Find
a Massage Therapist
OMTA
Annual Conference
 Member
Benefits
 Administration
OMTA
1710 Oakhurst Court
Eugene, OR 97402-8002MEMBERSHIP
Interested in joining OMTA?
Print
an application to mail.
Have a question about your membership?
Contact
Heather Bennouri at info@bennouri.net RESOURCE
LINE
NOW TOLL-FREE
1-866-977-OMTA
(6682)
FAQ
Have a question? Want to know about insurance, licensing, laws? See Frequently
Asked Questions.
| HAND
WASHING Did
you know that Oregon requires a handwashing sign to be posted in the restroom
that your clients use? Here
are four options that you can print for posting on your walls.. |
| The
Oregon Massage
Therapists AssociationOMTA
is an alternative grass-roots professional organization. We are a diverse, eclectic
membership, dedicated to a collaborative, consensus process. We support creative
new ideas and flexibility. We have a local Oregon identity, are self-authorized,
and self-created. We have
faith that the OMTA process does work: we continually try to go beyond polarities
to trust in the underlying unity. We dialogue in diversity, value compassion and
respect, and accept our humanness, our vulnerability and our judgments. We are
committed to working through our group process, appreciate feedback, and are aware
of boundaries.
| SPRING
CONFERENCE The
OMTA Spring Conference was a resounding success! Thanks to all who helped put
it together. Additional thanks to the instructors. And thanks to all who attended. |
- We offer affordable
dues: Only $40 per year, $20 for pre-licensure massage students.
- We
publish Touchstone, a professional journal.
- We will list your business
on this OMTA website in our Massage Finder.
- Attend
OMTA's workshops and Annual
Conference at special member rates.
- Network
with other state & national massage organizations, the Oregon
Board of Massage Therapy, massage schools throughout the state, other LMTs
and other bodyworkers.
- Current
individual members earn a $5 referral award for each new membership paid in full.
- Receive a $50 membership
discount with Associated Bodywork and Massage Professionals (ABMP)
which includes professional liability insurance, Massage and Bodywork Magazine,
and various business tools.
Support your alternative grass-roots professional organization. Join today! So
why are you waiting? Contact OMTA Membership,
or click here to begin our application process.
Have
questions about licensing, insurance or anything else related to massage? First
try our Frequently Asked Questions page. If you cannot find
your answer there or in a link from there, call our toll-free resource line, 1-866-977-OMTA
(6682). OMTA
sponsors meetings, events, classes, lectures and demostrations around the state.
Check the Area Representatives page to view events
in your area. We
have lots of new additions to our Lending Library,
and it is free to members! Welcome
to Mike Pooler, who was elected Area Rep for Eugene, and was inducted at the April
meeting of your Executive Committee.
Area Reps and other members of the Associate Executive Committee are elected by
a simple majority of the elected members of the Executive Committee. We
are an all-volunteer organization. Want to help? Contact either our President,
Robert Bike, or our Volunteer Coordinator, Emden Griffin. News
from the Oregon Board of Massage Therapists New
Massage Written Test
Effective July 1, 2008 all applicants for licensure
must have taken and passed the MBLEx administered by the states via the Federation
of State Massage Therapy Boards. Applicants who have taken and passed a previously
accepted board-approved written exam prior to July 1, 2008 may submit proof of
passing in lieu of the MBLEx requirement. New
Rules
Over the past 3 years the OBMT Rules Committee conducted a comprehensive
review of both Oregon Revised Statutes and Administrative Rules governing massage.
This review was done to increase readability, update terminology and streamline
processes. The State Attorney General's office has completed its review of the
new rules. Here is the link. Related
Links
Oregon Board of Massage Therapists
Oregon
State Legislature
|
News
from the Oregon State Legislature House
& Senate Bills
OMTA conducted a survey of its members for their opinions
on whether the bills currently at the legislature should pass or fail. Initially
there were seven bills. Three more have been added, and a survey will be going
out to members for these three next week. The
Executive Committee was asked to write 1-2 sentences on their opinions for each
bill currently affecting massage in the 2009 Oregon Legislature. Those that submitted
opinions have had them included below, without editing, along with their names.
You can use this to see what the issues are that the EC is concerned about with
the bills. Regardless of the opinions presented here, each EC member receives
only one vote in the poll, as do all our other members, in determining the OMTA
stance for each bill that will be presented to the legislature. Here
are the bills, a summary of what they are intended to do, opinions from some of
the Executive Committee members with recommendations to support or oppose them,
and the results of the member survey: Senate
Bill 146 Modifies the Current Massage Statutes
The full Text of SB 146
is online here.
Key
Changes:
Removes “state” and changes to “jurisdiction”
when referencing other locations besides Oregon. Allows OBMT to consider foreign
locations and small US municipalities (cities, etc.) when referencing massage
programs and licensees.
Adds “aiding and abetting” language.
This language holds responsible those who knowingly assist in promoting unlicensed
practice. Provides for one warning of violation before sanctions can be imposed.
Exempts clients and those who refer (as long as they are not receiving compensation)
to unlicensed individuals.
Revises exemption language. Clarifies
in concise language who is allowed to legally practice massage and under what
conditions.
Inserts “program or class” language for massage
education facilities. Allows the OBMT to approve a massage program as a whole,
as opposed to having to approve each individual class within a program. Does not
broaden power of OBMT.
Rephrased definition of massage. Updates language
to more modern terminology in simpler form without changing the scope of practice.
Moves
and clarifies site inspection language. Language that was in two separate sections
is now combined into one area for clarity. Permits OBMT to enforce regulations
it is already responsible for.
Other minor grammatical, spelling,
and phrasing changes. These are made for the purposes of linguistic accuracy and
clarity.
How Does This Affect You?
PASS Provides smoother process
for OBMT to review massage licenses of individuals moving to Oregon from outside
of the 50 states and consider their credentials when reviewing them for Oregon
licensure. Simplifies process for schools to get approval for their massage programs
and for modifications to their massage programs. Holds responsible unethical employers
who hire unlicensed therapists to practice massage (under current law, only the
individual practicing massage is held accountable). Closes loopholes in exemption
language for practice of massage. Clarifies inspection of premises language. It
should be noted that the primary function of the OBMT is to protect the public.
“Barging in” on a massage session for an inspection whether or not the
client is on the table would violate that charge and thus is not permitted.
FAIL
All language stays as it currently is. Individuals from US territories or foreign
countries may have a more difficult process getting licensed in Oregon. Massage
schools have a more lengthy process to have their programs approved. Spas, other
businesses, or individuals who hire unlicensed individuals and take advantage
of them can continue to do so without fear of repercussions. Loophole allowing
some forms of unlicensed practice stays in place. OBMT can still inspect premises,
but needs a complaint first (which it can make in its own name). | Executive
Committee Statements Support
A
long-needed overhaul of the massage laws that clarifies the definition of massage,
holds unethical massage employers responsible, closes loop-holes, while protecting
LMTs and the public. I do not share the concerns that the OBMT will overstep its
role. Robert Bike, OMTA President I
support this measure as it will have legal and financial repercussions for some
of the DC’s, PT’s, and Salon/Spa owners who knowingly hire massage students
and/or unlicensed therapists without any legal ramifications. The fears of the
OBMT charging into a therapist’s office while with a client are unfounded;
it would go against already existing rules and regulations. Bruno De Block,
OMTA Immediate Past President The
changes proposed by this bill were made either for simple language clarity or
more importantly, to address problems the board has faced with serious enforcement
issues in regulating massage. Put together with cooperation from massage schools,
Oregon LMTs, and representative from professional associations, this has been
a cooperative effort designed to meet the needs of the public, the profession,
and the board. Heather Bennouri, OMTA Membership Director & Touchstone
Editor Oppose
I
am not in favor of creating a new crime of “aiding, abetting, assisting”
in the unlicensed practice of massage; I am not in favor of removing the legislature’s
current oversight of massage education curriculum, and I am not in favor of giving
the massage Board authority to perform warrantless, on-demand inspections and
searches of massage premises. Rose Jade, OMTA Area Representative for the Central
Coast | Membership
Survey Results | House
Bill 2057 Eliminates Semi-Independence for Health Professions Boards
The
full Text of HB 2057 is online here.
Key
Changes
Budget approval process changes. The current process requires the OBMT
submit notification of the budget to all licensees and legislators and can then
pass it, or amendments to it. The proposed process would go through the legislature
for vote. Amendments require an appeal to the emergency board, no matter how small
or urgent.
Subject to the State Personnel Relations Law Requires
a more lengthy hiring process and many more reports than currently need to be
filed. The OBMT already has many of the same policies in place that would be required,
but with less reporting, employee time, and faster processes.
Establishes
a New Monetary Account for the OBMT. This would require a transfer of funds and
a different (longer) process for handling all financial transactions.
Removes
Significant Auditing and Reporting Responsibilities that Hold the OBMT Accountable
to the Public, its Licensees, and the Legislature. A biennial independent outside
audit, an annual comprehensive report, and an annual financial statements would
no longer be required.
How Does This Affect You?
PASS Removes
significant accountability of the OBMT to the public, its licensees, and the legislature.
Requires that the budget go through the legislature for approval, and any amendments
require an Emergency Board approval—a time-consuming process that does not
always result in the necessary funds. Adds significant administrative costs and
time. Fiscal impact statements are not yet available, but early estimates are
approximately $100,000.00 biennually to the OBMT budget. These expenses would
be passed on through increased fees, decreased services, or some combination thereof.
FAIL
Preserves semi-independence and permits OBMT to function in a more “business-like”
manner. Allows OBMT to continue to choose the cheapest and most efficient sources
for supplies and services. Allows the OBMT a faster budgetary and budgetary revision
process in order to address urgent issues.
NOTE The OBMT had been
a regular board from its inception until 1999, when semi-independence was granted
(along with the Optometry Board in 1997 and PT Board in 1999) after lengthy research
into efficient models of state government. | Executive
Committee Statements Support
I
am in favor of increasing legislative oversight of the massage Board’s past,
present, and future actions and goals: a state license to practice massage
should mean that all three branches of my state government are accountable for
how the license is granted and how the profession is regulated. Rose Jade,
OMTA Area Representative for the Central Coast Oppose
Adds
significant costs to OBMT, increases time to hire staff, decreases reports &
audits, tries to fix problems that don't exist. The OBMT has been much more efficient
and responsive since becoming semi-independent. Robert Bike, OMTA President Having
experienced OBMT before it obtained semi-independent status, I remember it as
having been more bureaucratic, less efficient, unresponsive to practitioner’s
needs, and less interested in making improvements to the system. Needless to say;
semi-independent status under Patty Glen’s leadership has improved all of
the above inadequacies. Bruno De Block, OMTA Immediate Past President Semi-independence
allows LMTs greater input into a faster, more responsive budgeting process, still
allowing for legislative input, but requiring a far greater responsibility on
the part of the OBMT in terms of mandatory reporting and accountability processes
to the public and the legislature. Semi-independence is more efficient, thousands
of dollars cheaper, and keeps the OBMT far more accountable. Heather Bennouri,
OMTA Membership Director & Touchstone Editor | Membership
Survey Results | House
Bill 2058 Changes OBMT Board Member Appointment Requirements and Process
The
full Text of HB 2058 is online here.
Key
Changes
Subjects OBMT Appointments by the Governor to Senate Approval.
Requires
that all members of the board must be residents of Oregon.
Redefines
public members. Cannot be massage therapists or family members of a massage therapists.
LMT
Board Member Selection Requirements Governor must also consider geographic location.
Specifies
Term Timing, Clarifies Appointments of Vacancies Also removes members from the
board immediately if they move out of state. Clarifies that if three consecutive
meetings are missed and unexcused, the board member shall be removed immediately.
How
Does This Affect You?
PASS A longer process to fill vacancies on the board.
Vacancies would take longer to fill due to the added Senate process. Individuals
who live just across state lines but hold active LMT licenses and practice in
Oregon would not be eligible for a board position. Only professional associations
can nominate LMTs for board positions.
FAIL No change in current
appointment process. | Executive
Committee Statements Support
I
am in favor of having the legislative branch (the Senate) review and approve the
Governor’s selection of massage Board members: this is a needed check and
balance on a state licensing Board, otherwise the executive branch (through the
Governor’s office) has too much control. Rose Jade, OMTA Area Representative
for the Central Coast Oppose
Fixes
problems with other boards; not sure how it will affect OBMT. If it ain't broke,
why fix it? Robert Bike, OMTA President I
do agree that the process could be cleaned up a little bit, but I think it is
better to keep it under the Governor’s duties, instead of the legislative
branch. The legislative branch doesn’t have enough time to deal with
serious issues; let alone saddling them with appointments to boards that can easily
be accomplished without involving them. Bruno De Block, OMTA Immediate Past
President The clarification
of who may serve as a board member (both public and LMT) is needed; however, with
the Senate approval portion, it adds unnecessary length to a process that can
already be time-consuming, tipping the balance of board members while vacant seats
remain unfilled. Heather Bennouri, OMTA Membership Director & Touchstone
Editor | Membership
Survey Results | House
Bill 2059 Requires Mandatory Reporting for Health Professionals
The full
Text of HB 2059 is online here.
Key
Changes
Requires Mandatory Reporting of Violations by Health Professionals.
This bill requires that if any health professional witness a violation of professional
practices by another health professional that it be reported.
Requires
Report Go to Reporting Licensees Board. The licensee filing the report must go
to his/her licensing board. (For example, if an LMT were to report a chiropractor,
the LMT would report to the Oregon Board of Massage Therapists).
How
Does This Affect You?
PASS Must report ALL violations made by health professionals
to the Oregon Board of Massage Therapists. Therefore, must be familiar with law
for all health professions in Oregon to know what are violations. Failure to report
could result in disciplinary action if found out.
FAIL Mandatory
reporting for other health professionals is not required. Mandatory reporting
of suspected violations of massage law still required. | Executive
Committee Statements Support
No
supporting arguments for this bill were submitted by the OMTA Executive Committee
members. Oppose
I
am in favor of the current system where reporting is free, voluntary, and is working:
people are encouraged to report suspicious or criminal behavior directly to law
enforcement agencies whose investigators and prosecuting attorneys handle reports
and can coordinate the response. Mandatory reporting encourages judgmental thinking,
can create extremely hostile workplaces, and is easily abused or mis-used by certain
personality types. Rose Jade, OMTA Area Representative for the Central Coast Current
system works fine. Some problems with wording of bill may require LMTs to report
violations of all health professions. Robert Bike, OMTA President There
is no need for the type of regulations proposed; maybe other Boards have had issues,
but that does not apply to massage therapists in general. Hopefully the
amendment would exempt LMT’s in the event it does pass. Bruno De Block,
OMTA Immediate Past President Mandatory
reporting is already required for LMTs under current rules, but not for LMTs to
report all other health professions. Designed to address serious problems that
occurred with a different health profession board, the language of this bill is
far too broad and vague, with unnecessary reporting steps to be an efficient solution.
Heather Bennouri, OMTA Membership Director & Touchstone Editor | Membership
Survey Results | House
Bill 2118 Revises Health Professions Statutes
The full Text of
HB 2118 is online here.
Key
Changes
Defines “impairment.” Boards maintain most jurisdiction to
handle case-by-case decisions.
States primary purpose of health professions
boards. Protect the public health, safety, and welfare by ensuring that licensees
practice with reasonable skill and safety.
Permits fingerprints for
licensing, renewal, and board applicants for the purposes of criminal background
checks.
Mandatory reporting of health professionals. Excludes Psychiatrists,
Psychologists, Psychosocial Workers, and Professional Counselors from reporting
their patients. Makes individuals who make reports to health professions boards
in good faith exempt from civil liability and administrative sanctions for making
the report.
Maintains health profession board jurisdiction over licensees
regardless of change in license status. Prevents granting temporary, conditional,
or restricted licenses to individuals whose license has been revoked.
Makes
email addresses of licensees confidential.
Makes health professions
boards subject to State Personnel Relations Law.
Allows board to
recommend the Governor remove Executive Directors.
Requires quarterly
reports from the Executive Director of the board to the board, Governor. and the
Department of Human Services. The Department of Human Services can do random audits
and assess the costs to the board.
Board members must be residents
of Oregon, public board members cannot be specific family members of an LMT.
Allows
statewide Massage Therapy Associations to nominate board members.
How
Does This Affect You?
PASS Mandatory reporting of health professionals will
be required. Allows board to hold licensees accountable for violations of massage
law committed when practicing, even if they give up their license. More clearly
defines who can be board members. Makes personal email addresses of licensees
confidential. Requires (for OBMT) two sets of personnel rules to be in place.
Provides for Governor removal of Executive Directors. Clarifies board member requirements.
FAIL
Statutes remain as is. Board retains rights to do fingerprinting as under current
law. Mandatory reporting of LMTs still required. Only one set of personnel rules
for hiring. Governor cannot remove Executive Director of board. Email addresses
are public information. Licensees who violate massage law and then give up their
license cannot be held accountable for their actions. Executive Director responsible
for higher number of reports. | Executive
Committee Statements Support
No
supporting arguments for this bill were submitted by the OMTA Executive Committee
members. Oppose
I
am in favor of the current system where reporting is free, voluntary and works.
See my comments under HB 2059. Rose Jade, OMTA Area Representative for the
Central Coast Intro
and Page 44 of the bill as it relates to the massage board. Allows OBMT to obtain
fingerprints for license renewal, imposes duty to report impaired professionals,
OBMT would keep jurisdiction over LMTs even after giving up license. This is far
too intrusive for all LMTs who never cause problems. Robert Bike, OMTA President OBMT
is already required to keep the identity of a complainant confidential. This bill
is casting too wide a net, just to address a few individuals who will already
lose their license under current rules and regulations. Bruno De Block, OMTA
Immediate Past President The
language in this bill more clearly addresses many of the concerns in some of the
other bills this session in a more sensible manner. However, it adds a level of
bureaucracy to the board, requiring two different personnel policies to run in
parallel and allows the possibility for the governor to appoint and remove the
Executive Director at whim. Heather Bennouri, OMTA Membership Director &
Touchstone Editor | Membership
Survey Results | House
Bill 2345 Develops Process for Dealing with Impaired Professionals
The
full Text of HB 2345 is online here.
Key
Changes
Defines “impaired professional.”
Establishes
process to identify, refer, and monitor impaired professionals.
How
Does This Affect You?
PASS Provides detailed instructions to the OBMT (and
other health professions board) on how to handle impaired professionals, how long
to monitor them, establishes drug testing procedures for individuals identified
as impaired professionals, and sets requirements for length of license suspension
or revocation.
FAIL Individual boards maintain current policies for
dealing with impaired professionals and have the right to adopt new or modify
old policies, as well as judge individuals on a case-by-case basis. | Executive
Committee Statements Support
If
a licensee has a drinking or drug abuse problem and needs to be monitored, the
Board should be required to use an independent monitor to reduce the risk that
personality issues between the Board and the licensee will be unfairly used for
or against the licensee. Another needed check and balance. Rose Jade, OMTA
Area Representative for the Central Coast
Oppose
Standardizes
how various health boards deal with impaired professionals, but takes away board's
discretion with individual cases. Again, this fixes problems with other boards,
but OBMT seems to be operating fine without the fix, and without the increased
costs. Robert Bike, OMTA President
If
there is any merit in this proposal, I do not see any reason why we can’t
make a suggestion to OBMT and address those issues accordingly. There is
no need to make more laws, when a rule change specific to massage therapists will
suffice. Bruno De Block, OMTA Immediate Past President This
establishes mandatory requirements for license suspension and penalties and removes
the board’s authority to use its discretion for case-by-case scenarios. Independent
monitoring agencies can still be used if there are cases that warrant this step,
but so far this has not even been an issue for LMTs. Heather Bennouri, OMTA
Membership Director & Touchstone Editor | Membership
Survey Results | House
Bill 2347 Prevents Health Licensing Boards from Assessing Costs and Attorney Fees
The
full Text of HB 2347 is online here.
Key
Changes
Prohibits health professional regulatory boards from assessing licensees
any attorney fees, investigation costs, hearing costs, or any other costs associated
with an investigation or disciplinary proceeding.
How Does This
Affect You?
PASS Investigative, hearing, and attorney costs involved in disciplinary
hearings against an LMT cannot be assessed against that LMT. Instead, these costs
would become part of the budget and thus distributed through decreased services
or increased licensure fees.
FAIL All language stays as it currently
is. Individuals who create cost to the OBMT for disciplinary processes can be
assessed fees corresponding to those costs. Extensive costs that are not part
of the budget do not become a burden to uninvolved LMTs. | Executive
Committee Statements Support
I
support removing the current provision that allows the Board to recoup its attorney
fees and costs against a licensee, regardless of her innocence, and on top of
any fine imposed should she be found guilty. The current system is unequal in
that only 3 Oregon Boards are allowed to do this, the licensee is not able
to recoup her attorney fees and costs from the Board, and the licensee has no
way to challenge the amount of Board costs (both due process safeguards are available
in court proceedings). Rose Jade, OMTA Area Representative for the
Central Coast Fines
if found guilty should be sufficient to punish. Again, this fixes problems with
another health board. Robert Bike, OMTA President Unless
it has changed, several years ago, OBMT used the tactic of threatening LMT’s
with the cost of litigation, in order to make them agree to a minor infraction.
This is not acceptable: Either the complaint has merit, and the LMT pays the fine,
or he/she is not and the Board absorbs the cost. Bruno De Block, OMTA Immediate
Past President Oppose
The
OBMT currently has this right and has only exercised it once in the past five
years. It is used when an LMT has been found guilty of the charges against them,
but has repeatedly appealed and run up court costs excessively (tens of thousands
of dollars)—without this, those costs would be distributed across all LMTs,
who are uninvolved. Heather Bennouri, OMTA Membership Director & Touchstone
Editor | Membership
Survey Results |
"This
survey was taken in accordance with OMTA's By-Laws. Only Voting Members whose
dues are paid and who hold current Oregon licenses were eligible to vote. 157
ballots were sent out, 52 were returned. Some measures had no votes on some issues.
Statistically, 52 ballots has a 91% accuracy that all the measures would come
out the same, even if we were able to wrangle opinions out of all of our members.
In fact, 52 ballots gives us 95% confidence level that all the bills except HB2347
would give the same results with the full 5712 Oregon LMTs with active licenses
at close to the same ratio (within 10%) that our members favor and oppose these
bills. 52 returned ballots gives HB2347 an 86% confidence level that it would
be favored by 5712 LMTs. I'm confident that the survey correctly represents our
membership, and the active Oregon LMTs as well."—Robert Bike, OMTA
President
Additional
measures in OMTA's second survey: SB
692: Expanded Reflexology Exemption
Complete text of the bill here. Key
changes:
Changes application of reflexology by practitioner from thumbs only
to include fingers and palms.
Changes application of reflexology on client
body from feet, hands, and ears to include face. How
this affects you:
Reflexology already has a limited exemption. This expands
the scope of practice for that exemption. Neither
the existing exemption nor the revision require any education, sanitation, communicable
disease practices, ethical boundaries, licensing, or any other requirements currently
in place for Oregon LMTs.
| Executive
Committee Statements Favor I
favor all of these bills because I think these modalities are distinguishable
from the commonsense meaning of massage, they pose very little actual risk to
humans, exempting these practitioners from the Massage licensing requirements
is quite reasonable, doing so will increase client access to these modalities,
and there are existing laws on the books to protect the public from criminal assault,
etc., and to provide liability against practitioners who are negligent. Rose
Jade, OMTA Area Representative for the Central Coast
Oppose
I
had a Reflexology treatment this week (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflexology)
and it felt like massage to me, as it was alternately soothing and painful. This
proposed law does not define Reflexology, provides no protection, either for the
public or the practitioner, for cleanliness, pathology, ethics or education, and
there is a lack of central regulation, accreditation, training and licensing,
allowing anyone to practice as a reflexologist, with no qualifications. Robert
Bike, OMTA President I
have the same opinion for all three. I feel that if a massage therapist can perform
them, which we can, then it needs to be regulated under the board. I am opposed
to all three proposed bills. Daisy Talbado, OMTA Vice-President
If
you are going to be physically touching clients, then you need to be regulated.
It is important for client safety, personal and client education, and professionalism
in the field of massage therapy. Emden Griffin, OMTA Volunteer Coordinator Oregon
has never separated massage by modality until the last legislative session when
Reflexology was granted a very limited exemption. Further expanding this while
failing to include any type of regulation, education, or basic sanitation means
that anyone could practice with no training or oversight whatsoever. Heather
Bennouri, OMTA Membership Director
| Membership
Survey Results | SB
693: Exempts Bowenwork Therapy
Complete text of the bill here. Key
changes:
Exempts practitioners of Bowenwork therapy from all massage statutes
(licensing, regulation, and enforcement). How
this affects you:
Bowenwork therapy is considered massage under current Oregon
law. This exemption does not require any education, sanitation, communicable disease
practices, ethical boundaries, licensing, or any other requirements currently
in place for Oregon LMTs.
| Executive
Committee Statements Favor I
favor all of these bills because I think these modalities are distinguishable
from the commonsense meaning of massage, they pose very little actual risk to
humans, exempting these practitioners from the Massage licensing requirements
is quite reasonable, doing so will increase client access to these modalities,
and there are existing laws on the books to protect the public from criminal assault,
etc., and to provide liability against practitioners who are negligent. Rose
Jade, OMTA Area Representative for the Central Coast Oppose
I
had a Bowen treatment last year (http://www.bowenworktherapy.com/what_is_bowen_therapy.html),
and it felt like massage to me. While Bowen is protective of its name and has
standardized training around the world, this proposed law does not define Bowenwork
(aka Bowen or Bowtech) and provides no protection, either for the public or the
practitioner, for cleanliness, pathology, ethics or education. Robert Bike,
OMTA President I have
the same opinion for all three. I feel that if a massage therapist can perform
them, which we can, then it needs to be regulated under the board. I am opposed
to all three proposed bills. Daisy Talbado, OMTA Vice-President
If
you are going to be physically touching clients, then you need to be regulated.
It is important for client safety, personal and client education, and professionalism
in the field of massage therapy. Emden Griffin, OMTA Volunteer Coordinator Bowenwork
therapy clearly meets the definition of massage by Oregon law. Like other touch
modalities—regardless of quantity of pressure—basic guidelines, already
established in current statute should be in place to protect both public and practitioner.
Heather Bennouri, OMTA Membership Director
| | SB
717: Exempts Polarity Therapy
Complete text of the bill here. Key
changes:
Exempts practitioners of Polarity therapy through touch from all massage
statutes (licensing, regulation, and enforcement). How
this affects you:
Polarity therapy without touch is already exempt from all
massage statutes. This exemption does not require any education, sanitation, communicable
disease practices, ethical boundaries, licensing, or any other requirements currently
in place for Oregon LMTs.
| Executive
Committee Statements Favor I
favor all of these bills because I think these modalities are distinguishable
from the commonsense meaning of massage, they pose very little actual risk to
humans, exempting these practitioners from the Massage licensing requirements
is quite reasonable, doing so will increase client access to these modalities,
and there are existing laws on the books to protect the public from criminal assault,
etc., and to provide liability against practitioners who are negligent. Rose
Jade, OMTA Area Representative for the Central Coast Oppose
While
the American Polarity Therapy Association has a code of ethics, extensive training,
and regulations for their members, this law does not define Polarity Therapy (aka
Polarity) and does nothing to protect the public or practitioners in the areas
of cleanliness, pathology, ethics or education. While I've had many wonderful
Polarity Therapy sessions since the early 1970s, and have read several books by
Randolph Stone (the founder of Polarity Therapy), excluding the entire field of
Polarity Therapy from regulation does not do justice to the public protection
that massage laws provide. Robert Bike, OMTA President I
have the same opinion for all three. I feel that if a massage therapist can perform
them, which we can, then it needs to be regulated under the board. I am opposed
to all three proposed bills. Daisy Talbado, OMTA Vice-President
If
you are going to be physically touching clients, then you need to be regulated.
It is important for client safety, personal and client education, and professionalism
in the field of massage therapy. Emden Griffin, OMTA Volunteer Coordinator Polarity
therapy, used without touch, is already exempt from massage laws—with touch,
the lack of definition in this bill for Polarity Therapy creates significant problems
and could allow anyone claiming to be a Polarity Therapist (regardless of work
performed) to practice massage without a license. Basic education, sanitation,
draping, communicable disease control, pathology, and ethics should still be required
as of all other touch modalities. Heather Bennouri, OMTA Membership Director | |
"This
survey was taken in accordance with OMTA's By-Laws. Only Voting Members whose
dues are paid and who hold current Oregon licenses were eligible to vote. 183
ballots were sent out, 71 were returned. Statistically, 71 ballots has a 97.0%
accuracy that all the measures would be opposed at the same percentage (within
10%), even if we were able to wrangle opinions out of all of our members. In fact,
71 ballots gives us 91.2% confidence level that all the bills in the second survey
would be opposed by all 5712 Oregon LMTs with active licenses at close to the
same ratio (within 10%) that our members oppose these bills. I'm confident that
this second survey correctly represents our membership, and the active Oregon
LMTs as well."—Robert Bike, OMTA President
Related
Links
Oregon Board of Massage Therapists
Oregon
State Legislature |
OMTA
is a 503(c)(6) Non-Profit Corporation. According to the IRS,
contributions are not deductible as charitable contributions on the donor's federal
income tax return. They may be deductible as trade or business expenses if ordinary
and necessary in the conduct of the taxpayer's business. Contact your tax consultant
if this affects you.
|
