 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| camaction |
|
Dear Representative Forster: Thank you for responding to my email so promptly. I am glad to see you are interested in more information. Though my response is lengthy I hope to demonstrate that there is much more to this issue than has been presented to you and the other supporting Representatives. As a massage therapist in the Atlanta-Metro area for over eleven years I have strong objections to the entire piece of legislation you are endorsing for many, many reasons. One of my biggest objections is the statement about massage therapy being harmful to the public. It has been proven over and over ad nauseum that this simply isn't the case. It is this initial arguement that is used by people who wish to control the industry for their own purposes by perpetuating such hogwash. As I asked before, on what grounds has harm to the public been proven? When SB300 was introduced in 1998 a Georgia Sunrise committee produced a report that researched this issue and found no harm to the public existed. This bill was withdrawn shortly after this report was issued. I object to the unlimited power that this bill provides to the massage board. For starters, there are no specifics regarding educational requirements or what schools will be considered "board approved" or the amount for licensing fees. What this means is there are absolutely no limitations in place to prevent the board from passing unreasonable requirements that would prevent legitimate massage therapists and somatic bodyworkers from being able to continue their practices and earn an income. Will the board be its own or will it fall under the power of other medical boards as has been suggested in the past? The state has admitted to not being able to fund this type of board. Which means that if this bill is passed and a board is created it could be put under the power of nurses, chiropractors, physical therapists or physicians...all who have their own agenda in regards to the earning potential of massage therapists and somatic bodyworkers. For example, physical therapists are unable to work on a person unless directed by a physician; currently a massage therapist needs no such directive or prescription--we can work on anyone who walks into our practice. The physical therapists are currently fighting the physicians to regain control over access of who they treat. If the massage therapy board is put under the control of physicians what is to prevent that same thing from happening to massage therapy? The answer is nothing. What is to prevent the chiropractic board from placing these same restrictions on massage therapists? Again...nothing. I'm curious how the massage board is going to be funded. In order for the board to remain its own entity the licensing fees would have to sustain it. It is obvious by the wording in the bill it is written primarily as anti-prostitution legislation. So I ask you, what is the cost involved in maintaining a licensing board, especially one that wishes to attack and prosecute people using massage therapy as a cover for illicit sex? Will the board have to fund this prosecution? How will this be limited? How much will the yearly licensing fees have to cost in order to provide the kind of funding to carry this out and remain self sustaining? Is it fair that legitimate massage therapists and somatic bodyworkers be held accountable plus fund the prosecution of prostitutes? The bill does not address these points. Have the people who wrote this bill given this any consideration? To further address your response in regard to illegitimate massage aka: prostitution. It is interesting that in your email your statement addressed the fact that this is not a large issue, "...on those few that give others a bad name to the public." Again, this is another means of misdirection on the part of those wanting to push this bill through. The way for massage therapists to fight against this stigma is through education of the public not through state licensing. In the past five years alone, the use of massage therapy as a safe alternative to the public has more than tripled and it has happened through education. Additionally, the state of Georgia has already created laws that address the illegal activity of prostitution. Everything law enforcement requires in order to prosecute prostitution is available for them to do so. It is not necessary to discriminate against legitimate massage therapists in order to prevent illegal activity. Representative Forster, what I know about the legislative process is this...this bill, introduced as it is, will undergo changes by people who know nothing to very little about massage therapy. It opens doors for the various medical associations to tweak it, the various religious groups to tweak it, various government agencies to tweak it and any other group who feels it needs to have some input. When it is all over and done, the bill that comes out could very well put over half of the massage and somatic workers in the state of Georgia out of work with little to no recourse. Those who will be able to work will be unduly taxed to perform a task that the state of Georgia is already capable of doing but chooses not to. Where is the benefit in this? There are reasons every massage licensing bill introduced thus far has been defeated. The majority of massage therapists and somatic workers in the state of Georgia do not want state licensing. They do not believe it is necessary to prevent prostitution by attacking and discriminating against their industry. They do not want people controlling their practices or their income and they especially do not want a handful of small minded people putting in the publics mind that massage therapy is dangerous when, in fact, it is not. Please Representative Forster, remove your support from HB368. This bill if passed will do more harm than good to the massage therapy industry. I personally do not see a need to create legislation that impacts massage therapy, however, if you truly wish to support massage therapy through legislation I would suggest you consider supporting the Complementary Medical Association (CAMA). They are drafting a bill to give the public access to alternative healthcare. Representatives are needed for endorsement and this bill will have a far more positive impact on the public. The draft can be viewed at the Complementary Medical Association (CAMA) website: http://www.camaweb.org/legislation/2003_bill_draft.php I would still appreciate knowing when this bill will be in committee for discussion? I would also like to know who proposed this bill to the Representatives so I may contact them personally. Respectfully, |