concern about HIPAA violations…and two clients actually called the office to ask why they were being called from the therapist’s cell phone, since previous calls had always come from her office.  She not only fired the employee, she also went to the police about data theft and filed an ethics complaint with the NCBTMB. The business is in an unregulated state, or she would have filed an ethics complaint with the state board, as well. She had plainly stated in her policies and procedures manual that taking the phone numbers and or other information of clients was prohibited, and discusses that fact with each new person she hires. The therapist had done more than just take the phone numbers; she had also downloaded all the treatment notes, etc–including those sessions performed by someone else that she was not involved in. The owner was perfectly within her rights to fire the employee and take the other actions, based on that policy.

I run things differently in my office. Nearly all of the half-dozen therapists who work at my clinic as independent contractors have the phone numbers of their regular clients in their cell phones (remember, my friend’s staff members are employees). It’s our procedure to ask clients if they would like a reminder call or a text message, and it’s my own desire for the therapists to make those calls personally instead of depending on me to do it. I’m the office manager and chief bottle-washer at my place of business, and in addition to the therapists, I also have an acupuncturist, a chiropractor, a clinical herbalist, and an aesthetic nurse there. I make the reminder calls for the chiropractor. I expect everyone else to make their own.

Some people would say that I am making it easy for them to steal clients, in the event they were to leave my practice and go elsewhere. That’s true, but I choose not to look at it that way.  First and foremost, my staff is what has made my business successful. I’m just the ringleader. Everyone there genuinely likes, supports, and refers to each other; it’s a family atmosphere. Staff turnover has happened so rarely that in 8.5 years of owning my business, I can count on one hand the number of people who have ever left. READ MORE….