Media Corner

Overview – Challenges in Licensing/Regulation/Certification

Federation of State Massage Therapy Boards

State Boards and Regulations, Massage Therapy

Legislative Update 2008

Legislative Resources
Eight Core Principles of Massage & Bodywork Legislation
Preemption of Local Licensing Rules
Educational Requirements
Institutional Education Approval Process
Grandfathering
Reciprocity
Modality Exclusions/Exemptions
Board Composition/Powers
Examination/Temporary Licensure

Opinions and Issues

Glossary of More Than 250 Entries on Massage Treatments

Searchable Archive of More Than 800 Articles, from Acupressure to Zen

Legislative Resources
(For further information on model legislation, contact Jean Robinson, 800-458-2267 ext. 645.)

Eight Core Principles of Massage and Bodywork Legislation
In considering whether it is timely for a state to adopt massage therapy licensing, ABMP is guided primarily by member sentiment and their freedom to practice in that state. In some states currently without massage licensing there remains a benign environment — no pattern of harm to the public requiring protection and broad freedom for therapists to practice without burdensome, expensive regulation.

In deciding whether to hear a case, the United States Supreme Court considers whether the issue in question has been sufficiently “ripened” by broad exploration and adjudication in lower courts.

From time to time, certain states arrive at a point where the case for massage licensing has “ripened.” Sometimes a clear majority of massage therapists decide they want greater professional recognition and believe being licensed will confer that. More often, a pattern emerges of inconsistent, especially burdensome, local regulation of massage, often driven by well-meaning, but misguided, local law enforcement authorities whose underlying premise is that massage therapy is a cover for unsavory activities. At such a point, ABMP member sentiment in the state often shifts to favor state licensing.

If “ripeness” has been reached and ABMP begins working with its members to achieve state licensing, then we bring to bear our legislative activity and bill-drafting experiences. That experience has led to the development of positions we consider essential on eight core elements in massage and bodywork legislation.

1. Preemption of Local Licensing Rules
2. Educational Requirements
3. Institutional Education Approval Process
4. Grandfathering
5. Reciprocity
6. Modality Exclusions/Exemptions
7. Board Composition/Powers
8. Examination/Temporary Licensure

1. Preemption means that a state regulation governing massage and bodywork is indeed an all-encompassing statewide ordinance. Any state regulation that allows existing local massage licensing or registration ordinances to remain in effect adds burden without appropriate protection and makes a state law just another layer of requirements and expense. Thoughtful, balanced state licensing makes local licensing or registration superfluous.

2. Educational Requirements. Licensure is usually implemented in a profession to ensure a minimum standard of training in a field in order to protect consumers. The minimum standard is exactly that — a training floor that all practitioners should possess, an accepted common denominator — not necessarily an amount of training sufficient for particularly sophisticated massage practices. The widely accepted minimum education standard in the massage profession (as recognized by ABMP, AMTA and the National Certification Board for Therapeutic Massage and Bodywork) is 500 clock hours of training. Indeed, the absence of a pattern of substantial public harm from massage treatments in Texas, which requires only 300 hours of education plus an exam, suggests that an educational standard below 500 hours may possibly be sufficient, especially for therapists providing seated massage or basic restorative Swedish massage. In any case, ABMP does not believe that a minimum training standard should exceed 500 hours and will not support legislation with a minimum exceeding that number.

3. Institutional Education Approval Process. Several recent legislative proposals have vested instructional curriculum approval with a board or advisory committee charged with overseeing the massage profession. Such boards, however well qualified to perform other duties, typically lack experience in assessing educational institution policies and curricula. We believe instead that massage training institution approval responsibility should be vested with the state board or department of postsecondary education, which has experience evaluating diverse types of educational institutions.

4. Grandfathering. Prior to a state adopting massage licensing requirements, a number of massage therapists, with diverse amounts and types of formal massage education, have been practicing and contributing to community well-being. The adoption of licensing should not create a class of individuals who will have their livelihood taken from them. Rather, grandfathering provisions should be included in legislation that credits (under a reasonable formula) already practicing massage professionals for their experience as well as for their formal massage education. Provisional licensure for a limited, prescribed period of time until each already practicing massage therapist meets the new education standard is not grandfathering; ABMP does not support this “temporary hall pass” alternative because it does not give any permanent weight to prior practice experience.

5. Reciprocity allows a person moving from another state, in which they already are licensed to practice massage, to practice in their new state in an expeditious manner. To benefit as many professionals as possible, reciprocity should not be reserved only between states with identical qualifications. ABMP supports recognition of similar training and experience requirements, along with recognition of the National Certification Examination, as tools for obtaining licensure in these circumstances.

6. Modalities Exclusions/Exemptions. Most state massage and bodywork regulations define and govern the practice of massage therapy. However, there are many related modalities practiced that may or may not fall under the statutory description of massage. During the development of legislation, practitioners in these related fields need to have a voice as to whether or not their work should be covered by massage therapy statutes. Wherever practitioners in these fields make a persuasive consensus case for exemption, ABMP will support their position.

7. Board Composition/Powers. Any governing board overseeing the massage and bodywork profession should exclude from its service any representatives from training institutions that serve the field. The potential for self-serving decisions is simply too great. It is acceptable and can be helpful for school owners, directors, officers or other representatives to serve in an advisory capacity to such a board. Board service terms should not exceed three years, with a maximum of two consecutive terms for any individual.

8. Examination/Temporary Licensing. If passing an examination to qualify for a massage license is mandated, applicants should be allowed to qualify for a temporary license (as currently in Texas). In particular, states that require applicants to pass the National Certification Exam should provide an opportunity for a 90-day temporary license for those who meet educational requirements but have yet to take the examination. This provision should be available both to new massage school graduates and to those moving from another state.

Glossary of More Than 250 Entries on Massage Treatments
Searchable Archive of More Than 800 Articles, from Acupressure to Zen