Guest guest Posted December 13, 2004 Report Share Posted December 13, 2004 The title, Lic. Ac., was a historical " accident. " Back in the early 80s, no state was going to legalize a whole other system of medicine. However, acupuncture looked like a useful, relatively harmless adjunctive modality to lots of people. That is why we were able to get acupuncturists licensed back then. Licensing/legalizing CM/OM was a no-start position. (It still is in a number of states.) The word " licensed " was probably added because of its insurance reimbursement implications. I know we here in Colorado have fought to be up-graded from " registered " to " licensed " acupuncturists for just this reason. (Just won this battle last year.) Back in the early to mid-80s, all we were trying to do was practice legally. Till then, we were practicing behind closed doors, with no ability to advertise and the constant threat of being busted for the practice of medicine without a license. So at the time, we didn't care so much what we were called. We were simply happy to come out from underground. Once we got our foot in the legislative door, we have then expanded our scope in various states little by little. This incremental approach was the only thing that was possible at the time. In politics, it's important not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Bob Thanks for the informative history. My question is why California, certainly one of the first states to license our profession, is still stuck with the anachronistic L.Ac.? Shouldn't we be lobbying in Sacramento to change the title? Did Little Hoover address this? Also your point about the practicality of incremental change is exactly the approach I am espousing. Yehuda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.