| Although this information originated from Reiki Unified, the proposed licensing bill would affect all forms of energy work and holistic care in Massachusetts. This is the 7th time the bill’s sponsor has attempted to get this bill through committee and into a general vote. We have stopped it only through our action: emails, calls, petitions, oral testimony, etc. This is relevant to anyone in the US — what happens in one state affects all states. SO PLEASE SEE THE INFO BELOW on how to help fight this destructive bill. If you don’t understand why it is destructive, or if you would like more info, take a look at my blog from the last time we had to deal with this threat: https://reikibostonclasses.com/2023/07/06/once-again-we-resist-a-poorly-conceived-system-of-licensure/ View this email in your browser |
| Dear Reiki Unified Supporters- URGENT – Immediate Action Needed- Massachusetts Needs our Help!The Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure is about to vote on S261 An Act Regulating Alternative Healing Therapies. If we do not take action there is a REAL posibilty Reiki will be regulated. This is serious and we must take action. CALL TO ACTION If letters in opposition or calls in opposition to S261 to the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure members are not received, this bill will be voted favorably out of the Committee and sent to the Senate for a vote. The Senate will without a doubt pass this bill, and the Governor, Maura Healy, who had filed a previous version of the licensure bill will sign it into law. If this bill is passed in MA, it will be duplicated in other states.We must keep Reiki free. 1. Sign the Change.org petition, Protect the Right to Practice, Teach and Access Alternative Healing Therapies in MA 2. Email letters of opposition to the Committee Members (Sample Letter on our Website) 3. Call the members of the Committee to voice your opposition of S261(Phone and Talking Points on our Website) Together We Are Stronger! The Reiki Unified Team—Christopher Tellez and Ifetayo White Please share this update with friends and colleagues! |
| WebsiteCopyright © 2025 Reiki Unified, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website. Our mailing address is: Reiki UnifiedPO Box 920444Needham, MA 02492-0006Add us to your address book |
Tag: yoga
Once again we resist a poorly-conceived system of licensure
For several years, we have been dealing with the possibility of licensure of wellness practices in Massachusetts. Perhaps there would be some way to license these practices in a constructive way. However, the proposed system in Massachusetts would have a devastating effect on these practices.
This Monday, July 10, the licensure bill will be heard by the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Licensure.
If you have ever benefited from Reiki, yoga, tai chi, chi gung, meditation, Jin Shin Jyutsu, polarity therapy or any type of currently unlicensed wellness practice, take action. We have been fighting this proposed legislation for several years, and at every step, it has been the sincere voices of clients and practitioners that has been effective. Your voice matters!
Here is the link that explains how to submit testimony or send email: URGENT Say No to Licensing Alternative Therapies in Massachusetts! — Reiki Unified Although sending email before July 10 would be ideal, it is still worth sending if you miss that deadline.
If you don’t live in Massachusetts, you can still write to legislators on the committee. This bill is considered to be a test case for similar efforts in other states. What happens in Massachusetts will affect the practice of traditional wellness practices across the United States.
If you think that somehow this legislation won’t affect you (“I already have licensure in another discipline, I am a certified practitioner so surely I can be easily licensed, I don’t consider my work to be a health practice, etc.”) think again. This legislation would be far-reaching and all-encompassing.
I hope you will share this blog with your contacts. We need a strong response to preserve our access to wellness practices.
Below you will see my written testimony to the committee. The link above includes suggestions for how to write your own email. You can also find more information about the licensure issue in my blog entry of 12/13/21.
MY WRITTEN TESTIMONY TO THE COMMITTEE
I appreciate the opportunity to present testimony in opposition to S191/H282. I am a client, a practitioner, and a teacher of traditional wellness methods. I am certified in several methods from various parts of the world, including a Japanese practice called Reiki.
I would like explain a bit about my profession. All of my practices are completely safe, with no risk of harm. I use light touch, with the client fully clothed. There are no needles, no pressure, and no substances. The worst outcome I can produce is no improvement, but that rarely occurs. My clients generally benefit from my sessions, experiencing relaxation, greater vitality, and symptom reduction.
I am not a health care provider; what I do is not an “alternative healing therapy.” Health care providers evaluate clients, diagnose disease, and treat particular conditions. I don’t do any of that. I assist the client’s system to reach a state of balance, harmony, and vitality. I support the client’s natural healing process. My practice is complementary to health care. My clients are monitored and treated by medical doctors and other licensed health care providers.
I love my work. I love helping people. But this profession can be quite difficult.I work long hours. My clients are often in crisis, and I experience secondary stress. My income is moderate. I am self-employed, so I receive no employment benefits — no paid time off, no 401K, no type of employer-sponsored health insurance, and no unemployment insurance. My only safety net is my savings account.
My training and ethical codes require that I not consider myself or present myself as a health care provider. Our society does not consider me to be a health care provider. Health care insurers will not pay for my services. These days, some insurance policies include coverage for acupuncturists or chiropractors, or even massage therapists. Absolutely no health insurance policy will pay for services like mine.
Many health care costs can be itemized as personal deductions for tax purposes, such as doctor visits, physical therapy, chiropractic and acupuncture. My services cannot be included as medical deductions.
The legal system does not consider what I do to be health care. I have worked with clients who had accidents and were pursuing insurance claims or lawsuits. Whereas their lawyers relied upon health care providers for records and/or testimony, I have never been involved. My opinion is meaningless in a legal setting.
I do carry liability insurance, but my liability insurance premium is a fraction of the premiums for health care providers. Insurance companies are precise in their statistics; they know that claims against practitioners in my field are rare to nonexistent.
According to the norms of my own methods, our health insurance system, our liability insurance system, our tax system, and our legal system, I am not a health care provider. However, the sponsors of this bill want you to treat me and my colleagues like “therapists” only in the area of licensure.
Why? Because there have been so many complaints about harm from practitioners like me? No. Consumer complaints were not the motivation for this bill. This bill has a long history and has been proposed multiple times. It was originally proposed as a way to fight human trafficking. Significantly, that particular justification has been dropped. We have shown, over the course of many years and many hearings, that our legitimate practices have no relationship whatsoever with human trafficking. And we have shown that licensing us would have little effect on human trafficking.
Each time this bill is brought forth, there is an outcry from clients, practitioners, and teachers. Our professions don’t lend themselves well to the type of regulation proposed in this bill. The proposed system would make it harder for us to practice and would put many of us out of business. We keep explaining this over and over.
Should a profession be licensed just for the sake of licensing? Should it be licensed in a way that would damage rather than enhance the profession? Should it be licensed just for the sake of collecting licensure fees?
It is unclear to me if I would be able to continue my work under this proposed licensure system. Many of the details are left vague, to be determined by a few licensure board appointees. I would probably have to stop teaching. Depending on the details, the proposed system could put me out of business. In the best case scenario, I would have to significantly raise my fees, making my services inaccessible to many clients.
I ask you to oppose S191/H282. Please don’t make my wonderful, difficult job even more difficult. More importantly, please don’t take our services away from clients and students. Doing so would be the exact opposite of consumer protection.
Thank you for your consideration of my testimony.
Why licensure of alternative and complementary care is a really bad idea
Update: Through organizing and contacting our elected representatives, practitioners and clients of energy work were able to prevent the passage of a licensure bill in Massachusetts in 2021. The bill has resurfaced in July 2023 and we are advocating for our practices once again. This issue is likely to remain relevant in Massachusetts and in many other states. It’s important that we work together across the many energy work disciplines in order to keep our work accessible to those who need it.
I include below my email to the legislative committee that was considering the licensure bill in December 2021. The bill being brought forth in July 2023 is identical to this 2021 version.
Dear Senators and Representatives,
I am asking you to oppose SB 221/HB 350 for the following reasons:
- A profession should only be regulated because of the actions of its own practitioners.
- Alternative healing practitioners do not need to be regulated. Harm is extremely rare.
- Licensing alternative healing practitioners would not significantly affect sex trafficking.
- Law enforcement can already easily distinguish between genuine practitioners and prostitution establishments.
- A court challenge on this basis of freedom of religion is nearly inevitable.
- Requiring state licensure of traditional practices with strong ethnic roots will be seen as discriminatory and an intrusion into cultural traditions.
- The proposed Board and Advisory Council cannot adequately establish guidelines for this extremely diverse set of practices.
- Each individual on the advisory board will have tremendous power over the discipline that they represent – power that could easily be abused.
- The bill would prohibit volunteering except under strict supervision or with immediate family members; cutting off this source of help seems particularly cruel.
- Burdensome licensing fees and procedures would cause many practitioners to close their businesses.
- Hard-working and sincere practitioners would lose their source of income.
- Supply would drop and prices would increase. Many clients would be priced out of receiving services.
- Licensing these practices would do far more harm than good.
Please see below for a more detailed explanation:
A profession should only be regulated because of the actions of its own practitioners, not because of the behavior of criminals who are pretending to be members of the profession.
Alternative healing practitioners do not need to be regulated. Harm to clients is extremely unusual, as is made obvious by very low liability insurance rates (approximately $150 per year).
Licensing alternative healing practitioners would not significantly affect sex trafficking. Traffickers still attempt to use “massage” as camouflage, despite the fact that massage is licensed.
Law enforcement can already easily distinguish between genuine practitioners and prostitution establishments. There are clear signs that an establishment is providing sex (name, photos used in advertisement, descriptions used in advertisement, listings on sex-work websites, etc).
These disciplines are holistic. They address the whole person — body, mind and spirit. Many disciplines consider their work to be spiritual or even religious in nature (for example Christian laying on of hands or pagan healing ceremony). Because of this, attempts at regulation may very well cross a line into limiting freedom of religion. If this legislation passes, a court challenge on this basis of freedom of religion is nearly inevitable.
Some of these disciplines are specific to particular cultural groups. Requiring state licensure will be seen as discriminatory and an intrusion into cultural traditions (for example, Native American shamanic healing, Cuban Santeria, Roma divination and prayer). Claims of discrimination and a court challenge are likely.
These disciplines are numerous and diverse. Even within methods that call themselves by the same name, there is much diversity. A Board and Advisory Council cannot adequately establish guidelines for this extremely diverse set of practices. Also, each individual on the advisory board will have tremendous power over the discipline that they represent – power that could easily be abused.
The bill would prohibit volunteering except under supervision or with immediate family members. Many practitioners provide free treatment to friends or neighbors, and these treatments can be very beneficial. They are especially important to those who can’t afford to pay for treatment. Cutting off this source of help seems particularly cruel.
Burdensome licensing fees and procedures would cause many practitioners and especially practitioner/teachers to close their businesses. This would reduce supply and increase prices. Those who do continue practicing would need to pass the cost along to their clients/students – which would again raise prices.
Many hard-working practitioners who provide valuable services and reap only modest financial rewards would lose their source of income. The majority of practitioners are women, many of whom are supporting families.
Many people depend upon the help they receive from alternative healing practitioners. We are currently in a crisis of exorbitant healthcare costs and inadequate insurance coverage. We are also in the middle of a pandemic. There would never be a good time for this bill, but now is a particularly bad time.
Licensing these practices would do far more harm than good. This bill has been under consideration for quite a while. At every step of the way, there has been an outcry from clients and practitioners. Please listen to those of us who truly understand the field of alternative health. Please oppose SB221/HB350.
Reiki Boston 