Sports Massage Progression

[Bp Seventeen]

Hi Paul,
you can find the Sport & Remedial CC's here:
http://thesrtc.org.uk/#/core-curricula/4540099833 this is what is being regulated. As much as I wasnt in favour of sport & remedial being put together, which I make no secret about, procedures were followed, and that is what was regulated. IMO it has caused a little more confusion than I would have liked, but we deal with it.

Whilst I do agree that policing schools is not your primary role, I feel that a lot of PAs are hiding behind that, in the hope that someone else will challenge the might of the Awarding Organisations...well I have challenged it enough, and I am one person, going about normal market research for my business and come across these schools on a daily basis, and whilst I have no intention of turning this into an SMA bashing, I can name 2 SMA directors who work (in some form) for VTCT and another who teaches on a course that is run by an ex sma director (and founder), who is also a consultant for VTCT. There are enough of you there to kick up a stink. The AOs should not be given an easy ride! The problem we have is, I seem to be finding these schools, but no-one seems to be doing anything about it. We seem to have a situation at the moment where everyone is passing the buck, and I now have drawn a full circle, because everyone is saying that someone else is responsible to sort it out

You mention the giant that is FHT, and not knowing your turnover I cant comment on the figure you quote, however, the fact that FHT is a huge organisation means that it can employ the staff to check these schools, which is one of my worries about verification for CNHC by small PAs who dont have the resources to check.

CNHC spent the best part of a day at FHT head office, scrutinising the systems that are in place, and they could find not one problem, not a single one.

It does seem now that FHT are the only PA that is not aligned to an Awarding Organisation, so it does attempt to put pressure on them, but sometimes I feel that it is a lone voice, because all the other PA are aligned to AOs.

I have offered to give as much help as I can because I believe in regulation, I also believe that the public have a right to be protected against shoddy therapists and I also believe that people looking to train should be protected against being conned into thinking they are getting a course that meets standards, when in fact they are getting a qualification that meets standards, but a training course that falls way way short.

I personally believe that the SMA want to increase standards, and ive said it on more than one occasion, this vtct endorsement hasnt done SMA any favours, when their level 4 is being run in much shorter duration than an SMA 'accredited' level 4, but that is my personal opinion, for what its worth.

I also believe that we should let bygones be bygones, theres no point in squabbling, when there is so much work still to be done in this industry. I believe the current batch of SMA directors, actually care about sports massage, and the old guard's mentality has gone, and I wish you luck in the regulation process, you are in for a bumpy ride to start off with, but thats the nature of the beast, it does get easier

 

[* *]

Thankyou AspireST and SportsTherapy for your comments. We do act on information -and will do so in future. There is a case for multilateral action, {both in terms of sharing information and acting in concert} by PAs and I will be developing this idea over the next year. Changing organisations is something of a personal speciality--I did it as a career for a very long time--my experience of successful change is that you have to be inside an organisaton to achieve maximum success. Heckling AOs from the sidelines will have limited success---but good luck to you.

Registering with CNHC is a leap of faith at the moment, but if it reaches a critical mass in numbers of registrants it will succeed--I think it is getting close.

 

[orgldrlb]

Paul,
I have responded to you personally by email. I look forward to meeting up with you soon to clarify my points and puting the world to rights over a glass of something. It is not appropriate to name people on this forum but as always I stand by my comments.
regards
BGFL

 

[no_censorship_8524]

No problem---you're buying!

 

[Mz. Devilz]

They have achieved none of their stated aims and have less registrants than a small association. Don’t take my word for it, check the figures. 20,000 Aromatherapists in the UK… less than 100 registered with CNHC. Reflexology, 25,000+ practitioners…. 400 registered with CNHC. The list goes on to a massive total for ALL those registered of less than 2% of CAM practitioners. Not bad for three years work and almost £3m of grant funding.

Your experience with them seems to be symptomatic of the problems.

I have been accused of being a 'CNHC basher' Well if only 2% of practitioners want to join after two years of an open register, I am apparently not alone.

 

[nick102]

Hi YR

Who hasn't got aims & objectives that may take longer than was originally conceived? That doesn't necessarily indicate a dead duck! It may just a need for a change of direction or management.

The problem with registration with the CNHC from what I can see is disinterest from many CAM practitioners. We have been told for many years that this and that and that and this is going to happen, blah blah blah, and never did. So here is finally an attempt to provide an unified register, and very few are listening. Bit like the boy who cried wolf story. Meanwhile, there is a competing register, and from what I can see many PA's are not really selling VSR to their membership.

Unless practitioners have a reason to join the CNHC ie increase in work, referrals from public and private healthcare, part of the job description, why should they? It isn't the job of the CNHC to promote therapies from far as I can see. And yes I'm on the register before I get accused of CNHC bashing.

Best wishes

RP

 

[Ichigo3343]

Where did you find the figures from? It is interesting to note that at the start of its conception it was to be self funded. I wonder if we can find out the break even number of therapists would be. Unless there are a lot of staff to fund, I can't imagine much-maybe a few hundred thousand P/A.

Will this be a sustainable organisation-time will tell.

 

[Pompal 09.]

Hi TT

There was another Hp member sometime ago claimed that there is a group of skeptics that had some computer program which scanned online CNHC register to ascertain registrant numbers. Whether this is true or a wind up I can't say. But unfortunately the mods pulled that thread, so I can't refer to it.

Best wishes

RP

 

[yvezuuzsimoiwzeoe]

Hi RP
what benifits have you got out of joining the register?

 

[Bazz]

Well to be honest SJ, nothing. But Cornwall can be a little bit behind sometimes. I would like to know if people in the more populated areas are having any luck.

Who knows, someone might look at my site or leaflet and may decide that such registration gave them more confidence in approaching me. Registration fee is due in March, haven't made my mind up whether to carry on this it or not.

Isn't this thread slowly going off topic?! Did read the core-curriculum above and was very interesting. Does help me understand the differences in these disciplines, which I been wanting to know for sometime. Could never quite understood from previous threads.

Best wishes

RP

 

[nnqieoyv]

would be nice to know where you get your 'facts' from...probably the same fake regulator who claimed that the CNHC had been funded with £10 million from the government and then were forced to withdraw the press releases under threat of being sued for libel.....yes that one.

Why dont you give factual information and state your sources, or will you just do what you usually do, drop in these claims and then disappear again.....funnily enough it always seems to be when CNHC are progressing...hmmmmm

 

[Pompal 09.]

Hi TT,
yes it was meant to be self funding and no, it didnt meet break even figures, however, as you know, HPC regs arent happening for a lot of professions hoping to go down that route and therefore the government, realising that we need some form of robust regulation in place, has funded CNHC. I dont know for how long, but you only need look at their registration figures to see how quickly its increasing.

CNHC isnt their to give benefits, its there to show the public that its registered CAM practitioners are trained, insured, and fit to practice. You only need look at the organisations that are now requiring CNHC registration (just like a lot ask for HPC).

Im going over old ground here, so wont post anymore on regulation on this thread.

 

[LP S]

If showing up standards of AOs is heckling from the sidelines, then thank god im not in their pocket and cant do anything other than heckle, because from what im hearing, those in bed with the AOs arent really doing much, but my 'heckling' is certainly rattling a lot of cages.


And for those who think that making threats will work with me, they are very very wrong, and obviously dont know me. I am not in the pocket of any organisation, and could resign without a moments hesitation, they need me more than I need them, so no, I wont be gagged by anyone, if I know what I am saying is right.....forget about the dirty tricks brigade coming back, looks like they have never been away.

 

[avlcyji]

The problem as I see it is 2 fold, when I was at GCMT, several council members wanted recognition for sports massage and remedial massage as a sererate category from body massage, it was however proving a difficult nut to crack. Therefore we discussed the possibility of a new council and lead body as Sportstherapy pointed out, it was to be the sports therapy council. At thattime there was a lot of objection from a single professional association who's stance was that they were the lead body in ST, I firmly believe that the management of said association did not understand the difference between what constituted a members association and the lead body, they accepted that there was a regulator, ie HPC. It transpired that in order to achieve the aims of the distinction between SMPs , RMPs and STs( these were the titles our members gave us when lobbied and described what they perceived their role to be). THe SRTC was formed with the remit of uniting the industry, IMO the "remedia"l has clouded the issue slightly but adequately classifies those SMPs with additional CPD training, additional fitness qualifications and myofascial/ structural release training.
Therefore the number of STs registering is lower than I anticiapted as they still want extra recognition from RMPs and SMPs, this is where it gets confusing becaue there are swathes of RMPs who meet the NOS and CC as detailed by th lead body SRTC, there are also lots who do not meet those standards.
The SMA have joined GCMT to give their members the access to the CNHC register as it is being held by many as the minimum standards of assurance of occupational competency. I suspect that their members will not want to join CNHC as a "massage therapist" because it does not reflect their additional skillset, they will seek to join as a remedial therapist via the SRTC route. (I am not going to argue about what constitutes a RMP in this thread, it has been flogged to death previously on other threads)
This is now my problem as PSB for sports and remedial I will be telling the regulator that these therapists do not meet standards. I will also be looking at all other courses that PAs "verify" to check the level of contol or policing they maintain.

I know the SMA have a "contract" with VTCT which prevents them policing their own schools, it clearly doesnt suit the progressive SMA board at present, I suspect it doesnt suit VTCT either, as they do not like it when SMA tell them that they want to police courses to ensure their standards are being met.

fronm an outside perspective why doont these 2 organisations simply spea to each other and say "it is clearly not working, so lets agree to scrap the contract."

When this happens I can see that SMa will be accepted around the table to speak to those who can be of benefit to their progressive aspirations.
I accept that I may have inferred that SMa directors run training courses that dont even meet their own standards but I now withdraw that accusation after reassurances that this is not the case.

I will now publicly state that there is a conflict of interests when there are those who run courses who are heavily involved in the AOs, both in planning, development and management. So Where is the external verification in these instances.

I have spoken to two other major awarding organisations who gave me assurances that this cannot happen in their set up.

I now return to the original post and talk about the sports massage profession progressing, I sincerely hope that we can all sit round the table thrash out our differences. I also hope that these posts are left alone by both the moderators and the detractors of the CAM sector, I know which organisation/ self proclaimed lead body is behind the negative posts, they dont bother me that much as they are entitled to an opinion, shame they have to resort to using false information.
regards
BG

ps
next stop

distance learning colleges and pathetic standards for hands on therapies
watch this space

 

[Ha.r.Monica]

As suggested, sports massage practitioners are not sports therapists, but....we can't stop them from calling themsevles this and nor should we! It isnt against the 'rules' is it?

Everything that is begin mentioned here to be honest sounds like teething problems, if the register does work (im still a little skeptical unless a massive influx of sports therapists join) then it will be a good standard to go by-if of course everything is delivered that said it would be.

U like our current government who seem to be backtracking on all promises minus cuts!

maybe in in the wrong forum

 

[Deans]

along the same lines then;

a massage therapist can call themselves a sports massage therapist

an attendee of a one day introductory massage course can call themselves a masseur

someone with no training at all can call themselves a masseur


and finally someone with no training can call themselves a sports therapist



because it is not against the rules,,,, we are all happy now


unless someone stands up and fights for these differences, that is what will happen. that is why I say to you TT, sometimes we have to accept that things need to change, changes dont occur because we sit around and think about them but because we get off our ar5e5 and actually do something to redress the problems which these undertrained therapists are doing to OUR industry.

 

[Jennifer W]

....I think this is off topic-but it is good to know that progressions are being made in sports massage!

 

[aqeppuqwibzilgens]

TT

Could you please tell me what you consider to be the 'difference' between a sports therapist and sports massage therapist (scope of prcatice, skill set etc) ?

(not 'loaded' just interested)

thanks

 

[Pandora Craufurd-gormly]

Ha! it is claimed that I have been asked to leave CNHC and FHT......so the lies are starting now are they.....cages are obviously well and truly rattled.

Watch out BGFL, they will be saying you dress in womens clothes and call yourself Samantha next!

And all because we want to see standards being driven forward instead of backwards, quite sad really.

 

[vniphone]

just reading your last post re the government and it reminded me of a well known phrase... something about a pot and kettle

in the words of Billy Joel;
We didnt start the fire, it was always burning, since the worlds been turning, we didnt start the fire

ps my Dad told me about him, before you say anything