Rep. Lehe has introduced HB 1427 which would license “naturopathic physicians.” With some exceptions, people would be prohibited from practicing naturopathic medicine without a license. Naturopathic medicine is defined as, “the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of human health conditions, injury, and disease using patient education and naturopathic therapies and therapeutic substances recognized by the Council on Naturopathic Medical Education and approved by the medical licensing board.”
It includes mechanotherapy, articular manipulation, corrective and orthopedic gymnastics; hydrotherapy;and electrotherapy as well as the practice of the material sciences of healing, including
nutrition, phytotherapy, treatment by natural substances, and external application.”
There are some broad exceptions to the application of the licensure requirement — for example, it doesn’t affect the ability of a health professional to practice within the scope of their license. It also doesn’t apply to a person treating themselves or their family. And, it doesn’t apply to “a person that sells and provides information about vitamins or herbs that the person offers for sale.”
Still, even if you accepted that “naturopathic” medicine is a legitimate discipline that can be practiced safely only by credentialed professionals (a contention that is very debatable), the definition is way too broad. As written, unless one of the exceptions applies, “only a licensed naturopathic doctor may practice naturopathic medicine.” “Naturopathic medicine” includes the material sciences of healing which includes nutrition. So, arguably, providing information about nutrition puts you in violation.
Back when I was drafting these things, it was my perception that it was the credentialing organizations mostly pushing for the licensure bills and they were going to profit by selling professional education classes. I suppose I don’t know that’s the case with this one, but I think it would be a solid guess.
I just wonder how many people in Indiana want to practice naturopathic medicine and how many of those who say they are naturopaths really don’t have the training and what that may mean. I mean, is it worth the law? I checked the Bastyr University, a professional school, which is located in San Deigo and Seattle, where they say they train those folks. Many of their courses of study can be found in any university (e.g., psychology, nutrition, exercise science, human biology and public health), but there are a number of areas unique to naturopathy. When a naturopath practices, I just wonder how close that person gets to practicing standard medicine and what that may mean. How can a legislator could make an intelligent judgment about this area when they have trouble deciding whether or not gerrymandered districts are a bad thing. Is a puzzlement.
“Back when I was drafting these things, it was my perception that it was the credentialing organizations mostly pushing for the licensure bills and they were going to profit by selling professional education classes. I suppose I don’t know that’s the case with this one, but I think it would be a solid guess.”
Another thing to consider is that these bills are the first in a move to require insurers to reimburse patients for these services.
Personally I would like to see licensure for “Board Certified” naturopaths. Not all training programs meet the requirements and rigor to qualify their graduates to sit for the boards. That distinction is what is used in many states that currently license naturopaths.