LEGISLATIVE REALITY
vs. Rumours
by the Rev. Timothy Jones, M.Min.
CI FNGH OB
In Ontario, Canada, there have been pervasive, incorrect rumours circulating around the internet that “… any verbal or nonverbal interaction with another person with the intent of holistically educating them or assisted (sic) them to wellness is now unlawful – unless you’re a registered psychotherapist, psychologist, MD, nurse, occupational therapist or social worker.”
Here’s another one … “From Yoga to BodyTalk, from hypnotherapy and hypnosis services to holistic education and spiritual care … your practitioner of choice must risk massive fines and jail time if they agree to treat you.”
And another … “If you practice any form of traditional, non-medical healing therapy and/or treatments or counselling, including spiritual and addictions counselling, in the Province of Ontario, your rights to do so will be severely restricted after March of this year.”
These are statements made on the internet by a particular group as if they are facts, rather than unsubstantiated opinion, however as I write this some months later in January, 2016, I note (with relief) the sun came up again this morning and the sky hasn’t yet fallen.
BACKGROUND
The real facts are that as with any state, province or country, before enacting laws in a democracy, lawmakers first hold public hearings to gather input from potentially affected, or involved, groups so the laws are balanced and fair for both practitioners and the public.
To that, in 2005-06, the province of Ontario held public hearings to seek input from interested parties regarding government plans to establish a professional regulatory College of Psychotherapists in Ontario.
The Act, which received Royal Assent in June, 2007 with a proposed 2013 date to begin operating (it was actually 2015), resolved a longstanding dispute with psychologists who claimed exclusive control over all psychological services, despite not necessarily being trained to do psychotherapy.
Moving to protect its members from being regulated, in 2011-12, NGH engaged in extensive negotiations with the Transitional Council for the Psychotherapy College using the lobbyist services of Jeffrey Lyons and Associates.
As part of the hearings, NGH’s Standards of Practice were read into official record and based on them, in all testimony of legislative intent, we received assurances that the Psychotherapy College DID NOT intend to regulate the practice of Consulting Hypnotism as defined by NGH Standards, that is … that we are motivational coaches using hypnosis.
WHO PAID FOR THAT?
NGH’s lobbying efforts were financed (in the 5 figures) by our union, the National Federation of Hypnotists, Local 104 of the Office and Professional Employees International Union (OPEIU) of the AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations) and CLC (Canadian Labour Congress).
The Federation of is one of the strongest unions of white collar workers in existence, comprised of nurses, physicians, chiropractors, podiatrists, consulting hypnotists, government employees, office workers … one which every hypnotic practitioner regardless of professional affiliation MUST consider joining.
ONGOING PROTECTION
Despite this, unsubstantiated opinions continued to be repeated by a group on the internet alleging the Psychotherapy College is going to prosecute hypnotists and other complementary health practitioners if not a member of the College.
In 2015, one of our Members, Ms. Robbie Spier Miller (Burlington Hypnosis Centre), a senior CI in Ontario, met the Premier at a political event and said she’d like to discuss the worrisome statements being made.
The Premier arranged a contact point for a meeting, and in August, 2015, Ms. Miller and I, as NGH’s Canadian Liaison for the Federation of Hypnotists union, met with the Premier’s Senior Health Advisor plus the Policy Advisor to the Minister of Health, at Queen’s Park, the seat of the provincial legislature.
We expressed that our Membership were concerned about the allegations of seemingly rampant planned prosecutions once the Act was passed, and although they didn’t appear common-sensical, suggested that the College wasn’t denying them in any fashion.
The Premier’s advisors indicated an awareness and appreciation of the unfounded web based allegations, accepted our 5-page brief, and suggested we also contact the College directly.
We did, and met with the Registrar of the College of Registered Psychotherapists Ontario (CRPO) personally in October, 2015.
We should mention here that although other organizations have been in touch with the College expressing similar concerns, NGH is the first professional association to request and be granted a meeting with the Registrar.
THE MEETING
The Registrar, with a background as a nurse and medical writer, also expressed an awareness of allegations circulating on the internet and addressing them, was quite emphatic about who the College is legislatively bound to approach.
First of all, she said, College regulations were put into place as a guide to their own Members, and (as reflected on their website) the College has very limited jurisdiction over people who are not Members.
Having said that, if individuals use the title “psychotherapist” (or an abbreviation), or hold themselves out as qualified to practise as a psychotherapist, or perform the controlled act of psychotherapy, if not a member of the College, there could be legal ramifications.
The College has the right, upon complaint from a member of the public, to investigate unlicensed individuals alleged to be performing the controlled act of psychotherapy, or calling themselves or what they do psychotherapy.
To that, also by their own regulations, the College may not investigate such an individual’s conduct, or hold him/her to the standards that apply to College Members. The College though also recognizes the expense of litigation and compliance with a “cease and desist” letter is preferred to prosecution when dealing with alleged infractions by unlicensed individuals.
WHAT IS THE CONTROLLED ACT OF PSYCHOTHERAPY?
In concert with the Colleges licensing psychotherapists, the Ministry of Health is the body who will determine the specific parameters of the controlled act of psychotherapy down the road, and in the meanwhile, the general definition to act as a guide is:
“… to treat, by means of psychotherapy technique delivered through a therapeutic relationship, an individual’s serious disorder of thought, cognition, mood, emotional regulation, perception or memory that may seriously impair the individual’s judgement, insight, behaviour, communication or social functioning.”
PSYCHOTHERAPY VS. COUNSELLING
There is a legislated difference between psychotherapy and counselling, and hence motivational coaching.
This is Ontario’s Health Professions Regulatory Advisory Council (HPRAC) distinction between Psychotherapy & Counselling …
“The practice of psychotherapy is distinct from both counselling, where the focus is on the provision of information, advice-giving, encouragement and instruction, and spiritual counselling, which is counselling related to religion or faith-based beliefs.” (HPRAC: New Directions, 2006; Chapter 7, Regulation of Psychotherapy, p. 208.)
The College IS NOT regulating counsellors or counselling. However, psychotherapy and counselling can at times be highly interrelated, like intervention in situations where an individual has indicated they intend to harm themselves, etc.
Another Canadian jurisdiction, Quebec, addressing the situation more directly, has indicated (by Bill 21) that there are interventions that, despite having similarities with psychotherapy, do not qualify as a psychotherapy.
Some of those listed are support meetings, support intervention, conjugal or family counselling, coaching, and crisis intervention.
We gave a copy of the Quebec regulations to the Registrar, and asked if the College would consider similarly clarifying the situation in Ontario in some manner for the complementary health professions, which they undertook to take under advisement.
PROFESSIONAL TITLES
It has been NGH’s practice for more than a decade to advise Members not to call themselves “hypnotherapists” nor call what they do “hypnotherapy.”
Supporting that is NGH legal opinion, based on prior experience, that in the event the hypnotherapist title is tested in a legal action, the courts are not expected to distinguish between “psychotherapy” and “hypnotherapy,” and may construe “hypnotherapy” to mean “psychotherapy by means of hypnosis.”
In fact, all NGH certificates are issued with the title Consulting Hypnotist, entitling Members to use the post-nominal CH after their name. You can also use one of the three other approved NGH earned titles, BCH (Board Certified), FNGH (Fellow, NGH) or DNGH (Diplomate) as post nominals.
LAST WORD
To common sense, just because someone with a web presence is of the opinion that the CRPO regulations disallow mothers to listen to their children’s troubles, or AA to counsel their members, or school guidance professionals to listen to student concerns, or even that critical incident stress management trained people cannot offer stress management in a critical incident unless a member of the College, is just nonsense.
It’s unfortunate that rumours are more exciting than fact, but as Adlai Stevenson II once quipped, “I offer my opponents a bargain: if they will stop telling lies about us, I will stop telling the truth about them.”
Remember that the official definition of Consulting Hypnotism is motivational coaching by means of hypnotism. It may also be held out to the public as teaching a self-help skill that allows normal people cope with normal problems in living.
As with any professional body, adherence to NGH’s Code of Ethics, Standards of Practice and Recommended Terminology are in place both as a guide for practitioners, and for Members’ protection.
Rev. Timothy Jones offers motivational hypnosis and
pastoral counselling from his clinic in Caledon, Ontario.
About Post Author
