Certification

[d rona]

As usual, it seems NZ has a far more civilized approach. However, there may be some variations in how various countries use the words License, Registration and Certification. Again, for information purposes, I’ll add a bit from the US side.

In my experience in the US -
* Licensing by a governmental body – or quasi governmental ‘board’ is supposedly to ‘protect the public’. It comes with a regulatory board, lots of paperwork, exams and entry and yearly fees paid by the practitioner, rules and regulations, and a full set of penalties (reprimands to fines and even prison) for anyone who violates the rules and regulations. So it has a fully operational policing branch with real teeth. It legally excludes ‘non licensed’ persons from practicing or even offering services that use the regulated vocabulary of the profession – effectively establishing a professional monopoly. It also sets the practitioner in a place of ‘expertise’ and ‘trust’ and opens them up to liability (lawsuits) if they do not perform to the current ‘standard of practice’.
* Registration may be governmental, quasi governmental or completely private – and usually comes with a regulatory board (and the paperwork, exams and fees paid by the practitioner) but is usually non limiting in that non registered or non certified persons may practice, may use the vocabulary of the profession, and the regulatory board has no ‘policing’ authority within their own ranks other than to refuse to renew an individual’s registration or certification if they are blatantly defying the precepts of the board. So you have the outward appearance of an ‘authority’ in a profession (with all the paperwork, exams, and fees paid by the practitioner), but none of the professional benefits of licensing.
* Certification is usually non governmental – and an award, much like a degree, by anyone that wishes to offer it. So you have a fully accredited university offering a ‘certification’ and a mail order herb company offering a ‘certification’. You also see a variety of newly invented ‘boards’, ‘associations’, etc. offering ‘certifications’.
In the eyes of the public, the use of the terms ‘registered’ and ‘certified’ are usually taken to mean some standardized level of quality and indeed a ‘standard of practice’. At this point, I have not met a cross section of CHC homeopaths that had any obvious ‘standard’ in their practice of homeopathy. I do not mean any disrespect to CHC or any other registering or certifying body in homeopathy or other field of alternative medicine. In engineering or accounting it is obvious that you either arrive at the right answer or you don’t (ok – no jokes about ‘creative accounting’), based on the facts. 10 well trained engineers or accountants faced with the same problem or set of facts will arrive at the exact same answer. In homeopathy you work with an individual, at that moment in life, with the information available to you at that moment. 10 homeopaths will most likely treat the same individual in at least 8 different ways – if not 10. You can not do a double blind study to absolutely prove the correct prescription and dosing technique. Unless you follow that individual for years, you can never say with any certainty that they were cured or just very well palliated. But if the individual is relieved of suffering, brought to a better state of health, enjoys a higher quality of life, and has no nasty pharmaceutical side effects – isn’t that the goal of homeopathy? Now how do you ‘certify’ the ability to do that?
If certification/registration is pursued as a prelude to insurance payments and entering ‘mainstream’ medical establishments – well – then it would appear we must come up with some ‘standards of practice’. That would seem to start at the education level – not the certifying test level. If certification/registration is pursued as a prelude to licensure – then we are admitting that it is something that requires governmental regulation to ‘protect the public’. Yikes – I would hate to see homeopathy, the gentlest and most effective branch of medicine, ever fall into that consideration.
Donna
D C Rona, PhD, ND, DHM
________________________________

From: minutus@yahoogroups.com [mailto:minutus@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2009 8:06 PM
To: minutus@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Minutus] Re: "Certification"

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

I forgot to add this: the government has given the task of registration, certification, etc,....to the various professional bodies.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit www.drjoesnaturalmedicine.blogspot.com for articles and information.

[suriya56]

malaysia has followed what NZ has done for all complementary and alternative therapies by giving the registration etc to each therapy's governing body.

Suriya

--- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD." wrote:

[Irene de Villiers]

That is also how it is in WA state, and in fact USA has all of this
at STATE level.

(I agree that NZ is such a superb example of how it can and should be
done!)
Nothing - except perhaps the high cost of the lobbying and the need
to provide a policing system - stops us proposing it to the States
here either.
(There is a rule to provide a policing system, and one can copy the
state malpractice board of the veterinarians as a model - but the
rest can be forced into place by a petition or can be lobbied into
place. There are specific rules for making new laws by either
method , but they are IMO not impossible to use well.)

Namaste,
Irene
--
Irene de Villiers, B.Sc AASCA MCSSA D.I.Hom/D.Vet.Hom.
P.O. Box 4703 Spokane WA 99220.
www.angelfire.com/fl/furryboots/clickhere.html (Veterinary Homeopath.)
"Man who say it cannot be done should not interrupt one doing it."

[Luise Kunkle]

Hi Donna,

let me add to what you have written about the US the "ways of Germany"

In Germany we have to be licensed to do any kind of medical work.

The license is based on an exam done by officials of regular medicine.

The exam is the same for all, never mind what kind of alternative
medicine they are planning to perform. It just covers issues of
regular medicine: anatomy, physiology, pathology, "allopathic
diagnoses" ....

All the certification boards or associatios that set themselves up
have no clout whatsover - you can belong to one or a dozen or none -
you can have eough certificates of whatever kind you want to paper
your house with - it means exactly nothing.

There are rules set by law, applying to all the people practicing
under the license - rules set by those bodies may be nice to have,
that's all.

This also applies to insurance: the private insurance companies pay
all having the license, the equivalent of the NHS for none.

For at least 25 years there have been elephant trumpetings by the
various professional organisations mentioned above that "this is going
to change soon - in the near future you will need [insert whatever the
specific organisation would like - whatever courses or exams or
seminars they want to push for reasons ranging from sincere conviction
to plain money-making, supporting their schools, the teachers of the
schools, the people arranging ang giving seminars or the people being
paid for doing the exams]. Well in those 25 years nothing has happened
to support those trumpetings;-)

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

[Luise Kunkle]

Hi Joe,
Are there several differet bodies inside the broad definition of
homeopathy - or did they get together under one of them?

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

There is one Council of Homeopaths with whom the government speaks.
There is also a small group called the Register of Homeopaths who for some reason (I would guess more personal than anything else but I really do not know) did not want to join the Council but they have no political clout. The few I know in that group are good homeopaths and nice people.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit www.drjoesnaturalmedicine.blogspot.com for articles and information.

[Dr. Joe Rozencwajg, NMD]

I am not part of the Executive or the Educational committee, but as far as I know, there must be education from a recognised college, either in NZ (and you can see the course programme on any of the websites, Google BOP College of Homeopathy or Auckland College of Classical Homeopathy or Wellington College of Homeopathy) or overseas with a corresponding programme.
The basic requirements are all the same, Organon, CD, repertorisation, etc,.... But no other method is outcasted, ostracised or denigrated, it is the individual choice of the individual practitioner to use any method on top of the basic homeopathy most of us agree to.
Joe.
Dr. J. Rozencwajg, NMD.
"The greatest enemy of any science is a closed mind"
Visit www.drjoesnaturalmedicine.blogspot.com for articles and information.

[Luise Kunkle]

Hi Joe,

thank you and a follow-up question:
So this council determines what qualifications a homeopaths must have
in order to be certified or licensed or whatever?

If so - what are those qualifications. Different for people using
different methods or how?

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========

[Luise Kunkle]

Hi Joe,

Thanks again.
This was the nub of my question.

Even if the person does not want to work using repertorization, has no
truck with the Organon etc. s/he would still have to spend the time,
money, energy to take a full course in what he does not want to use in
order to be certified.

So "classical homeopathy" has in NZ managed to monopolize what we may
call "potency medicine".

To understand what I am saying:

Before the 1950s or so probably hardly any homeopath in Germany had
ever used a repertory. Kent was translated into German 1946 and v.
Boenninghausen's was probably not even known. The people who did not
use it included e. g. Dr. Haehl of 6th Organon and "Life of Hahnemann"
fame and Prof Ritter, head of the big homeopathic Bosch Hospital in
Stuttgart.

Most of the homeopaths has probably never read the Organon - just knew
bits and pieces if at all, never mind the CD, which was not even
accepted at the time of Hahnemann.

Even now it is only the minority of homeopaths who work with the
repertory or according to the Organon or the CD.

In view of the fact that Germany may be the country where homeopathy
has been widest spread of any country in the world and still is you
may understand my surprise - which is liberally sprinkled with
scepticism as to the wisdom of doing it this way.

Regards

Luise
--
One thought to all who, free of doubt,
So definitely know what's true:
2 and 2 is 22 -
and 2 times 2 is 2:-)
==========> ICQ yinyang 96391801 <==========