Sign up Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
9ways

Avatar / Picture

Modulator
Registered:
Posts: 97
Reply with quote  #1 
I recently had a talk with the Sound Therapy Association in the UK regarding standards of practice, ethics, etc. including study curriculums. It’s my feeling that keeping an open dialog regarding these issues is an important step in the development of Sound Therapy as a recognized element in an integrated approach to wellness. There seems to be this ‘feeling’ within the sound healing community that these conventions are not important, and as long as no one gets hurt, why all the fuss. Any form of regulation in any manner, is unwelcome. I wrote an article about a year ago bringing this subject up precisely, which was met with mixed results from the sound healing community at large. Without drawing specifics, and encouraging dialog within the community itself, I simply asked what would be better for the whole? I pointed out, that self regulation would be far better than ‘imposed’ regulation. Consider this, your in a restaurant bathroom, and there’s a sign on the bathroom door that tells employees to wash their hands. This simple reminder about sanitation codes is very important if they are preparing your meal, is it not? How many people feel threatened by this regulation, or for that matter, feel that some boundary is being crossed over? Common sense tells you that forms of order are needed. I think that everyone feels that Sound Therapy can be useful, but traditional medical approaches to wellness have difficulty incorporating Sound Therapy because they see it as an unregulated entity being orchestrated by people who don’t see value in this. Case in point, the Duke University ‘Wheel of Health’ protocol incorporates ‘mindfulness’ as the central hub in their conventional and complimentary approach to prevention and intervention. This protocol stresses self care and professional care as important areas of focus. As traditional medical care moves closer to the mind body connection, and spirituality, which is what the Duke Integrative Medicine protocol is, does it not make sense to create standards of practice, standards of study, ethical and professional guidelines? Of some sort? Is not the act of simply pointing out misguided approaches or dismal research a step in the right direction? If the sound healing community cannot police themselves, who do they want to do it for them? It’s going to happen, because with protocols like the ‘Wheel of Health’ being set in place, regulation is simply right around the corner.

I'm particularly interested in feedback on this subject, and I welcome opinions on this topic as a means of creating dialog.

__________________
Mitch Nur, PhD
http://www.9ways.org
https://www.facebook.com/9waysAcademia/?ref=hl
https://www.facebook.com/mitch.nur
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCalU4f5foilh5ReEzX3nY1g
0
RichG

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 250
Reply with quote  #2 

Thanks, Mitch.
I too would like to see what others have to say about this topic. I think it is very meaningful and valuable that we, those of us immersed and active in the Sound Healing/Therapy scene, step up a fair bit more and engage in our own self-'regulation' - as it almost surely will be handed down to us, and not without legal repercussions, if we don't uplevel our standards ourselves as Sound Healing becomes more and more popular and widely practiced. And it may hit us sooner than we imagine. If anyone doubts this, then I suggest looking into what the Music Therapy scene is already attempting to do to basically outlaw us (and which I believe is motivated in no small part by territorialism and greed, or fear of lack, as much as any concern for our Sound Healing standards).

Having said that, I'll admit that I'm one of the first to resist any 'police actions', and one of the last to gather any satisfaction from policing or regulating others.
What I'd like to see happen is a collective and voluntary upleveling engaged among all of us. I'd like to see a widespread and individual expression of and commitment to quality and depth values in our work. I'd like to see us exploring, articulating and supporting the Sound community in these regards. In fact, this issue was a primary motivating factor to create this forum. It might be a great thing if this subject rises as a significant if not primary purpose of our loose and "unregulated" gathering here.

Ultimately, we might even create a document that articulates several areas of importance and guidelines or suggestions, maybe 'Points of Awareness' to be promoted in our practices and teaching etc. Again, the ideal is that it be voluntary and self-regulating, but it could even be something like a BBB 'declaration of awareness and commitment' that we sign onto - and hold ourselves accountable to.

I think in this scene there can be roughly delineated three areas of practice, from a certain perspective. (And yes, there may not be solid and clear lines between these areas!)
What I am referring to is:
1. The concepts and practices that nearly all of us can agree on as having value or truth or demonstrable effectiveness behind them.
2. The concepts and practices that a significant majority of us agree is nonsense, or based in fantasy or wild, wholly unsupported ungrounded speculation.
3. The concepts and practices that stand in the vast and murky middle ground between these 1 and 2.

Our greatest challenge to self-regulation may lie in #3.
We will surely offend more than a few with #2!

The idea of these three areas, and any need to address them, may not even be part of the point of what Mitch is proposing, or of what would benefit from our self-regulating. (In other words, does openly and officially rejecting or 'calling out' nonsense, fraud and 'snake oil' even constitute a portion of worthwhile collective self-regulation?) I offer these thoughts for consideration or dismissal as others see fit.

There's currently 113 members here and about 40 have already viewed the first post. Please share your opinions and perspectives! 


__________________

Sound Medicine Expansive Weekend Retreat!!
at the Omega Institute - Coming again September 25 -27, 2020!!
Please consider joining us!!! (Details not yet posted.)
http://www.richgoodhart.com/omega2019.php

Rich Goodhart
http://www.richgoodhart.com
http://www.facebook.com/Rich-Goodhart-Music-118609091489499/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3EDI7L60GcsDD7Ab1fdDMw

0
9ways

Avatar / Picture

Modulator
Registered:
Posts: 97
Reply with quote  #3 
This commentary first appeared in Facebook and was shared to other FB Groups. When posted to the Facebook Group "Sound Healers and Friends" a comment from John Shapter caught my attention and I'm posting his comment and my response here.

From John Shapter:
Although I feel an intense danger by sticking my head over the parapet, I do feel that I want to add something to this discussion. To introduce my history, I was a mainstream clinician in the UK for 35 years before jumping the fence to Holistic and Complementary Therapies - working with sound. Starting out in training as a dentist and focusing on preventative care, finishing with a special focus on periodontics and endodontics. I also trained and practiced in Clinical Governance and Clinical Risk Management, ending my days as an Expert Witness in Clinical Negligence.

Working with sound, I do not see myself as a `healer`, so much as taking people on a journey to a place where healing is possible. My belief is that all true healing has to come from inside and from one`s own heart, otherwise it`s just a sticking plaster.

From my perspective I see both pros and cons to regulation and registration.
First of all, the perceived need for regulated training and registration.
1. As much as we love to think that what we do is giving heart based care to people who need help and support and that nothing can go wrong, the tools we use (gongs, bowls and bells) are powerful energetically. Without fully understanding and learning to connect with these, as well as our own ego based feelings and shortcomings, we can potentially take people to a place where they can be less happy than they were.
2. Many people come to us with problems which only resolve through bringing up emotional issues which they find upsetting and cause their own trauma. We tend to call these `healing crisis` without always knowing what they are. In parallel to this, people come with emotional and possibly psychiatric problems which we need to recognize as being outwith our abilities to deal with. If we continue to provide care, both these points only take us to a place of working `out of our competence`. The issue is that without proper training there is a danger that we don`t even know when that is happening, let alone when to step back or refer for counseling.
3. I, for one, love the spiritual journey we take with many people who come to experience healing sounds. We should, however, make sure that they are ready for this and ask permission to take them along. A knowledge of informed consent is important. Poor training can fail to prepare us for giving people choices and permission to only take what they want or need.
4. Finally, for now, everyone involved should have proper insurance cover in order to protect themselves and clients. I see a time when insurers will only cover those with more formal qualification.

You might gather from this that I`m a supporter of regulation, but actually I do not support anything but voluntary registration. Here are the contra arguments that I would put for avoiding formal and enforced regulation.
1. During my time in a clinical environment I saw the ability to provide empathetic and heart-based care decrease. In the name of safety and good practice, care became pathway driven and more and more focused on what the establishment saw as `good for patients` rather than what they really wanted or needed. True Holistic Care has been driven out by Evidence Based care that is too narrow minded. In my own past profession, holistic dentistry is nearing the end, as those who practice it are in danger of being disciplined or even losing their registration. There is no room for giving people true choice, only those choices that are considered right by a small number of established people at the top of a tiered profession. We need to be safe and effective in care, but we do need room to listen to people`s needs, beliefs and wishes.
2. We need evidence of effectiveness in order to take our sound work into more clinical environments, such as cancer care units for one. But whilst an evidence based and effectiveness based culture is needed in the work which we do with sound, I would hate to see it deteriorate to the mainstream clinical approach where the only research is done on a commercial basis. In turn this research leads to narrow pathways of care. We work with mind, body and spirit, how do we produce evidence of increasing the flow of energy through the universe in order to touch us all? How do we produce evidence of the effectiveness of the universal energy of love?
3. A formal authoritative structure for any profession becomes increasingly judgmental and policing becomes more of a priority. Because of this, registration fees increase and our funding structure would be in danger of disenfranchising many people who would benefit from healing sound.

I truly believe that we need to practice safely, professionally and work with good `governance`. However, I feel that the continuing of voluntary registration is the way to go, only with more emphasis on public education so that potential clients can seek out trained and insured practitioners of sound. I`m always open to changing my opinion if I`m wrong, I hope that these points may at least be a focus for discussion.

My response to John's insightful comments: Welcome to the conversation John, and presenting some valuable points of discussion. I feel that we are long overdue in having an adult conversation about Sound Therapy. I want to point out to the readers that John is from the UK, and for those of you who don’t follow Sound Therapy in the UK, you will find that there are differences that exist. First, the UK has a different approach to ‘complimentary medicine’ than the United States. A striking difference is the approach to Music Therapy that exists between the 2 countries. I’m going to use Nordoff Robbins as my example. Nordoff Robbins is a leading Music Therapy proponent and training and research center in both the United States and the UK. In the United States they run a program at Columbia University. Nordoff Robbins in the UK has an outreach program that supports non Music Therapists to bring music to the community. Into social settings like hospitals, old age homes, etc. Where Nordoff Robbins in the USA offers no such program, and The American Music Therapy Association is actually lobbying State Legislatures to regulate who can go to a retirement facility and present a sing a long. I’m simply pointing out, where the same organization in 2 countries supports things differently (Nordoff Robbins also is in Scotland). Even the ‘tone’ of the American Music Therapy Association and the British Association of Music Therapy is in stark contrast. The American association is committed to over regulation and restricting the use of who can and who cannot provide services to the community at large. The British association seems to  be focused on Body Mind integration and Intelligent Compassion for example. Recently the AMTA stood in front of the Minnesota State legislature and proposed that people that are not licensed as Music Therapists could not play a guitar in front of retirees in an elder care facility without ‘risking’ the health of the listeners.

As John pointed out, instruments such as Gongs can present powerful energetics, and I feel that most people reading this would agree with his assessment. One of the reasons that I think this type of dialog is important is because the world, it’s problems, and overall health of the populations are quite different than say just 10 years ago. In America, 1 in 5 children born today in the USA have some form of diagnosed learning disability. and stress related health issues run as high as 190 billion US dollars a year now. The stress factor costs the UK 10 billion pounds a year, and 200 billion Euros in all of Europe. These staggering  statistics are quite sobering, especially when most of us realize that Sound Therapy can be a powerful antidote to this epidemic.

In John’s case, he has seen the landscape from different sides of the fence. His experience in dentistry, and Clinical Governance, and Risk Management, over 35 years, coupled with his sound based work today offers a broad vision. Like the late Dr. Mitchell Gaynor in the USA who saw sound based protocols helpful for cancer patients. There is a responsibility for those who see a bigger picture to speak up when the conversation is being steered by the uninformed who simply see a product to sell. Self regulation seems to be an important talking point, but it should extend beyond self assessment to include when boundaries are being crossed from reasonable approaches to outlandish unproven claims. A recent case is a Sound Healing teacher from India who came to the USA proclaiming he could cure cancer without any form of evidence other than his own opinion. When challenged, he became indignant, and offered no credible argument to support his claims.

John, thanks for ’sticking your head out over the parapet’ by lending your opinion and insight to this dialog. Hopefully we can continue this dialog and reach a rough consensus on necessary steps to strengthen the discussion.

__________________
Mitch Nur, PhD
http://www.9ways.org
https://www.facebook.com/9waysAcademia/?ref=hl
https://www.facebook.com/mitch.nur
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCalU4f5foilh5ReEzX3nY1g
0
9ways

Avatar / Picture

Modulator
Registered:
Posts: 97
Reply with quote  #4 
Rich: I strongly agree with some of your points, and I appreciate your input to the discussion. Many of us don't like the 'feel' of imposed regulation, but on the other hand, see that some leadership on the subject is warranted. I hope that this dialog can lead to a consensus.
__________________
Mitch Nur, PhD
http://www.9ways.org
https://www.facebook.com/9waysAcademia/?ref=hl
https://www.facebook.com/mitch.nur
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCalU4f5foilh5ReEzX3nY1g
0
RichG

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 250
Reply with quote  #5 
Thanks, Mitch and John.
John, if not already a member here I hope you will consider joining and feel encouraged to stick your head out often. For the most part we are a rather benign bunch..... [cool]  We certainly welcome your considered thought, wisdom and experience.

__________________

Sound Medicine Expansive Weekend Retreat!!
at the Omega Institute - Coming again September 25 -27, 2020!!
Please consider joining us!!! (Details not yet posted.)
http://www.richgoodhart.com/omega2019.php

Rich Goodhart
http://www.richgoodhart.com
http://www.facebook.com/Rich-Goodhart-Music-118609091489499/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3EDI7L60GcsDD7Ab1fdDMw

0
9ways

Avatar / Picture

Modulator
Registered:
Posts: 97
Reply with quote  #6 
Another comment from the Facebook Group "Sound Healers and Friends" a comment from Lee Wearly caught my attention and I'm posting his comment and my response here.

Lee Wearly- “Great discussion ... can't help but add that everything changes when you start charging money for perceived services whether spiritual and/or healing.

My Reply - "Good point Lee, people approach this from many angles. And like you brought up earlier, there is a bevy of 'certified' trainings available. The Harmonic Therapy Association spent a year 'qualifying' programs based upon subject material, hours of study, evaluation of teaching credentials, etc. and found a wide desparency of teaching methods. The obvious methodology was instrument based rather than subject material, and the focus in many cases was to sell instruments. In the end, a consensus was reached regarding study hours dependent upon subject material that was not instrument based, and that was a minimum of 125 hours which was the equivalent of approx. 3 college semesters. In the United States, very few facilities met this requirement. Which could be a major factor behind why there is an overpopulation of misleading and unsubstantiated claims regarding effectiveness. Being a teacher myself, I am often asked, how soon one can expect making an income from Sound Therapy, and I am brutally honest. because we live in an instant gratification culture. I tell them not to be expecting any windfall of profitability initially and I also warn them about being honest with their skill set. I also encourage that they spend time working on themselves, friends and family to better assess their ability. But this is always an ongoing topic with me, I constantly receive email about rate scales and therapy times from people all over the world. It’s one thing to guide your own students in this regard, but I fail to see any benefit for people I don’t even know. Only yesterday I received an email from a therapist in India who wanted me to guide him on what he could charge for services. Some days are crazier than others. I generally do not charge people who are seriously sick with a life threatening illness; I see no point in this. But there is this element of ‘expectation’ that exists on both sides of the money issue."

__________________
Mitch Nur, PhD
http://www.9ways.org
https://www.facebook.com/9waysAcademia/?ref=hl
https://www.facebook.com/mitch.nur
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCalU4f5foilh5ReEzX3nY1g
0
9ways

Avatar / Picture

Modulator
Registered:
Posts: 97
Reply with quote  #7 
Another comment from the Facebook Group "Sound Healers and Friends" a comment from Christopher Davis caught my attention and I'm posting his comment and my response here.

Christopher Davis’s comment -“Regulation can be easily handled.
If all that is necessary a certification then accredited schools get to certify people. Licensing means you've invited the government to tell us how to run our practice.
It is important that the practitioners be allowed to run their practice as they see benefit to their clients.”

My response - “Good points Christopher, but let me play devils advocate for a moment. How would you recommend dealing with someone who does not run an ethical practice and is no benefit other to themselves? They could easily pass thru a certification program could they not?”

Christopher Davis comment- "People pass through certification programs that don't have testing or rigid lessons that must be learned before certification. Licensing is a total threat to freedom.
There is very little damage one is likely to receive from a musician unethical practitioners are out there doesn't matter if their doctors lawyers massage therapists or nail technicians.  Individuals and groups build practices primarily on referral and their reputation. We have seen people who run unethical practices on both the Internet and locally.
However a Guild would never have them as a member."

My response- "at this point the conversation has sort of steered to self regulation rather than licensing. Many seem to be in agreement that interference is simply that. I'm not sure if it can be 'assumed' that things remain ethical, which was a point Lee Wearly was calling attention to regarding the charging for services. I'm in total agreement that many do in fact build a reputation on their skill set. But this also cannot be expected or assumed. So how would this be dealt with? Ignore it for example? I'm only looking to stir dialog, and I want to bring an example up. A person running a sound healing business in Florida was approached by an out of state customer. When they arrived at their clinic, they were told to strip. Now there was no clue of this on their website, or before they were asked to pay for services. I hear stories like this all the time quite frankly. So what's your opinion in dealing with something like this?


__________________
Mitch Nur, PhD
http://www.9ways.org
https://www.facebook.com/9waysAcademia/?ref=hl
https://www.facebook.com/mitch.nur
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCalU4f5foilh5ReEzX3nY1g
0
JohnShapter

Sonic Inquirer
Registered:
Posts: 2
Reply with quote  #8 
Hi Rich, it seems I`m already a member, just not very active!

Thanks for the response, there is a lot to discuss and everybody`s views need taking into account.  My old `risk-adverse self` is feeling that some control is needed if only over training establishments, my new enlightened self is feeling that we are all on an incredible journey and any control would stiffle this movement into a new age.  

At least we should be learning from other disciplines and looking ahead to see what affect any change may have not just in the next few years but 10 years or 20 down the line.
0
ChiSoundHealing

Avatar / Picture

Sound Participator
Registered:
Posts: 5
Reply with quote  #9 
Hi, I think this is a very sticky area. I am for certification and self-regulation. not licensing. I think what John the Dentist said is right.  
 I have been working as a sound healer for a good few years now, having worked as a professional musician for 30 years and a practicing Reiki master for 15 years.  my practice grows mostly on recommendation. I'm just a normal person who found western medicine could not help me when I was very ill and turned to other alternative therapies.

If you want to work out of holistic clinics you have to be insured. to get insured you have to be certified. What I found when researching how to get certified is there is a great variety of courses out there. which is wonderful because there are many approaches to sound healing. what some will think of as wishy washy or strange can be perfect in the right context, right client or holistic tradition. Who are we to say one tradition is false and which is not? Too much logical intellectual assessment can miss the point completely.  We are working with vibration and spirit. The whole point of sound healing is we are on the vanguard of a holistic revolution that takes us back to the dawn of history. creation itself. and into the future of transformation. we are sound vibration. if we begin to license on a western physician type of medical standard we will put the brakes on our human r-evolution.

Just look at what has happened to Herbalists in Europe once legislation and paranoia set in. it’s a disgrace how many natural herbs and traditional herbal mixtures we cannot use or get hold of because they haven't been through very expensive clinical trials by "drug" companies. Stevia, a natural herbal sweetener can only be bought as an over processed expensive and copyrighted product by big industry instead of the natural oil we bought 15 years ago.
The same thing is happening in the UK for Acupuncturists. Traditionally trained Chinese School Acupuncturists are having to fight for their right to practice because Western Medically Trained Acupuncturists want to only license their version of acupuncture here. Quite frankly I’m not so sure our version is as thorough or as good as the 5000-year-old Chinese version. Licensing can be destructive.

I did my Certification with Soma Energetics in America. their Ethics Course was horrific. to be able to practice any sort of "healing" in America you cannot claim to help anyone. (I did not say cure- I said Help) you cannot ask them what is wrong with them because you are not a "Dr" or medically trained person. if you do so you can be taken to court and bared from practicing. They have government bodies that make it their business to track down people who use the wrong language or ask you what is wrong with you. The only way forward there is to say you are working with spirit. spirit led. if we allow people to push us into licensing we will be playing into the hands of Western Medical rigid control and banning ourselves from doing what we came to do. which is help people heal themselves.

Masses of research IS being done, by wonderful people. We are still learning what is possible.  

yes, I get to hear of Sound Healers who are "not so good" but we are drawn to the healer that is best for us at the level or vibration that we are in at that moment. for whatever reason, and the biggest problem is healers don't seem to be aware that what they are thinking and feeling and projecting is carried on the sound vibrations. Are we are trying to regulate the spiritual evolution of the sound healer? how can you do that? You can’t teach someone to be a good healer. you can give them the tools, and systems, but a good sound healer comes with the evolution of that person. A Certificate does not make a master.

don't forget that 30% of all healing is placebo. That one executive of a major American drug company admitted that their drugs only work 50% of the time and that Cancer therapy /radiation harms as much as it heals.
People are turning to alternative holistic medicine out of desperation. We give them the frequency but it is up to them to heal. I don't believe giving a person the wrong frequency will damage them. they will just not take it. their body and spirit rejects what they are not ready for. We do not work at the levels of sound that harm people hearing. Yes, healing crises are real and we do experience them but they happen with every holistic form of healing. We cannot be scared of them. just available for our clients if they happen. you can’t license them away.

Licensing could cut us off at the roots. I thank god I live in the UK where we can still be Shaman and Witches and Sound healers and Musicians without getting a degree to practice. Punk Music would never have happened today because most youth go to college to learn how to be rock musicians. Licensing is designed to stop the evolution of Holistic practising therapist. Not aid us or protect the clients. Its a huge mistake.
0
ccobine

Sonic Inquirer
Registered:
Posts: 1
Reply with quote  #10 
It's important to point out the the Duke Integrative Medicine Wheel of Health is not a protocol. The Wheel of Health represents all of the factors an individual should consider for behavior change toward a healthier way of being.
0
RichG

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 250
Reply with quote  #11 

Just an 'editorial'/Admin comment:

I think it would be great if people put their actual names in the signature line - if their user name is not their real name.
It makes for a greater sense of connection and community than having half or more of everyone being anonymous.
It's a little more professional too, in terms us knowing who our colleagues are.

Just so you know, since we are talking about "self-regulation", I could have set it up so that everyone was required to put a name in the signature line. I didn't because I don't much care for unnecessary authority or requirements.... and then there's also that obvious little fact that one could just put down a false name in the sig line too! 


__________________

Sound Medicine Expansive Weekend Retreat!!
at the Omega Institute - Coming again September 25 -27, 2020!!
Please consider joining us!!! (Details not yet posted.)
http://www.richgoodhart.com/omega2019.php

Rich Goodhart
http://www.richgoodhart.com
http://www.facebook.com/Rich-Goodhart-Music-118609091489499/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3EDI7L60GcsDD7Ab1fdDMw

0
RichG

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 250
Reply with quote  #12 

Regarding licensing, I'm willing to bet that nearly everyone here is against it. I agree with the comments that licensing can be destructive - particularly with 'alternative' modalities. I also believe that much of such an impetus is motivated by greed and territorialism and not by genuine concern for standards of quality. In my perspective I feel one of the primary motivations for self-regulation in this community is to possibly help keep licensing from being forced upon us.

I agree that the mental/emotional/spiritual attunement and state of consciousness of the practitioner can be a huge component of the effectiveness of a sound healer. And how would that be measured? I wouldn't even want to try to quantify such a thing. Do your practice and let your reputation preceed you in the world.

Quoting ChiSoundHealing above:
"Who are we to say one tradition is false and which is not? Too much logical intellectual assessment can miss the point completely."

I agree with you 100% about too much logical intellectual assessment missing the point completely.
Regarding which traditions are false and which are not, speaking for myself, I do not engage in nor have any desire to be laying down verdicts on any people's traditions. What I do take issue with, and sometimes am openly vocal about, are the craploads of made up nonsense, including outright lies and willful fraud that are propagated and sold in the name of sound healing/therapy. (See my 432Hz article on this forum for just one example). I choose to speak my thoughts about such things for probably two primary reasons:
1., such things lead many people astray, investing their time, money and hope in things that have no basis in reality - things that exist because someone is intentionally taking advantage of other people's innocence, naivete, gullibility, hope and in some cases desparation;

2., because I believe such junk is damaging to the realm of sound healing in general. The more that lies, nonsense and fraud are associated with this field the less credibility it has with a large number of people, including governments, medical communities and anyone else who might find motivation and desire to externally regulate us, even ban us from openly practicing our work.


__________________

Sound Medicine Expansive Weekend Retreat!!
at the Omega Institute - Coming again September 25 -27, 2020!!
Please consider joining us!!! (Details not yet posted.)
http://www.richgoodhart.com/omega2019.php

Rich Goodhart
http://www.richgoodhart.com
http://www.facebook.com/Rich-Goodhart-Music-118609091489499/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3EDI7L60GcsDD7Ab1fdDMw

0
RichG

Avatar / Picture

Administrator
Registered:
Posts: 250
Reply with quote  #13 
Regarding certification, I am really not a big believer in that either. Possibly in no small part due to the fact that I don't possess anyone's sound healing certification piece of paper. And yet, I've been a musician for over 40 years, have had an active interest in studying, exploring and working with the consciousness and healing aspects of sound and music for about 35 years, began studying sound healing with real live teachers and mentors 20 years ago, and have been offering my sound healing work as a service and practice for at least 15 years. Additionally I am a Qigong & Taiji practitioner and teacher and have studied and practiced yoga, meditation, shamanism and more, for decades. I've experienced and even worked with (not refering to studying with) at least a few "certified sound healers" who might have had at best 10% or 20% of the experience that I've had, and I've witnessed what sounded or felt to me like their limits of experience, of perspective, of depth and/or of personal attunement. And yet they have that piece of nicely printed paper on their wall that gives them credibility.  In short, we all know holding a 'certification' doesn't guarantee anything. I also imagine that there are many, probably many here, who have their own version of an extensive resume, years of study and practice etc, like mine or much more than mine, who also don't have any group's or organization's or school's official certification. What should we do? Go back to school, spend the time and money, just to be 'recognized' on paper? And the same goes for traditional practitioners whose culture and tradition never thought about issuing pieces of paper.

Having said all of that, yes, sure, certification can be at least an indication of a certain level of study and practice, and that can be worth at least something, depending on who issued it. Also, I don't mean to demean or dismiss anyone's certificate that they worked, practiced and paid for. Might one of our potential goals here be the creating of a criteria or guideline or "informed suggestion" for meaningful measure of certification?

(So, would anyone care to issue me a "grandfathered in" certificate based on my experience? If so, please send me a private message! [cool]  )

__________________

Sound Medicine Expansive Weekend Retreat!!
at the Omega Institute - Coming again September 25 -27, 2020!!
Please consider joining us!!! (Details not yet posted.)
http://www.richgoodhart.com/omega2019.php

Rich Goodhart
http://www.richgoodhart.com
http://www.facebook.com/Rich-Goodhart-Music-118609091489499/
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3EDI7L60GcsDD7Ab1fdDMw

0
9ways

Avatar / Picture

Modulator
Registered:
Posts: 97
Reply with quote  #14 
In response to the Duke University 'Wheel of Health' as a 'protocol', here is Duke's definition: "The Wheel of Health provides a framework for a comprehensive and highly individualized and personalized health plan for each person." Whether or not you accept the meaning of protocol as 'rules of conduct, procedure, the thing to do, system of rules governing affairs of state, I feel is splitting hairs regarding definition. To further clarify, I offer Duke's definition from their initial Press Release - "Developed by experts at Duke Integrative Medicine, part of the Duke University Health System, the Wheel of Health is a guide to integrative medicine and health planning that represents Duke's unique approach to integrative medicine. It illustrates nine key areas of health and wellness and underscores the interrelatedness of body, mind, spirit, and community in the experience of optimum vitality and wellness, as well as in the prevention and treatment of disease."

In relation to the topic under discussion, I feel that if the people involved in this 'Art' that we are speaking about, whether you call it "Sound Worker, Sound Healer, or Sound Therapist", cannot reach an equitable solution to definitions regarding standards in education, ethics, guidelines, responsibilities to their communities, etc., much less an intelligent dialog, then things are truly amiss and they become part of the problem. What we are seeking is a consensus for solutions, an important first step in any process. John Shapter and I have been sharing thoughts through the FB "Sound Healers and Friends" page, and I think one step in the 'solution' process would be to form a consensus around the definition of Sound Healer, Sound Worker, or Sound Therapist.

I would also like to point out, that if there is 'some form' of disagreement in definition, that the person pointing this out should clarify why, and offer a rebuttal or suggestion; rather than just saying it isn't so, and leaving it at that.

__________________
Mitch Nur, PhD
http://www.9ways.org
https://www.facebook.com/9waysAcademia/?ref=hl
https://www.facebook.com/mitch.nur
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCalU4f5foilh5ReEzX3nY1g
0
9ways

Avatar / Picture

Modulator
Registered:
Posts: 97
Reply with quote  #15 
More contributing dialog from the FaceBook Group Sound Healers and Friends:

From Otto Haddad:
"I honestly think that the healers vs therapists are just a political curtain.There is not a single one training in the UK that offers a real Therapist training. There are hints of it to make it look academic but nothing serious.
I swallowed the academic arrogant pill of Therapists are more trained than healers and then realized that it is just the same thing called differently. Somebody who has been working with sound for 30 years does not make him/her an authority on the subject unless they are experts in all facets of sound. There are many spend workers that should be involved like Elaine Thompson, Fabien Maman...
Finally scientific approach has almost no truth in working with bowls and scanning Chakras. One calls it healing and once calls it 'therapy'. Let say things as they are. Where is the science behind healing with mantras?
"


From John Shapter: "In an academic sense I agree with Otto Haddad that there is no true Sound `Therapist` training in the UK. To be placed on a standing with the other mainstream therapists would require a 3, 4 year fulltime training, possibly to degree level. As I said, too, you can`t measure effectiveness or construct pathways for the more shamanic or spiritual practices. Back to the idea of having a basic framework for safe and caring practice on which we can hang any modality of working with sound."

My response to both: "I appreciate the input. I think that some of what we are talking about can find definition through Asian Bodywork Associations; at least from my experience in the States. I am currently developing a 500 hr. program that I am submitting to one of the American accreditation committee’s for recognition. In essence this will create a legal form of Sound Therapy in the United States. Whether or not it is truly a ‘political curtain’ should be ascertained, but I get the drift of what you are saying. Having been involved in this as long as I have, and literally dropping out of teaching on the University level after only 2 semesters, because of interference from those above me, I well understand how academics can get in the way. But, they can offer solutions, simply by how things are presented. I can honestly say I have spent most of my life researching this, and if we simply use Western conventions to seek our answers, then we are truly on a dead end street. There is research that supports this, for example, a Singing Bowl is a type of Idiophone, research exists on Idiophones. It’s how you conduct research. I think you both bring strong points, but we need to find solutions to these points we’re bringing to the table, and instead of solving all our problems at once, let’s seek a solution point by point. Something else to keep in mind, and John brought this up, is the shamanic and spiritual side to all this. Wording is important, and should be used carefully in order not to create ‘red flags’. Many highly educated people from Jung to Eliade have explored these areas (and there are many others), and make useful arguments for us today. The danger is when the conversation is being steered from someone who claims their research comes from Atlantis. What I don’t want to see, is this dialog being derailed by people who feel it’s worthless or unimportant. We are far overdue in having an adult conversation about this. If you feel that what you do is important and worthwhile to your community, then support this discussion and contribute, rather than simply showing where the roadblocks exist. believe me when I say, they can be challenged and overcome if we join together."

__________________
Mitch Nur, PhD
http://www.9ways.org
https://www.facebook.com/9waysAcademia/?ref=hl
https://www.facebook.com/mitch.nur
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCalU4f5foilh5ReEzX3nY1g
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.