OML response to the Australian Association of Massage Therapists Certification announcement On Wednesday 29 th June, AAMT sent out an email to members announcing a series of physical and online meetings to allow members to discuss with the board the proposed scheme. This comment piece does not include the additional information contained in the email nor the changes made to the Certification webpage. Further information will be provided when the changes have been considered. Oncology Massage Limited (OML) was in attendance as an exhibitor at the 11 th Annual Australian Association of Massage Therapists (AAMT) Conference, held in Hobart on the 27th, 28 th and 29 th May. Eleanor Oyston, founder of OML, and Atholl Reid, OML Tasmanian Coordinator, were there representing OML. A report on the conference is elsewhere in this newsletter. AAMT made two major announcements at the conference. One announcement was regarding the growth of AAMT, about which Paul McCann, AAMT president, said... the Board has also reviewed, evaluated and researched options to refresh our brand. They have resolved to bring forward a new, revitalised and relevant brand trading name of Massage and Myotherapy Australia that recognises the breadth and depth of our membership base across the span of qualification and skill. This process has been undertaken thoroughly and with professional input. The other announcement made by AAMT concerned the creation of what AAMT has termed a roadmap for the Massage and Myotherapy profession (1). AAMT states on the webpage for Certification, Certification provides a universal, formal
roadmap for the Massage and Myotherapy profession by describing the competencies skills, qualifications, and professional pathways for Therapists. It will support the growth of the profession and the professional development of Massage Therapists. (1) The capitalisation in this quote is as it is written on the AAMT webpage. The announcement has caused many massage therapists to comment on their view of what this means to the massage community. The matter of Certification has also arisen on the OM Therapists Facebook page. We encourage you to comment and make sure your views are heard. As has been commented on the web (2) there currently exists a framework for massage therapists set down in the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) (3). What is outlined on the AAMT Certification webpage appears to be a duplication of existing structures and documentation, with the major exception being that mention is made of trademarks for different types of therapists, and licensing, which implies cost, though no details of either are explained. The webpage states that accreditation entitles Massage Therapists to use the Trademark name and promote services in modalities for which they have the required qualification and accreditation (1) and that AAMT will instigate legal action to pursue individuals in breach of the Trademarked obligations (1). It does not go into any details about how this will be accomplished. There is a list of modalities on the AAMT Certification webpage (1) that includes Oncology Therapist : note that it does not state oncology massage therapist, merely oncology therapist. The term oncology massage therapist is a term that is currently in use, and recognised by AQF (via the OML Cert IV and Diploma documentation), and that would make it unlikely to be successfully trademarked. Also in the list of modalities (1) are some very open terms, including Chinese Therapist and Thai Therapist, which could have multiple interpretations, and would therefore require clarification.
The details revealed to date do not give any timeline for the implementation of AAMT Certification. One statement about time is in the section about the scheme being mandatory, which states that :... a grandfathering period is being considered... (1) to allow therapists time to enter the scheme. This same section also states that while it will not initially be mandatory, it will become so at some time in the future. Mandatory perhaps for AAMT members, though how this would impact other massage associations is unknown. In the AAMT details of Certification (1), it states that some massage associations have been consulted regarding the Certification initiative. From reading many comments on the web, it is unclear which associations have been contacted. OML was not contacted and AAMT has not provided OML with any additional details regarding the Certification scheme. OML is not an association, but with oncology therapist listed as one of the modalities they plan to trademark, the lack of consultation is surprising. There have been several opportunities in the past when the organisations representing massage therapists could have worked together and presented a cohesive and therefore more professional front for massage therapy. In many cases an opportunity has been missed in that each has presented their own point of view. An example of this was The Review of the Australian Government Rebate on Private Health Insurance for Natural Therapies (4) where multiple submissions were made. Another example is the way that change has been imposed by private health insurance companies and the responses of the organisations representing massage therapists. When one of the large private health insurance companies issued changed definitions, one massage organisation issued to its members an almost verbatim rendering of the wording, whereas another massage organisation took legal advice and then issued a breakdown of what their legal advice advised them were the impacts of the changes. No announcements were made about a combined
response to the private health insurance company. The AAMT announcement of Certification would appear to be yet another example of a missed opportunity to bring together the different organisations representing massage therapists and present a united presence for massage. It has all the appearance of being yet another divisive move that will not result in benefit for massage therapists. Other industries have multiple representing associations that come together in a peak body to present a single response as and when required. This is not the case with massage associations. Why is this? At the time of writing, there are still many unknowns with regard to the details of the AAMT Certification and its implementation. Until more details are made public of why AAMT believes that it needs to take this step, how the Certification program is to work and clarifications are made to the titles and their trademarking, it is difficult to know what the impact will be for oncology massage therapists, both AAMT members and non- members. OML has been following this matter and will continue to do so as it unfolds, keeping oncology massage therapists updated. It would be great if this were to be a two way process and any comments or concerns that oncology massage therapists have are welcome, either by email to info@oncologymassagetraining.com.au or on the therapists page on Facebook.
References; 1) https://aamt.com.au/certification- 2/ 2) Commentary on the web regarding the announcement of AAMT Certification: https://www.facebook.com/aamtofficial/ the comments on the post about Certification, dated 28 May at 10:30 http://softtissuetherapy.com.au/forum/threadview.aspx?id=5443 http://www.amt.org.au/news/articles.html#article- 1 3) Australian Qualification Framework (AQF) http://www.aqf.edu.au/ The AQF is the national policy for regulated qualifications in Australian education and training. It incorporates the qualifications from each education and training sector into a single comprehensive national qualifications framework. The AQF was first introduced in 1995 to underpin the national system of qualifications in Australia encompassing higher education, vocational education and training and schools. 4) The Review of the Australian Government Rebate on Private Health Insurance for Natural Therapies https://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/content/phi- natural- therapies