(September 2001) While the lobby for state license had been happening in Indiana before this time, this was our first awareness and encounter with those responsible. As herbal and educational vendors at the Indiana AMTA convention, we had copies of a 4-page rebuttal to each problem that licensing would allegedly remedy. Barb Lis and Jenni Irving each approached and wanted to know why we were so against licensing and proceeded to again give the "reasons it is necessary." As each point was graciously proven to be invalid, they would go on to the next reason until finally Jenni asked me, "Desiree, why do you feel so threatened by licensing?" I replied, "I do not feel threatened, I just believe it is better for everyone if the state remains free in this area since none of the offered reasons are valid. Why add another law when it is not beneficial?"
We also spoke to several members of AMTA at the meeting who were not in favor of licensing. When asking them why then they were member of AMTA, they replied, "Insurance and the newsletter regarding continuing classes."

(January 2002) AMTA posted a list of reasons titled "Why Massage Licensing is Needed - Why Massage Licensing is Wanted" online at www.amtaindiana.org. The four-page letter rebutting each reason was updated then mailed and emailed to each member of the Indiana Senate and House. The bill was introduced in the Senate and did not move forward, due to Senator Miller, the chairperson of the committee to which the bill was assigned.

(January 2003) The bill was introduced in the Indiana House (1355) and Senate (313). The Senate bill was never heard, and the House bill was heard. According to Indiana AMTA's website, testimony against the bill was heard, yet the House has said since that "no-one has ever spoken against the bill" in person. While I know that letters and emails and phone calls have been sent, AMTA stated there were opponents present in person in 2003 (although it was not anyone I know). The House bill died however due to timing, thankfully!

(November 2003) At a class hosted by the Indiana AMTA, a person read my name tag and asked, "Do I know you?" I said, "No, don't think so." He went into deep thought and a few minutes later exclaimed, "Oh yeah I do know you, you're the person who wrote that long letter and a legislator handed it to our lobbyist last year and said, 'Well, what about this?'" Ahh. Yes, that probably was mine. [Sigh]
So, after being rebuked by the table members for getting in the way of what would bring "credibility" to the profession, one member said, "You really need to just back off and let this happen because we are tired of spending money to lobby for licensing!" I said, "Well there is a really easy remedy for that. just quit spending the money and quit lobbying for licensing! The public and therapists are doing just fine without it!"
We did have copies of the letter present and gave a few away after class was over.

(January/February 2004) This year, House Bill 1071 reached the Senate and was co-sponsored by several members of the Health & Provider services committee. While the 4-page letter had been sent earlier, additional letters targeting the specific problems with the language of the bill were sent to committee members. Senator Miller once again for refused to hear the bill. (She is wonderful on this subject!)
However, AMTA so wishes the law to be passed that they "made an attempt to have our bill ride in on another bill and pass this session" (quoted from the legislative update posted online at www.amtaindiana.org).
Thankfully, the bill still died due to some controversy where the Republicans walked out on the Democrats.

(Summer 2004) There was a brief discussion between Barb Lis and I on Indiana AMTA's web forum, but the conversation was removed sometime in the Spring of 2005 and I did not get a copy of the whole thing. The discussion began with a post regarding a prostitution bust and how this could be used as more evidence showing why a license law is "needed." I posted a reminder that Indiana Code already exists to close prostitute shops, it just needs to be enforced, and that a law boxing in the good guys won't stop the bad guys. Barb Lis responded with a comment about self-taught people and that they have further evidence and my final response which asked to see the alleged evidence was never responded to.

(January/February 2005) This year was a real eye-opener on the law-making process! First, the Lord gave a scripture for the battle: "The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will." (Proverbs 21:1)
HB1390 was originally assigned to a House health committee and was not going to receive a hearing. (Hooray.) Rep. Frizzell got the bill reassigned to the "Public Policy" committee. At the committee meeting, Rep. Frizzell says, "We have some amendments which substantially change the bill." The chairman asks the committee, "Can we pass these without reading them?" The committee votes YES! They pass amendments that substantially change a bill without even reading them! Wow. The amendments were not good, either. We were thinking the Lord wasn't doing so well in turning their hearts at this point, or maybe that we hadn't heard him correctly! With these traumatic events occurring at the house Public Policy committee, we also began to realize the importance of this scripture: "I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty." (1 Timothy 2:1-2)
Then AMTA stood up and said now that Kentucky and Illinois are licensed this is "endangering" our public and "especially the children." When it was our turn, we were very intimidated and said what we could, but the committee passed the bill with only 3 opposing votes, if remembered correctly.
The bill died because the day it was to be voted on in the House was the final voting day and the Democrats walked out on the Republicans. Yet once again, the attempt was made to ride the bill in on a Senate bill and it came down to one man, the author of that Senate bill, Sen. Meeks, who opposed the change. So the bill finally died. God did indeed turn the heart of one man, who according Indiana AMTA's web legislative post "was always supportive of licensing" in the past. Praise God!

Rep. Crooks also encouraged that any future letters should be one page or less for any hope of gaining an ear in the House.

(January/February 2006) The scripture received for this year was to "stand still and watch the salvation of the Lord, who will fight this battle for you. Go out against them and the Lord will fight for you." That sounds good! So Trish took the helm and gathered the troops to attend the first ever Senate committee hearing on this subject.
Four people spoke in favor of the bill. The president of AMTA National (who lives in Indianapolis), Jenni Irving (president of Indiana AMTA), a Vincennes University representative and the Indiana Chiropractors Association, who specifically mentioned the need to be able to "revoke the licenses of massage therapists who are practicing chiropractic."
Of the 9 present who opposed the bill, 7 were acquainted with each another, 1 man from Northern Indiana and the trump card was Michael O'Brian (sp?) from the Professional Licensing Agency. When he spoke, I nearly cried with joy and felt I was witnessing "the salvation of the Lord." He stated that Indiana does not feel the need to license yet another profession when the profession can self-regulate so well.
After the meeting, discussion began in the back of the Senate chamber. Barb Lis came over and we questioned some points of the bill's language. The problem here is I had the bill in my hand, read directly from the bill, and Barb says, "well that is not what the bill says." How can a conversation like this go anywhere positive? How can dialogue like this bring about any type of good law? It cannot. It is better to have NO law, other than the laws of commerce and common sense which already exist, since it is known that massage licensing would not remedy any of the alleged problems! There are simply too many variables and too many doors of opportunity closed once a license law is in place... it is better to keep the door firmly closed.
After going through the standard "reasons" given by AMTA, Barb's final comment to me was "well, this is really all about us being able to make a livable wage, you know." I was speechless and had to walk off at that point. Since when would a state license guarantee a livable wage??!

(October 2006) AMTA Indiana Chapter hosted an "open license forum" in Jasper. Jenni Irving (President) and Barb Lis (Gov't Chair) led the meeting. The meeting was opened stating this was an "informal Q&A session and is for anyone to bring up any issues they may have with the bill." She noted the bill has been presented for 7 years and that, locally, Indiana and Michigan remain without licensing. The meeting's purpose according to the newspaper brief was to bring awareness that massage licensing is needed to raise the credibility of the profession. It seemed the audience was split about 50/50 for and against licensing.
One comment repeatedly stated is that licensing is "needed" because massage is being more recognized as a medical treatment "now." Hippocrates (among other ancient physicians) both used and highly recommended massage as part of his health programs, so massage has been recognized as "medical" or "medicinal" for a very long time. State license would not enhance this truth.
In response to a new resident's concern that the National Certification Exam (and membership) would be required as the state exam, Jenni stated there are only 250 Nationally Certified therapists in Indiana, and that "only new therapists would be required to take the NCE if the state board did not develop a test." The NCE has been made the mandatory state test for most states who implemented licensing because the boards are too lazy or too financially strapped to create their own test. This number is much less than the 5,000 therapists AMTA alleges actually practice in Indiana. The NCBTMB website shows approximately 375 N.C. therapists in Indiana, although how current the database is kept is unknown.
In response to the rhetoric that "massage licensing is needed to reduce prostitution and sexual crimes" surrounding therapists, if a crime has been committed (by the client or by the therapist), you still have to report the crime to a police officer. A state board slapping someone on the wrist or even "revoking" a license does not end these problems!! Too often though, such boards do use their power to squelch people who are working within their level of training, but disliked for some reason. One example of this was a local chiropractor who was reported (anonymously, of course) to her state board for practicing veterinary care! Actually, she was adjusting horses according to her training in that field. She did not pretend to be a veterinarian at all. She won her case against the chiropractic board's "cease and desist order." While it is rumored that a local vet turned her in, this just goes to show the power of a state board is not always helpful.
Another AMTA-presented argument at the forum was the "need to require formal educational baseline standards." Why is formal training so much to be desired over informal training? Why must a so-many-hours approach determine someone's eligibility to begin a trade so harmless as massage therapy? One of the greatest lawyers of all time learned his trade, not in a formal training program, but by reading the law and observing others in action in the courtroom. This "informal" apprenticeship, coupled with his stellar honesty and perserverance, earned him an honest living for many years before ending up as President of the United States. Abraham Lincoln was an excellent Hoosier example of the truth that there are many ways to learn.
A man from Floyd's Knobs, Indiana declared emphatically that "if you are passionate about massage, you must be passionate about licensing." I did speak up on that one. I am totally passionate about massage therapy as an invaluable tool for health and wellness. I truly believe every factory, office complex, chiropractic office, small "burg," city and town needs a massage therapist (or two or three) because it is that precious and of course no "one" therapist can help everyone due to time limitations. So I am passionate about massage. But a state license will not enhance massage therapists' abilities to help the public!! It will only limit the field and make the fees more expensive. Especially since under such bills, not even students would be allowed to receive compensation for massage services. Why???
Another revealing statement made by AMTA at the forum was that "insurance currently will pay for Nationally Certified therapists (membership number)." So if you want to be involoved with insurance, get nationally certified, or work under a chiropractor or doctor.

And the final frightening statements by AMTA that evening which further reveal the wolf-in-sheep's clothing nature included:
"I don't care what you actually do when this bill passes, just don't call yourself a massage therapist." So, is this is about protecting the public or is it about prestige, ego and title?
and "This meeting is not about whether or not you want or even like licensing. Licensing IS coming to Indiana so you might as well get used to the idea. This meeting is about what language you want in the bill." I disagree. It is not inevitable. Just because most of "the other states are doing it" does not mean Indiana has to fall to the pressure of special interest groups and require further state regulation!! Stand up, Indiana, for the public who so desperately needs you!

(January/February 2007) Two bills have been introduced in the Senate this year. What is puzzling is that Senator Miller has attached her name to SB320, which is essentially the same as last year's horrific bill, except the title "Licensed" has been replaced with "certified." I do not understand what is going on here, but am looking for some clarification.
Senator Landske's bill, SB469, has some of the same problems including restricting student compensation, exempting energy work (which is more harmful than massage, by far), requiring 500-hours supervised in classroom learning, requiring liability insurance to hold a license and the new clause D in the grandfather clause which is very bizarre. Nonetheless, there was one improvement to the bill which is the fact that out-of-state massage instructors would now be specifically exempted, but wouldn't that just be common sense? Not in law, you see, it must be in writing!

So watch for further updates in this continuing saga... and do some research on Gideon's men.

There are two bills for 2007. To read the actual language of the proposed bills, SB320 (Miller) and SB469 (Landske)

Contact the Members of the HEALTH and PROVIDER SERVICES COMMITTEE and ask them to vote NO on these bills if they are heard. Be sure to put your specific request in the subject line if you email and not just the bill#.
Example: "Please Vote NO to SB320 & SB469 Massage Regulation."

It is also wise to contact your local senator and representative here.

If you have further questions regarding the stand for liberty, CLICK HERE to read this page, or contact us by email or phone.

© Copyright 2006 D. Sunshine Yoder. All Rights Reserved. Permission is granted to use this information or to
reprint for free distribution to massage therapists, senators, representatives and other interested parties.