To:Douglas M. McRae. Registrar. College of Massage Therapists of British Columbia (CMTBC)
From: Albert Schatz, Ph.D., Editor
CMTBC's position is that Registered Message Therapists can be adequately trained to do rectal and vaginal massage, and should therefore be given a restricted title which includes rectal and vaginal massage.
However, CMTBC has not provided any convincing evidence WHY Registered Massage Therapists need to do vaginal and rectal massage,
I have already written one report and a short item about CMTBC's request for a restricted title which would include rectal and vaginal massage. In that report I asked questions which no one at CMTBC has yet answered.
I am motivated to ask additional question about CMTBC's interest in vaginal and rectal massage because CMTBC has provided additional information about its desire to obtain a restricted title which would prohibit unregistered massage therapists and other bodyworkers from doing rectal and vaginal massage.
This additional information, which CMTBC has provided, is in the following documents.:
1. CMTBC's November 17, 1999, Supplemental Response to the Health Professions Council's Preliminary Report on the Massage Therapists Scope of Practice.
2. Your letter of July 31, 2000., to Janet E.. McGregor, Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Program, Ministry of Health. Victoria.
3. George K. Bryce's letter of September 15, 2000, to M. VanAndel, MD, Deputy Registrar. College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC. Vancouver.
Presumably CMTBC wants a restricted title to protect the public from harm that may occur IF unregistered massage therapists and other unregistered bodyworkers were to do rectal and vaginal massage.
1. When CMTBC was harassing* unregulated massage therapists and other bodyworkers, did CMTBC find any unregulated practitioners who did rectal and vaginal massage? If so, how many unregulated practitioners did rectal and vaginal massage, and what actions did CMTBC take against them?
2. If CMTBC has no reliable evidence that any nonregistered practitioners have ever done rectal and vaginal massage, may we not safely assume that those unregistered practitioners have neve done rectal and vaginal massage?
3. Why then does CMTBC want a restricted title that would prohibit unregistered practitioners form doing rectal and vaginal massage which they have not done, and probably never will do?
4. Approximately how many patients, if any, do physicians presently refer to Registered Massage Therapists annually for rectal and vaginal massage?
Finally, I want to reiterate the following questions which I asked on page 2 of the Massage Law Newsletter Vol. 14, No. 3. 2000.
1. How many people in British Columbia, who need such vaginal and rectal massage, are presently unable to obtain that treatment?
2. What well-documented evidence does CMTBC have that British Columbia presently has a shortage of professionals who are qualified to provide rectal and vaginal massage?
3. How serious is this shortage of qualified practitioners in terms of the public health, safety, and welfare in British Columbia?
cc: Mary McCrea, Health Professions Council
David MacAulay, Health Professions Council
Invine Epstein. Health Professions Council
A. Moyes, Minister of Health
Janet E. McGregor. Assistant Deputy Minister. Corporate Programs. Ministry of Health. Victoria
M. VanAndel, MD. Deputy Registrar. College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC. Vancouver
Lincoln Lau, British Columbia Coalition of Allied Bodywork Practitioners
George K. Bryce, CMTBC Board
*Walsh. K. British Columbia's Battle of the Bodyworkers. Animosity Grows toward BC Massage Therapists as Legislative Changes to Massage Regulations are Proposed. Massage Magazin.e pages 17-124. November/December 1998.