What Happened to the Regulation of Acupuncture in the UK?

[normansavigar]

Dear Lisa

I fear that the opportunity to secure any protection for the term 'acupuncture' for Chinese medicine practitioners was lost probably about 20 years ago when BAcC was formed from the consolidation of a number of bodies and Western medical acupuncture hadn't gained the worldwide momentum that it now has. My personal understanding is that current legal and political advice indicates there is no mileage to be gained from pursuing such a specific objective in the current environment. But there may be other opportunities for increasing the recognition and acceptance that are worth pursuing.

Having reviewed the CHRE/PSA opportunity about a year ago, the per capita investment for BAcC PSA accreditation of less than £3 per member per annum was not considered to be a big issue given the benefits BAcC Members expect to receive.

As our Members' Survey and Regional Groups highlight, there is a considerable number of BAcC Members who wish to work within or for the NHS in a variety of opportunities, and the agenda is thus suitably balanced to support their quest. On the other hand, there are also many who have no desire at all to be associated with the NHS and their independence is also supported with BAcC activities. I can't speak for the activities of other 'representatives of our profession' beyond the BAcC that you refer to.

In the context of this Forum, I would stress that we need to have confidence in the very long-standing and proven medicine that underpins our practise using acupuncture techniques. I don't see myself as competing with other dry-needling healthcare professionals, who are developing their own models of why needling may be successful with their treatments. In my proposals for NHS opportunities I have been quite clear that my diagnosis, strategy and treatment principles are all based upon the theory of Chinese medicine, whether that be Classical or Traditional Chinese Medicine, or techniques such as the Balance Method. I will not waiver from that position and I would encourage all traditional acupuncturists to consider this and not give in to any inclination to dilute our medicine.

regards
Norman

[AAPrescott]

Thanks for this. I am not sure that an oportunity was lost 20 years ago, because I am not aware of their being any oportunity to lose. I don't think it was attainable at that time. Here in the US we have the same tension between working within the system or sticking to ones principles. But here of course the system is private health care and having lived in the US for 16 years I want to yell accross the Atlantic that you guys don't know realise how much better the NHS is. Of course I know it is not pefect, but it is way better than a system that has only one aim - profit.

[Lisa]

Dear Lisa

I fear that the opportunity to secure any protection for the term 'acupuncture' for Chinese medicine practitioners was lost probably about 20 years ago when BAcC was formed from the consolidation of a number of bodies and Western medical acupuncture hadn't gained the worldwide momentum that it now has. My personal understanding is that current legal and political advice indicates there is no mileage to be gained from pursuing such a specific objective in the current environment.

Protection of title of 'Acupuncturist', not Acupuncture, as an educational level of a professional subject could be lobbied for.
Of course political advice is against this route! It usually is, that's the point in going through the process, It wasn't easy for Osteopathy either.
If the time had passed 20yrs ago why did we all bother to attempt statutory regulation so recently?

As I understand it, all of the associations, had reached an agreement and were waiting for approval of SR when the government pulled the plug on the whole idea.

If the groundwork has already been done, why can't this be used to move forward with protection of title and voluntary self regulation?

Are you and your members happy to have to earn and pay for a place, for approval of safety, on the same register as other professions that are allowed to use acupuncture with only one weekend of training?

Do you and your members think it is ethical for the government to allow this?

[normansavigar]

Dear Lisa

I think that you have answered most of your own questions with regard to trying to deal with successive governments that don't want to spend considerable resources, if they can avoid it, on the statutory regulation of more healthcare professionals.

I am also not hearing any serious concerns about what has been achieved with VSR for BAcC Members. Perhaps we should stick to the values of our 2000-year old medicine and continue to prove our worth in the market place. Then they will be more inclined to listen to our success stories, as was evidenced at the ARRC event today.

Regards
Norman

[AAPrescott]

There is an interesting comment by the new chairman in the most recent edition of The Acupuncturist. I think I will also post this on the BAcA forum. "We were sorry to recieve the resignation of Jennie Longbottom from the Governing Board. Jennis has always keenly advocated our cause as traditional acupuncture practitioners alongside her great expertise in trigger point therapy that have been adopted by some physiotherapists". This strikes me as something of a gloss-over. There is a tension here. Although, I do not assert where the balance might be.

[Lisa]

Dear Lisa

I think that you have answered most of your own questions with regard to trying to deal with successive governments that don't want to spend considerable resources, if they can avoid it, on the statutory regulation of more healthcare professionals.

I am also not hearing any serious concerns about what has been achieved with VSR for BAcC Members. Perhaps we should stick to the values of our 2000-year old medicine and continue to prove our worth in the market place. Then they will be more inclined to listen to our success stories, as was evidenced at the ARRC event today.

Regards
Norman

Protection of title, differs from statutory regulation in that it does not require the government to regulate, it is self regulated as we are being asked to do already, but it would afford us protection and professional status, that we do not have at the moment.

Im sure your members don't have any complaints about what has been achieved by VSR, it seems obvious that people would be happy about the positives but are there any complaints about what is missing?
Are your members happy to have to prove their fitness to practice, to gain approval from a register that does not demand the same level of proof from chiropractors and osteopaths to practice acupuncture?

Is it ethical for the government to allow this?

[nmalyon]

No not really, it isn't ethical for a government to allow such bias and misinformation to the public, who obviously cannot distinguish between one person calling themselves an acupuncturist and another. One of whom may have completed a 4 year degree in TCM acupuncture and the other 3 years of pure occidental medicine and a mere weekend of acupuncture! This can never be right, whichever way you look at it.

Its fine and dandy that the BAcC have attained this status - (Shame its another "go it alone" situation but that's probably not all their fault - that's down to all of us not having the gumption to unite) - but it is, as Lisa rightly points out, not protection of title. Osteos and Chiros also have protection of title - that's the crucial bit!!!

As it stands, the PSA???..................hmmmm................posit ive move...................not as influential a move as people seem to think, I suspect..................shame its still us and them amongst trad acupuncturists............the BAcC??.......... still pushing the NHS thing (As this is Nick Pahl's past and what he knows best).

All the way from sunny China, Nick

[nmalyon]

I don't see myself as competing with other dry-needling healthcare professionals

And I forgot to add - re: the above quote.

Norman, just to to bring you up to date with whats actually happening out there

You are absolutely correct in saying you are not competing with other dry needling healthcare professionals! They are very rapidly disappearing from our streets and clinics..........Really? I hear you say.......because they are now calling themselves acupuncturists!!! That's the point, not that they are there, but they are now calling themselves acupuncturists!!!

Not one physio or osteo colleague in my area, to my knowledge, use the term dry needling any more. I've spoken to many of them about it. They say, "Its not a very pleasant term", "The public have no idea what it is" and they've now realized that if they call themselves acupuncturists no-one can do a damn thing about it!!!!!!!

Now! That's the issue.....................Protection of Title.

[attilio]

We are also shooting ourselves in our own foot, when you have practitioners of acupuncture, such as Jennie Longbottom, offering weekend courses to medical doctors, http://www.cpdo.net/cpda/cal.html#3. Learning a 2000 year old medicine in a few weekends is like learning western medicine in one weekend. Impossible! The BAC and other associations should stop practitioners from offering these courses. CPD courses and all workshops should also be regulated.

Rather than see the errors of her ways and stop teaching day courses in acupuncture to healthcare professionals, Jennie has felt it would be better to file a complaint against me to the ASA. Well, i don't know what she hopes to accomplish with that apart from having a little spat, but the facts are the facts and she is in the wrong. So this compain will continue!

[Lisa]

This is very sad Atilio! There should be solidarity at least among the professional acupuncture associations and its practitioners!

The AACP claims its practitioners use Traditional Chinese Acupuncture Principles with a minimum training of 80hrs. Is this Possible without studying the TCM system of diagnosis? Does using its techniques, as instruction by rote, qualify as understanding of and competent use of the principles?

If not, is this a possible fraudulent or at least misleading claim, issued on an unsuspecting public?
Don't the public deserve to be told the truth about the quality of treatment they are receiving, in trust?
This is in effect mislabeling.
Isn't it the ASA who check these sort of claims?