Newsletters > Summer 1999 > Movin' Steady with Bipartisan Support, by Diane Miller, JD

Minnesota is making history! House File 537 and Senate File 689 Complementary and Alternative Health Care Freedom of Access Act is alive and well and will have additional hearings in the Minnesota Legislature during summer session. On March 10, 1999, the bill was first heard in the House in a seven member special Health Subcommittee. After wonderful and intense testimony and discussion the Committee passed the bill with only one dissenting vote. On March 15, the bill moved on to the full Health and Human Services Policy Committee for recommendation to passage. This committee sets policies on Health issues in the House of Representatives. Unfortunately the Minnesota Medical Association and the State Board of Medical Practice were still in opposition to the bill. Rep. Tom Huntley proposed an amendment to seriously weaken the bill, to delete all language protecting consumer access to already licensed health practitioners who wish to use alternative or complementary therapies. The amendment passed with very brief discussion and the remaining portion of the bill dealing with unlicensed providers passed and was sent on to the Civil Law committee. On March 19, the bill was heard in the Civil Law Committee. This committee assures that civil laws can be administered. The opposition of the Medical Board and the MMA was still present. After testimony and discussion, the Committee Chairman recommended that the bill be laid over to summer hearings because it is a very important public topic and further resolution is needed. This means that the bill is still alive. It will continue in committee hearings this summer and next session. Senator Janet Johnson is the new author in the Senate, since Senator Steve Morse has accepted a position with the DNR. Senator Johnson is very enthusiastic about the bill and ready to work to pass the fully protective original version including licensed providers. The bill has not yet been heard in the Senate but there is a chance it may be heard in the summer.

What instigated H.F. 537? The Minnesota Natural Health Coalition and the Minnesota Natural Health Coalition ACTION NETWORK studied the issues since 1996 and found that current Minnesota law prevents consumer access to complementary and alternative therapies in chilling and indirect ways. One law states that you need a medical doctor's license if you are a person that "offers or undertakes to prevent or to diagnose, correct, or treat in any manner or by any means, methods, devices, or instrumentalities, any disease, illness, pain, wound, fracture, infirmity, deformity or defect of any person". Mn.Stat. 147.081 Subd. 3 (3) 1998. If you do any of these things without a medical doctor license you are guilty of a criminal misdemeanor. Can you imagine what an unlicensed practitioner must feel when they read that law?

Another law states that a licensed professional such as a Medical Doctor is engaging in unprofessional conduct if they make "any departure from or the failure to conform to the minimal standards of acceptable and prevailing medical practice in which proceeding actual injury to a patient need not be established". Mn. Stat. 147.091 Subd. 1 (k). In a recent hearing a Minnesota Representative asked the President of the Minnesota Medical Board to explain who sets the standard of care for doctors. The reply was that doctors practice by a community standard; whatever other doctors in the community are doing that is what every doctor does. Well, so much for being innovative and your own physician scientist. If you don't perform within the pack you lose your license. You'd think a standard of harm would be in order. Does this mean that if everyone is harming patients then it's O.K.? As a result of these laws providers are often afraid to practice. And what about the consumers? Minnesotans are deprived of the very best and innovative practitioners in the State.

H.F. 537 is based on the premise that: 1) Individuals differ in the type of health care practitioners they desire to help them recover and return to wellness and optimum health. 2) Consumers can make informed choices. 3) The government must not interfere with the relationship of an individual and a health care practitioner just because the health care practitioner is practicing complementary, alternative, holistic or innovative health care if there is no harm or imminent risk of harm. 4) There are existing civil laws in place that provide recourse for consumers that have complaints.

H.F. 537 tackles the problems head-on. First, it legally acknowledges the existence of a wide variety of health care practices that have historically been considered independent from the practice of medicine but that are banned under Minnesota's current broad and sweeping laws. The new bill's definition of complementary and alternative practices "do not include practices of surgery, x-ray radiation, administering or dispensing legend drugs and controlled substances, practices that invade the human body by puncture of the skin, or the manipulation or adjustment of articulations of joints or the spine..." or a person who endeavors to prevent or cure disease or suffering exclusively by mental or spiritual means or by prayer. However the definition does include an open-ended list of practices which shows that there are many, many types of health care practices that are not considered to be the exclusive practice of a particular professionally licensed group. Some of the practices mentioned in the bill are alphabetically: acupressure, anthroposophy, aroma therapy, ayurveda, cranial sacral therapy, culturally traditional healing practices, detoxification practices and therapies, energetic healing, polarity therapy, folk practices, healing practices utilizing food, food supplements, nutrients, and the physical forces of heat, cold, water, touch and light, Gerson therapy and colostrum therapy, healing touch, herbology or herbalism, homeopathy, iridology, body work, massage, and massage therapy, meditation, mind-body healing practices, naturopathy, non-invasive instrumentalities, and traditional oriental practices such as Qi Gong energy healing.

Second, the bill gives complementary and alternative health care practitioners the right to practice complementary and alternative practices as long as they provide their clients with specifically laid out information and disclosures set forth in the bill and receive back from their clients an informed consent form also set forth in the bill.

Third, the bill gives the government new parameters to follow when considering prosecuting an unlicensed provider or disciplining an unlicensed provider. Under the new bill "No criminal sanction may be sought or imposed against an unlicensed complementary and alternative health care practitioner...for practicing medicine without a license under section 147.081 Subd 3,(3)" However in the future the government will be able to stop a provider from practicing if there is actual harm. Under the new bill, in the case of individuals already licensed under a licensing board, the government will not hold disciplinary proceedings or injunctions unless (1) there was no informed consent as required under 146A.04; (2) the treatment has no potential for promoting wellness; (3) the treatment poses a greater risk of serious, direct, physical or mental harm to the client than that of the prevailing or accepted conventional treatments or standard of care of the practitioner's regulated profession; or (4) the treatment was not provided with reasonable skill and competence.

Fourth, the bill sets out a code of ethics for unlicensed practitioners including a list of prohibited conduct and a list of circumstances where practice would be prohibited. These will be enforced by city and county attorneys. Licensed practitioners will be held to the professional and and ethical standards of their existing licensing Boards. Under the new bill the Minnesota Department of Health will provide a place to receive consumer complaints. "A client with a complaint about the care received from an unlicensed complementary and alternative health care practitioner may contact the office of health care consumer assistance, advocacy, and information established under sections 62J.77 to 62J.79 regarding the complaint." And lastly, the H.F. 537 provides consumers with a legal avenue to go into court to recover damages and sets forth the legal duties and standard of care that a complementary and alternative practitioner will be held to in such an action.

The hearings on this bill have been profound for the listening ear. Representatives have asked very good questions and made remarkable statements. The Minnesota Natural Health Coalition will be transcribing the hearings and putting them on their Web page for educational purposes at www.minnesotanaturalhealth.org. We are in the midst of great change, great freeing up of the universal and healing energies. We are excited about the enlightening and educational dialogue regarding natural health that is taking place in Minnesota on every level.