1.       (2)  Yes – fitness centers qualifying as ME have wider hours of operation.

(3) No, but … trying to limit prostitution vis-à-vis professionally licensed business massage community is hopeless, misdirected and is discriminatory as it singles out Massage Therapists and their practice setting and is attempting to code cumbersome, expensive and unwieldy requirements; the professional ‘touch’ community is not isolated to Massage Therapy…chiropractic, physicians, dermatologists, [hair/beauty] salons, dentists, naturopaths, etc. – with a high incidence of practice settings identical to that of a Massage Therapist; consequently is the same question being posed to these practitioners?

As in my letter to the Senator who proposed the legislation, if the state is interested in dealing with prostitution, and particularly rooting out individuals who pose under massage to obtain business, they can begin with the multiple dozens of advertisements under the Massage Heading in the Yellow Pages who are not in compliance with the rules (24-hour outcalls with no registered establishment name, and/or individuals listed improperly or outside the code).  The Department doesn’t even avail themselves to this hefty “source of additional revenue” through fines; although the money is not used to support a Departmental needs – still it is a fundamental necessity to help ‘root out’ illegitimate posers – then, as far as solicitation under Massage, our Department would be doing us all a favor.  Second, they could require YP compilers to verify licensure (easily through the department website) before allowing advertising.  Third, local officers can Google Massage and compare to the department website for licensure and act.  This has been done in other states in health care and Law fields; it’s no problem for them; however the YP compliers won’t do it without a requirement. 

An aside; I’ve argued disallowing unlicensed MT/MEs advertise, quick internet check to verify, etc.  Their answer?  For a number of years a split Heading – Registered, Non-Registered!  The mighty dollar is pretty powerful.  This year, they decided to combine the headings (on-line) and in Print.  Same old problem.  It only took me 1 ½ hours to verify licensed and unlicensed in compiling a list.  Surely the Department and / or Enforcement Agencies can do the same, any old day.

The department has NO authority over unlicensed individuals posing/advertising as massage practitioners.  Enforcement agencies do.  In my community, San Antonio – the unlicensed, suspect ‘businesses’ advertising suspect services appear in advertising year, after year, after year.  It seems an arbitrary and discriminatory witch-hunt to attempt to impose further time, effort and money on an already under-funded MT Licensing and Regulatory unit, and a professional practice industry trying to be firmly and finally disassociated with prostitution, when actionable opportunities to address the problem remains.  Therefore, the industry need to offer insights and solutions and ask questions, as above, rather than continue pursuing legitimately licensed businesses; I for one strongly object.   

Further, if enforcement agencies want to do something about prostitution – why not partner with those MEs who are willing to come forward and tell what they know about various illicit operations, WITHOUT shooting the messenger?  Based on MT job interviews I’ve had over the years, I ask why are they leaving their former place of employment.  Bingo!  It boils down to enforcement taking advantage of opportunities available, not to hog-tying legitimate businesses with arbitrary business practices that will yield nothing.

It is not the obligation or duty of Licensed Massage Therapists or the Department to wipe out prostitution; and to infer that we are the problem is just as (legally) discriminatory as the notion of invading the privacy of worker to find out about ‘communicable skin diseases;’ plantar warts being one, a cold sore another; we treat patients with MRSA – refusing care is illegal! 

Best,

Jann