CMTBC's position is that Registered Message Therapists can be adequately trained to do rectal and vaginal massage, and should therefore be given a restricted title which includes  rectal and vaginal massage.

However, CMTBC has not provided any convincing evidence WHY Registered Massage Therapists need to do vaginal and rectal massage,

I have already written one report and a short item about CMTBC's request for a restricted title which would include rectal and vaginal massage. In that report I asked questions which no one at CMTBC has yet answered.

I am motivated to ask additional  question about CMTBC's interest in vaginal and rectal massage because  CMTBC has provided additional information about its desire to obtain a restricted title which would prohibit unregistered massage therapists and other bodyworkers from doing rectal and vaginal massage.

This additional information, which CMTBC has provided, is in the following documents.:

1. CMTBC's November 17, 1999, Supplemental Response to the Health Professions Council's Preliminary Report on the Massage Therapists Scope of Practice.

2. Your letter of July 31, 2000., to Janet E.. McGregor, Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Program, Ministry of Health. Victoria.

3. George K. Bryce's letter of September 15, 2000, to M. VanAndel, MD, Deputy Registrar. College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC. Vancouver. 

Presumably CMTBC wants a restricted title to protect the public from harm that may occur IF unregistered massage therapists and other unregistered bodyworkers were to do rectal and vaginal massage.

Questions

1. When CMTBC was harassing* unregulated massage therapists and other bodyworkers, did CMTBC find any unregulated practitioners who did rectal and vaginal massage? If so, how many unregulated practitioners did rectal and vaginal massage, and what actions did CMTBC take against them?

2. If CMTBC has no reliable evidence  that any nonregistered practitioners have ever done rectal and vaginal massage, may we not safely assume that those unregistered practitioners have neve done rectal and vaginal massage?

3. Why then does CMTBC want a restricted title that would prohibit unregistered practitioners form doing rectal and vaginal massage which they have not done, and probably never will do?

4. Approximately  how many patients, if  any, do physicians presently  refer  to Registered Massage Therapists annually  for rectal and vaginal massage?

Finally,  I want to reiterate the following questions which I asked on page 2 of the Massage Law Newsletter Vol. 14, No. 3. 2000.

1. How many people in British Columbia, who  need such vaginal and rectal massage, are presently unable to obtain that treatment?

2. What well-documented evidence does CMTBC have that British Columbia presently has a shortage of professionals who are qualified to provide rectal and vaginal massage?

3. How serious is this shortage of qualified practitioners in terms of the public health, safety, and welfare in British Columbia?

cc: Mary McCrea, Health Professions Council

David MacAulay, Health Professions Council

Invine Epstein. Health Professions Council

A. Moyes, Minister of Health

 Janet E. McGregor. Assistant Deputy Minister. Corporate Programs. Ministry of Health. Victoria

M. VanAndel, MD. Deputy Registrar. College of Physicians and Surgeons of BC. Vancouver

Lincoln Lau, British Columbia Coalition of Allied Bodywork  Practitioners

George K. Bryce, CMTBC Board

Peter Behr

On October 4, 2000, you wrote the following letter to David MacAulay. Chair, Scope of Practice  Review Panel (Massage Therapy). Health Professions Council. Vancouver, British Columbia.

Dear Mr. MacAulay:

Subject: Correspondence from Lincoln Lau

I am writing on behalf of the CMTBC Board and our Scope of Practice Committee regarding recent correspondence from the above individuals. As you are probably aware, these gentlemen have some concerns regarding statements made by Peter Behr at the June 6, 1999, public hearing.

You will recall that Mr. Behr addressed the Council in his capacity as a private citizen and Registered Massage Therapist. He did not speak as a representative of the College of massage Therapists.

In any event, the CMTBC Board would be willing to respond to any concerns that the Health Professions Council may have regarding any of the issues raised by Mr. Lau or Dr. Schatz. Accordingly I would ask that you contact this office in writing to set out any questions that you may have.

________________________

Even though Mr. Behr, who was formerly the  President of CMTBC, may not have represented  CMTBC at the June 6, 1999, public hearing, it is logical to assume that a Past-President of CMTBC would know what he was talking about.

However, be that as it may, the following  questions addressed to you and others at CMTBC still merit answers.

1. Does CMTBC have any evidence that validates the "extreme" cases of harm that Mr. Behr presented? If CMTBC has such evidence, what is that evidence. If CMTBC has no such evidence, why doesn't CMTBC admit that?

2. Do other Registered Massage Therapists do the above-mentioned forceful work on vulnerable patients, who are in pain, that Mr. Behr said he does? If so, approximately how many Registered Massage Therapists do that?

3. Does CMTBC approve of the forceful work that Mr. Behr said he does?

The controversy about regulation involves the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the United Nations International Bill of Human Rights. Massage Law Newsletter 10(1):1-12. 1999.

3. Schatz, A. A request for information about the controversy over the scope of practice of Registered Massage Therapists in British Columbia. Massage Law Newsletter. 10(2):1-1-2. June. 1999.

4. Schatz, A., and Brewster, M. The College of Massage Therapists of British Columbia wants to do vaginal and rectal massage. Massage Law Newsletter. 11(1):1-10. 1999.

5. Schatz, A. Letters to Peter Behr in British Columbia. Massage Law Newsletter. 11(2):5-6. October. 1999.

6. The College of Massage Therapists of British Columbia tells us there is no significant risk of harm by massage therapists in the U.S.... The College of Massage Therapists of British Columbia (CMTBC) has not provided acceptable evidence that nonregistered practitioners are any more of a threat to the public health, safety, and welfare in British Columbia than massage therapists are in the U.S. ---- Why does CMTBC want to do rectal and vaginal massage? Massage Law Newsletter. 14(3):1-2. 2000.

7. Schatz, A. The Great Massage Mystery. The strange case of people allegedly killed by massage therapists in  Powell River, British Columbia. Massage Law Newsletter 15(1):1-2. August. 2000.

8. Schatz, A. The Great Canadian Massage Mystery. The strange case of people allegedly killed by unregulated massage therapists in Powell River, British Columbia. Massage Law Newsletter. 15(1):1-4. September. 2000.

9. Schatz, A. Has the College of Massage Therapists of British Columbia provided misleading information to the Health Professions Council? Massage Law Newsletter. 15(2):1-2. September. 2000.

10. Schatz, A  Are payments to Registered Massage Therapists in British Columbia, under the Medical Services Plan, cost-effective? If not, should these payments be discontinued? ---- How much iatrogenic harm is caused by Registered Massage Therapists in British Columbia? ---- What information does the College of Massage Therapists in British Colombia have about Peter Behr's treatment and about harm caused by Registered Massage Therapists? And why do British Columbia RMTs need a 3,000-hour training. Massage Law Newsletter. 15(3):1-5. October. 2000.

11. Why doesn't Peter Behr (Past President of the College of Massage Therapists of British Columbia) document his allegations of serious harm associated with massage therapists in British Columbia and Alberta? Massage Law Newsletter. 16(2):1-3/ 2000.

12. Schatz, A. Another case of harm mistakenly attributed to massage by the College of Massage Therapists of British Columbia. Massage Law Newsletter. 16(4):1-2. 2000.