A Passionate Plea for Reflexology |
|
Following some of the recent articles in ‘Reflexions’ I felt I had to write to express my comments as I am becoming increasingly saddened at the direction which I feel reflexology and the Association are being taken. I
have read the House of Lords select committee report and whilst I applaud
any effort made to create an equal and honest union, I do not see this
happening. What I see is
reflexology being forced to conform to the narrow, reductionist
view of modern medicine and science. By
merrily accepting our position in group 2, as a relaxation and comfort
therapy, I believe we are grossly undervaluing our healing art and the
benefits it can bring. Nursing
was once an art, encompassing the use of intuition, wisdom and craft.
Now nurses are largely reduced to the status of technician,
pushing trolleys of chemicals around wards where little or no healing
can take place. Indeed
acupuncture is being better accepted by the committee report largely
because it’s theories have been reduced to the view that it
simply works on the nerves, losing centuries of wisdom at a stroke.
Homoeopathy will only be fully accepted when
it reduces its philosophy to treating everyone as the same and
therefore getting exactly the same remedy for the same condition.
I greatly fear this will be the
demise of reflexology if we continue bowing to the conglomerates.
Perhaps we will be reduced
to the precise placing of reflexes and no deviation from one standard
technique. In effect this is akin to the baby spider (modern medicine) luring the ‘elder’ spider (forms of natural healing) into it’s web: “Come hither and I will eat you”. Original, natural ways of healing are the wise elder, without which we would not have survived thus far. If a 2-year old child began telling it’s elderly grandfather how to live his life we would consider the child to be cheeky and arrogant beyond belief. What there needs to be is a MUTUAL coming together by people who work with integrity and who are aiming at complete equality. Largely I see no honest or open respect for the natural ways of healing, only the desire to control. Reflexology is far, far greater than a pampering ‘cuddle’ therapy and at heart we all know that. What we practise is of enormous value. Healing is far more powerful than doctoring and I have no desire to be considered a subordinate appendage to a system controlled by reductionist theories, big business and powerful pharmaceutical companies. (“Therapies in group 2 aim to operate as an adjunct to conventional medicine” – the House of Lords Select Committee report.) Nurses themselves have spent years trying to get their profession recognized in its own right, rather than them being subordinate to doctors. Additionally on the question of what we should not treat I would strongly argue against the view of not working with serious heart conditions (or any other serious conditions). My mother has had angina, a heart attack and recently by-pass surgery and continued with her reflexology throughout this time, gaining great benefit from it. As I know have many others. In any event, if reflexology can only have a relaxing effect, why should there be any fear from the medical profession? Taking this point of view also actually leads us into being condition orientated – something we are not supposed to do. We treat the whole person NOT the condition. In any event, in my opinion, whatever the condition, the final decision has to be that of the patient or client, not the doctor’s or therapist’s. None of us should ever be placed in the position (or indeed place ourselves in the position) of controlling another’s choice. The AoR code of conduct states that I must at all times work within the limits of my training. If a doctor, who admits to knowing nothing about reflexology, refuses to allow the patient to receive reflexology, is s/he not working outside the limits of her/his training? If a rule is to be applied to one party, then if there is ever to be true equality, it must be applied to both. The very best of both worlds could be brought together to create a healing environment which would heal the very world itself. However, vast commercial interests abound and are even now seeping into the natural ways as the need for fast fixes continuously drives us towards ‘product’ based health with supplements, teas and other magic fixes galore. Somehow I feel the point is being missed. True health is not ultimately dependent on outside/external potions. They may be able to support and heal in the short term, but longer term healing needs a much deeper working from the inside. I firmly believe in reflexology as a natural, powerful form of healing which can bring some level of aid to anyone, should they choose to follow this path. However, I think we are allowing ourselves to be dragged into conforming to a system which, after all, is but a speck of sand in the vast ethos of time. We need to strive towards “recognition of reflexology as a bone fide professional therapy in its own right” (Christine Watson-Bartlam – national qualifications speech). We need to be very careful that we are not clipped and pruned so hard that we can no longer heal the whole person with intuition, love and tender care, but only mechanically press exact points on the feet to produce specific results! Anne Thomas (the parts in italics were not printed in ‘Reflexions’)
FOOTNOTE
The above article appeared in Reflexions a few years ago (whenever I find the exact issue I will let you know). It is interesting to note that in the section "Theories and Philosophies of Reflexology" of the national curriculum published in 2004, it already begins to reduce reflexology to theories which will be acceptable to the medical profession. Whilst it states that "they (ie the students) will have an awareness (my italics) of the main tenets related to: The Holistic Approach, The Therapeutic Relationship, Complementary Therapies, The Energetic Framework and how reflexology may be thought to work", they (again the students) "should know the meaning and postulated significance to reflexology of nervous system responses, proprioception, the electromagnetic theory, the endorphin/encephalon release theory and the placebo effect" IE, students need to KNOW the medically acceptable theories but only be aware of the energetic models.
It then further states:
"Candidates will not be required to recall facts about the Aura, the Meridian and Chakra models of the energetic system, or Subtle Energies. Questions will not be set on horizontal and longitudinal zones. Candidates will not be required to recall information on the working of cross reflexes on the hands and feet"
(Bold words are in the curriculum)
The above areas are fundamental to the basic HOLISTIC theories of how reflexology works, but the curriculum is clearly biasing the history and theories of reflexology to the medical models.
The curriculum currently being worked on by the Reflexology Forum lists precise techniques which will be 'acceptable' to the qualification along with 'acceptable' lubricants - ie talc, cornflour or nothing. Oils and creams are not acceptable and neither are certain techniques, such as linking. |
Back to Articles Home
Page
A Passionate Plea for Reflexology Regulation, Research and Science Subfertility, Reflexology and Thyroid Function Subfertility, Reflexology and the Adrenal Link
|
