Re: Digest Number 3453

[Guest guest]

UKHerbal-listFrom Potterton ND MRN MNIMH

re:

Announcement on Statutory Regulation

It was becoming apparent prior to November last year that medical herbalists and

acupuncturists were likely to end up being offered registration with the CNHC.

I reported in an editorial in the British Naturopathic Journal that the

Department of Health was backing away from statutory regulation and that

therefore herbalists would have to contemplate registration with the CNHC (BNJ,

2009, 26 [3] 2).

At much the same time, members of the British Naturopathic Association voted

against immediate voluntary registration with the CNHC, and subsequently the

General Naturopathic Council (GNC), the equivalent of the EHPA, voted to delay

progress of naturopaths towards registration with the CNHC, one of the stumbling

blocks being that Prof Colquhoun, one of the leading critics of complementary

medicine, has been appointed to one of the CNHC's committees.

The homeopaths have already pulled out of voluntary registration with the CNHC.

I can't see registration with the CNHC (rather than the HPC) going down too well

with herbalists either (even though it will probably be cheaper). However, any

practitioner can register with the CNHC if they want to and a few nutritionists

have already done so.

The rest of the membership of the CNHC seems to be a hotch-potch of professions,

and it does not give them statutory regulation.

The naturopaths are currently considering alternative registration options, but

quite frankly there's not much on offer that would be recognised by the current

government...and herbalists (and also some herbally qualified US and Canadian

naturopaths now in the UK) are in a cleft stick over the European directive.

What isn't quite clear to me is whether registration with the CNHC is enough to

satisfy the European directive.

Also it's possible that if the difficulty with Prof Colquhoun's appointment to

the CNHC can be resolved that naturopaths might re-consider their relationship

with the CNHC.

UKHerbal-list

1. Announcement on Statutory Regulation From: reiter@...

1.

Announcement on Statutory Regulation

Posted by: " reiter@... " reiter@... ned_reiter

Thu Apr 1, 2010 11:31 am (PDT)

The announcement today by Andy Burnham (Sec. of State for Health) on

the statutory regulation of herbal medicine, although a step in the

right direction, is actually rather an abysmal fudge. The minister

stated that he is minded to " legislate to ensure that all

practitioners supplying unlicensed herbal medicines to members of the

public in England must be registered with the Complementary and

Natural Healthcare Council (CNHC).

I believe that the introduction of such a register will increase

public protection, but without the full trappings of professional

recognition

which are applied to practitioners of orthodox healthcare " .

This is unsatisfactory on two counts: firstly, the proposed

regulator,the Complementary and Natural Healthcare Council (CNHC), is

not the body that previous reports recommend, namely the HPC (Health

Professions Council). The HPC is an experienced, statutory body which

would provide the public with the full benefits of regulation, and

herbal practitioners with the necessary status to avoid the potential

chaos that may well ensue once EU legislation on herbal medicines is

fully implemented in 2011. The CNHC cannot deliver on either of these

counts; it is a body set up to facilitate voluntary regulation of

healthcare systems not covered by the House of Lords original report.

The whole point of the vast amount of work that has ensued from that

original report is that herbal medicine, along with acupuncture and

TCM, are of a different order to the plethora of other medical

ancillary practices where a system of voluntary regulation was deemed

to be sufficient.

Secondly, the minister's aim to deny us " the full trappings of

professional recognition which are applied to practitioners of

orthodox healthcare " once again demonstrates a politician who has

failed to grasp the most basic concepts involved in an issue over

which he has so much power. Statutory regulation has nothing to do

with " trappings " : it is, first and last, about public protection -

protecting the public from unscrupulous or unqualified

practitioners, and also protecting the right of the public to have

access to the medical treatments that they choose. Recognition

doesn't come from a politician's pronouncements but from, in our

case, centuries and generations of effective, safe and compassionate

care of our patients (or does Andy Burnham think that the proposed

regulation of wheel-clampers, for example, will suddenly elevate that

tribe to the status of respected profession in the eyes of the public?)

As someone who has been intimately involved with this process in the

past, and who sat on the Dept. of Health Working Group which produced

the last report on this issue, I can only say that in my view it is

much too early to pop the Elderflower Champagne corks: we still have

a fight on our hands. We have gained ground insofar that the

principle of Stautory Regulation seems to have been accepted, but we

must continue to push for the HPC to be appointed as our regulator,

and for full recognition as healthcare professionals. With elections

around the corner, it would definitely be worthwhile for members, and

indeed their patients, to write to each of their prospective

parliamentary candidates to explain the issues and advance our case.

Ned Reiter FNIMH

Ned Reiter

13 Bere Lane

Glastonbury

Somerset BA6 8BD

England

U.K.

e-mail: reiter@...

website: www.greenmedicine.co.uk