Protect holistic health in MA!

Oppose the Bodyworks Bill Hearing, Monday, October 28. Please act now!

Do you use holistic, complementary, or alternative health practices?

Pending state legislation would seriously limit access to holistic health care, ban teaching of holistic practices like Reiki and Integrated Positional Therapy outside of state licensed schools, and potentially put practitioners like me out of business.

The Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure is holding a hearing on the Bodyworks Bill this Monday, October 28, from 11 a.m. – 4 p.m. Legislators need to hear from you!

Details for contacting committee members are at the end of this message.

Background

In seeking to combat the serious problem of human trafficking, a state Senator has introduced a bill that conflates “bodywork” with human trafficking. Arguing that it must regulate “bodywork establishments,” the bill would decimate the practice and teaching of valuable holistic healing in Massachusetts.

Senate Bill 168, “An Act Regulating Bodyworks,” would mandate occupational licensing for complementary and alternative health care practitioners. “Bodywork” has been labeled as a broad, diverse group of practices using “touch, words or directed movement to deepen awareness of patterns of movement in the body.” This definition applies to more than 200 different modalities, A to Z from the Alexander Technique to Zero Balancing, including Reiki and Integrated Positional Therapy, the modalities I practice and teach.

The basic arguments against S.168 are:

The definition in the bill is NOT a definition of bodywork. The language is what’s used to carve out the exceptions to the massage licensing law. In other words, the bill starts with what we are not—we are not massage therapists. There is no such thing as a single “bodywork profession” that can be defined in this way.
The bill unfairly and restrictively regulates professions that have no record of causing risk or harm to the public. Recognized legal principle requires the party calling for regulation of a trade to show that regulation is needed to protect public safety. And, if regulation is needed, the least restrictive means should be tried first. Proposed legisation S.665 is a rational alternative course of action.
If passed, there is no practical way the licensing board could fairly represent the vast array of practices it would make rules to regulate.
If passed, training in these techniques would be banned outside of state licensed schools.
The bill could put an untold number of legitimate holistic and alternative health practitioners out of business and take away valuable support for our clients, with no positive gain.
There is no evidence that licensing will stop human trafficking or prostitution. To the contrary, state and national anti-trafficking research shows that initiatives like this do more harm than good. Further, they suggest linking bodywork with the sex trade puts holistic health practitioners at greater risk. (Please read the Polaris Project’s Jan. 2019 report for details.

My biggest concern about this bill is that it would require Reiki—or any modality (I teach and practice three!)—to be taught from a boilerplate curriculum at a state licensed school. The vast majority of my Reiki students take my classes to learn self-care tools. They come to their local yoga studio to study Reiki for their own self-care, use with loved ones, and perhaps with volunteering. They aren’t at all likely to seek out Reiki training at a professional school or jump through the hoops of licensure to practice. This level of education from solo teachers like me—as well as my own teachers—will be lost if this bill advances to law.

The Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure is holding a hearing on the Bodyworks Bill on Monday, October 28, from 11a.m. to 4 p.m.

What you can do: Please share your opinion—and your story—with Committee members before Monday’s hearing. Please scroll down for sample text and email links for members.

Sample Email text

Date:
Subject: Please Oppose S.168
To: The Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure
Re: Opposition to S.168, “An Act Regulating Bodyworks”

Dear Chair Feeney, Chair Chan, and Members of the Committee:

I am a Reiki (yoga, meditation, EFT, etc) practitioner (or client/student/patient) and I reside in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

I urge you to oppose S.168. I have great concerns about how this bill will affect my livelihood/profession and/or my personal healthcare choices by limiting the teaching and practice of complementary and alternative healthcare in the Commonwealth. (Include a personal story. Say why the issue is important to you and how it affects you, your family member, and your community. This is the critical piece of your message. Personal stories resonate with legislators.)

(If you wish, you can complete your letter with statements from the “issues” list above.) Please vote against S.168.

I would greatly appreciate a response. Thank you for your time and consideration of my concerns.

Sincerely,

Your name (and credentials, if applicable)
Street address, City, State, Zip code
Phone and Email

List of Legislators to send letters to:

(Top Priority Chairs of Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure and Bill Sponsor Mark Montigny)

Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure:

Chairs

Paul R. Feeney Paul.feeney@masenate.gov

James T. Welch James.Welch@masenate.gov

Tackey Chan Tackey.Chan@mahouse.gov

Jay D. Livingstone Jay.Livingstone@mahouse.gov