Shared scope of practice will kill the TCM profession

(Reply from the ministry of health regarding Acupuncture as a reserved act)

---By John Yang Dr. TCM; MD (China)
The comments that follow are not necessarily the opinions of the CTCMABC.

I recently navigated the TCMA website and found a letter that worried me. The letter from Linda Gee of Ministry of Health was a response to Ryan regarding “Reserved Actions Regulation.” According to Ms. Gee, the Ministry of Health adapts a new model recommended by former Health Professions Council. “Under the new model, many aspects of the scope of practice of each health profession may overlap, or be shared, with those of other health professions.” “This approach is expected to reduce professional ‘turf protection’, support more multidisciplinary practice and improve consumer choice, while maintaining patient safety and public protection.”

As an elected member of CTCMA, I have to express my disagreement with Ms. Gee’s comment. First, the new model will create double standards toward TCM & acupuncture profession. Under the CTCMA By-laws, a candidate who wants to challenge the acupuncture licensing exam must have a minimum 1,900 hours of acupuncture program training. Under the shared scope of practice model, other health care providers may practice acupuncture without the minimum training requirement. One wonders how this double standard maintains “patient safety and public protection.” This model allows the Ministry of Health to restrict the TCM & acupuncture profession in favor of other health care professions. This is professional discrimination.

Next, most other health care providers can access third-party payer systems such as WCB, ICBC and extended health insurance. So far, the TCM profession cannot. The shared scope of practice model, therefore, leaves patients without the ability to choose between visiting a licensed acupuncturist or another health care provider. This does not “improve customer choice,” but discourages it.

Finally, lower income patients are funded under BC Medical Service Plan to visit other health care providers but not licensed acupuncturists. This policy denies lower income patients the right to receive care from a qualified acupuncturist. If the shared scope of practice “is expected to reduce professional ‘turf protection’, does this mean a licensed acupuncturist can practice part of other health care profession and bill MSA directly instead of lower income patients? The answer is no. This is not fair to the TCM profession. If the Ministry of Health allows this approach to continue, it could seriously jeopardize the growth of TCM and, ultimately, kill the profession.

I believe most CTCMA registrants do not know that the shared scope of practice model exists. I urge everyone to view the TCMA website and read Ms. Gee’s letter. I also encourage all registrants to voice their concerns about this unfair approach. The government needs to hear our message. A strong professional association can represent our rights. It is time for all associations in BC to put aside their differences and come together to voice their concerns about the shared scope of practice approach. I believe collaboration and unification within the profession are integral components of our profession’s growth. I urge you to see the importance of joining this association and supporting its work. The association is a major part of why you have this opportunity to practice. Your participation in a professional association will help shape your own future.