Present: Marie Lamey, Lynn Mackay (writing minutes), Caroline Dent, Peter Fraser, Tina Spathis, Christy Zettl, Susan Forbes, Nathalie Allen, Saima Shah, Iain Marrs, Laurie Dack, Lucy de Pieri
Meeting start was delayed til 1:27pm due to Board members getting lost whilst getting food supplies.
Minutes of 2011 AGM and Financial report:
Marie said the minutes had been sent out ahead of time by email for review and made an invitation for comments.
Iain said thank you for sending them out ahead of time and made a motion to accept the minutes of the 2011 BCSH AGM.
Laurie seconded the motion with thanks also.
The minutes for 2011 AGM were accepted.
Susan mentioned that more money was spent this year on promotion of the BCSH and homeopathy at the West Coast Women’s Show and for the website. More website information will be covered in the annual report.
Lucy asked about the idea of a short term, 30 day, GIC for the money rather than have it sitting in the bank.
Susan said that might interfere with status as a non-profit. She also voiced concerns that to do this may make the accounting too complicated and we would have to hire an accountant. There was discussion on whether a non-profit society can generate income. Lucy commented that the PAC at her children’s school is non-profit and permitted to do that.
Nathalie thought it could be allowed.
Peter added it is permitted as long as there is no pay out.
Laurie thought perhaps non-profit societies were not supposed to have money left in the bank at the end of the year.
Peter suggested that a plan was required for the money to avoid losing non-profit status.
Laurie and Susan agreed on the need to further examine the non-profit regulations. As the money has grown since the society started and has never been entirely spent.
Susan pointed out that the money has been kept aside toward the future cost of regulation if it should be needed and toward structuring the professional regulation of the society since that is our plan. Lawyer’s expenses were part of last years cost on an advisory capacity. She added that she would delve deeper into the financial aspects of this.
Lucy remarked that the Society has not been queried on this money.
Susan said we don’t have to submit financial reports to the government any more, just to send in the annual report.
Lucy motioned to accept the financial report.
Peter seconded the motion.
All were in favour.
The financial report for 2011 was accepted.
Marie gave a review of last year’s activities:
Upcoming changes to the board:
Marie stated that Inge will not continue with the board due to health reasons and that the board will need a new secretary. Also Ashley won’t be returning as membership secretary. Christy has offered to take on this role with the board.
Other board members have agreed to remain in their current positions.
Board focus in 2011:
Marie said that last year the board was focused on reviewing the Standards and Competencies Document. We have been looking into new brochures for BCSH as well. Membership numbers are about the same at 60 with some shifting of status to more registered members.
Marie said she has sent out several updates throughout the year, the Marketplace letter, CBC’s response and the board’s response to CBC’s response.
Standards and Competencies Document:
Marie stated that after the summit meeting for the standards document there was a need to review and edit the content. Susan and Marie did this by the July 16th deadline. We are still waiting for the final document. It has not yet been completed.
In February 2012 the board started to revise this document for our purposes. It has been cut down to the present state to make it a more workable document. The Appendices were part of the original document and were left in only as a reference for that type of format. Do we want something similar or not – do we want a remedies list and or an hours list? This needs to be worked through and we have this as an item on the agenda. The plan to go for occupation title requires having a document of standards of practice. It also requires a plan for disciplinary action and a membership exam. Theses items are also up for discussion later. Can we have a draft ready for next year regarding disciplinary action? Who will help with the exam? What will the requirements for membership be? And so on…
Marie noted that there have been several new files added over the year to the Newsgroup for the members benefit; where to get supplies, insurance information, services for homeopaths and more…
Marie announced that our web master Brian informed us in September that he would retire in November.
We have been working through this transition coming up with a new design and new directory database. This database is easily searchable through cities, members, education status etc. It should be fully done by the end of the month. The member’s only section still needs addressing regarding the log out ability.
Research into PR firms concluded that it is not in the best interest of the board to have a firm represent us. The talking head approach is expensive and they wouldn’t know homeopathy well enough to do this accurately. There is one smaller firm that could do it on a smaller scale. But consensus is it is best to have a community person take on the job – training could be provided if there was someone available to go on camera if the need arises. There are organizations that do funding grants for non-profit to cover larger expenses in the area. It was concluded that this is a whole other project that would require a separate committee to step forward if that is what members want to do. (Let it be noted that no one present opted to step forward at this time).
West Coast Women’s Show:
Marie explained that this is the largest such show in Canada, lasting 3 days. We handed out 450 brochures and had a good reception overall. Many attendees wanted to know where to find a homeopath.
At the Show there was some discussion with the RMT’s who had easy access to volunteers by offering them CEU credits to man the booth at this show. As it was primarily only Marie and Lucy able to attend the show it was thought this may be a good way to get more volunteers out for the BCSH. This idea will be put forward for vote later in the agenda.
Marie confirmed that membership has been renewed again for this year.
Brochures (and further marketing ideas):
Marie introduced Saima as the person we have been working with to develop brochure ideas. Saima has developed two potential models for brochures – we will look at this later in the agenda for feedback.
Saima put forward at this time the idea of using You-tube videos for viral marketing, connecting to a blog etc. She has been looking at the PR model for the medical profession particularly on the internet. She wondered if we could use a subtle, off beat approach that may be impactful, fun and cost us less and have it on You-tube.
Laurie commented that Iain could write the script.
Iain asked what is the media exposure for, expansion and growth, protection? He said representation is for self-protection whereas viral marketing is good for expansion. Items coming up in media are often for self-defense. We should examine both.
Marie added that there had been phone calls requesting interviews so someone would need to be willing to be in the public eye. She thought it would be a good idea for us to focus on expansion.
Susan added it would be good for us to get people to think and referenced the need for this after the polling requests form the UK regarding funding for pharmaceutical care or homeopathic care.
Susan thought a two pronged approach would be best – both PR and viral marketing.
Nathalie suggested it be done in at least two languages. She added that she had previously been approached by French CBC this past year for comments and suggested that we may increase the opening for Homeopathy by also accessing other languages.
Lucy agreed this would a good idea and asked what would be the next step.
Saima said a script would be the goal –to capture homeopathy – and that if we had a proactive presence on the web it would be harder for others to make demeaning comments regarding Homeopathy. She offered her involvement in this next step.
Lucy commented we now have 61 members!
Nathalie said we need a new campaign and don’t want to repeat the same things.
Marie added that nothing more has happened since the initial CBC episode. We could still contact a company on a smaller scale.
Lucy commented that they are starting to attack again.
Iain added there is a developing movement back in the other direction. There was a swift comeback in Britain. After the first wave of sickness they are now coming back strong. He likened it to the same as with religion…there is a general sense that skepticism and fundamentalism is unacceptable now.
Peter commented that in a recent radio show set up to attack homeopathy all of the callers were very much supportive of homeopathy.
Marie said proactive is better than reactive and will raise the profile of Homeopathy.
Laurie commented that there are internationally groups that have already contacted PR companies and that perhaps we could contact them.
Caroline added that the approach in Britain has been proactive not defensive and that it is best to not fall into the backlash idea rather to put Homeopathy out there positively is a good process and what comes from that will be better than if we defend ourselves.
Susan commented that even being proactive could call out an attack.
Peter, Caroline, Susan and Lucy all agreed that the positive approach would bring better results. Marie agreed also adding that the exposure at the West Coast Show was very good.
Caroline agreed increased exposure is positive.
Nathalie asked how those who have indicated interest in this route could get together – skype? conference calls? She offered to be involved but not as leader. To look at marketing – creating topics to address – deciding who will write the scripts – all those details.
Caroline said some people do need to take responsibility for the project.
Nathalie suggested a few people take that responsibility rather than just one and that if it is put out when the chats will be held others may want to come in and be involved.
Iain added, not too many others. He said research shows that brainstorming doesn’t work. Perhaps a drop box with posts to be added would be better.
Nathalie said that a blog is able to have sections for comments.
Caroline added that meeting for coffee in the presence of other people promotes the most creativity.
Marie said that a group needed to take responsibility, that the idea of a drop box is ok to her but not an open forum. Someone needs to carry the group.
Marie, Caroline and Nathalie all agreed to be part of this group.
Iain agreed to write scripts for the viral marketing and wondered how to present them in the cheapest way possible.
Peter said to make a dozen little short movies and release them when needed would be very positive rather that responding reactively to an arising situation.
Iain again agreed to sign up for the script part saying he has some material.
Saima also said she had some ideas already in mind and would like to see Iain’s ideas.
Susan said this is good…our board needs more help.
Marie will contact the volunteers in the next couple of weeks to set up some initial suggestion over coffee. Saima will bring a video camera adding there is enough material in this room already.
Marie explained the reasoning and thoughts for adding CEU’s for volunteering. She had to do three12 hour days at the show and other board members were not all able to help as much as was needed.
Peter thought there was a conflict of interest as the school provides CEU’s. He thought that 12 hours of CEU’s was not very much and that the hours needed to be increased.
Marie replied that the Island members and interior members often have travel challenges so it was thought to keep the CEU requirements lower.
Peter added that the school had extended studies and could easily travel to do courses on the Island or Interior as they are flexible. Members need only contact Peter and Caroline.
Lucy added there are webinars on line also available that don’t cost too much but that to volunteer does not cost.
Caroline said it is the principal of it – it won’t increase the understanding of Homeopathy – how to make it more valuable to the person?
Susan added that the homeopaths volunteering at the show would have opportunity to practice and how to think about the way they present Homeopathy to the public.
Iain suggested it would then be reasonable to add in as CEU’s the hours put into revising the Standards of Practice.
Susan said that is part of our commitment and responsibility as a board.
Iain said people burn out…
Susan said she goes well over the 12 CEU’s yearly anyway but that the idea of CEU’s for volunteer hours is to encourage activity and involvement of the members.
Caroline said it is a big step to decide whether to become active in that way or not for some.
Nathalie said there should be a ceiling on the number of CEU hours that could be filled through volunteering.
Susan gave some history stating that CEU’s were just voted in last year and that we needed to get the community of members used to this process and perhaps could increase the CEU’s as time goes along.
Nathalie said the naturopathic society requires 5 hours over 2 years for members to participate at the AGM or on a committee as part of their Professional Development.
Marie clarified that those hours (for the naturopathic society) were for involvement on the board and at the AGM.
Nathalie said yes as a volunteer.
Peter said that then the CEU’s would be in part for learning and part for active involvement.
Nathalie suggested it be made flexible.
Marie said that would require rewording the current proposal…
Caroline said widening it…
Susan said this is part of the bylaws and would have to be voted on in changing bylaws so could only be done for the next AGM officially. We would have to play with it…
Peter suggested putting this proposal in now as it is and introduce more categories next year with volunteer options.
Marie joked we would be forcing people to count more …
Laurie and Susan retorted we would be rewarding people…
Marie added we require 30 days notice to change wording regarding CEU’s. She proposed to have this passed now and put in a new proposal for next year as per the discussion.
Laurie agreed one step at a time.
Marie motioned to accept the proposed changes to CEU’s
Lucy seconded the motion.
Iain jested that eventually the longer the AGM meeting is the more points we will all get!
This resulted in more banter regarding the possibilities.
Marie responded saying this is good, this is why we need this.
Susan said the board works well together but need to have these new ideas.
Lucy asked if having two types of CEU’s, side by side, could work (i.e. learning and active involvement)?
Peter said it is about leveraging – we can increase the hours but have more ways to count the hours.
Iain said it’s about more carrots with more sticks each time.
Susan and Marie had some further joking around about where this could go.
Standards of Practice:
Iain asked if we had added to the document.
Marie replied no
Susan added except for the reserved acts list and CEU’s.
Iain commented well done to cut it down to a third must have taken a lot of time.
Marie replied that it is a very verbose and repetitive document.
Susan added that the original document wasn’t this lengthy but once it came back as the final draft it had more added to it. Not all of it needs to be there.
Susan reminded us that the objective of this is for title protection.
Marie invited comments
Nathalie asked about the highlighted section.
Marie said they refer to the appendices.
Peter said we should remove the appendices they are very difficult and should be referenced elsewhere, for remedies and certainly for the hours.
Marie asked could we use it to work towards the exam.
Peter asked if there was any objection to the CHC exam.
Marie said it was nicely laid out in that format.
Marie said there had been some objections to the exam.
Peter said appendices are dangerous. The process of regulation may then require these referenced items and that could lead to expensive course changes. It would be a nightmare.
Marie said the hours would have to cover the VHA, Devon school etc hours.
Susan said the point is to distinguish adequate training versus a couple of weekend courses.
Marie asked whether hours of study fits into the standards of practice document that the BCSH would require. Practice is different than standard requirements. She thought to cut out the appendices would be fine but wanted to keep the one referring to CEU’s only.
Peter said it would be better to refer to where it is versus putting it in the document. The CHC remedy list is good and could more simply be referred to. In the same way that CEU’s could be referred to as in the bylaws of BCSH.
Iain asked about the source of the remedies lists.
Marie said the first list is from the CHC and the other is from the summit meeting where newer remedies were added.
Peter said the CHC would eventually be revising their list so it is still best to just refer to that.
Iain said we could post this material in its entirety so that nothing is lost.
Susan asked why post it on the website?
Marie said it might be good for the members to have the list of remedies on the website. Maybe it could be a newsgroup document.
Susan asked to what purpose?
Iain said to protect the air of expertise from the outside structures – expectations from the outside – as a resource.
Peter said there is a danger in the list being modified and added to. It is already at 150 if it got to 200 it could mean needing to learn two remedies a day for a year. And the BCTA may say that is required to cover all the remedies. There needs to be a lot of latitude in what is expected or it could be difficult to qualm the requests of the BCTA.
Laurie said there is no need to know a million remedies. It can be kept concise.
Peter and Caroline agreed.
Lucy said remedies could be listed and categorized as the lac’s, spiders etc.
Peter said that’s referenced in the text (document) and it is still best to go to the CHC list – they are doing the same process, just refer to that and don’t worry about having to change it.
Laurie said anything you can outsource is good.
Peter said the reserved acts list would be a problem. You could be sued if the list changed etc.
Iain said just as with Appendix 1, Appendix 2, by laws, for Appendix 3, remedy list refer to the CHC. Leave off the rest.
Caroline said it avoids the issue of having no list.
Marie said it is a good list to guide us for the exam, as a reference. Educational requirements, case taking, case management, legal implications all are seen as separate and distinct in the document. She likes the format only.
Susan said they have not done the standards of practice document to apply to the title protection as we are. We need that and an exam and a disciplinary action process. We can keep the educational part of the document in reserve. We took all of the educational sections out. It could be used for preparation for the exam. Could be useful to give information about what is required. It is not needed to be included in our standards document to submit for title protection.
Marie said she sees that the code of ethics and disciplinary action go hand in hand as do the standards and exam.
Susan said so it is better to not be too detailed.
Peter said if there was a correlation between the two it could come back at you. We could put the exam in the hands of CHC.
Susan said then we would require the CHC exam for members.
Marie said an entrance qualifications exam is required for the title protection process – the entire CHC process requires 40 cases etc, some of our members are part time. That would be too much and maybe the whole process could be separated. Can we do the exam only?
Peter said to talk to Elsa as the representative to use only the CHC exam. He said that kind of exam is not part of their plan.
Laure said outsource – use the CHC
Susan asked who could administer that though – we can’t.
Laurie said there would also be the issue of overlap between the US and Canadian names for pharmaceuticals in a section of the exam that may need some revising for Canada. Some of the American and Canadian protocols and names of drugs don’t translate.
Susan asked if we could adapt the exam.
Laurie said I think they would be open to that idea
Susan said people come to us and we have no means to separate qualifications of people from anywhere. An objective exam would help – it doesn’t have to be that extensive- do we want to be more on the side of exclusion or exclusion in our numbers? This is step one.
Marie said we needed to distinguish between a professional homeopath, a subset of naturopathy or something done in someone’s spare time as a weekend course.
Laurie said contact the CHC, see the exam…maybe it’s too much. Or see the Ontario exam.
Lucy said they have more medical parts.
Peter asked if the Grandfathering plan could work, if it’s loose at first, then it could be stricter later? We could have more trouble if we make it too strict now.
Susan said I’d just bow out if I had to do the CHC exam – not that I couldn’t it’s just that I’m done with doing exams at this stage of my life.
Peter said that would undermine the process
Laurie said it is characteristic of a lot of people though
Iain said the characteristics and skill and personality of those of us who got this far in this setting tends to go in that direction For example in midwifery many of the people who worked to get it to the place it is in now would be excluded by how it is now set up. Others then step away once it’s official.
Susan said Arthur Erikson could no longer call himself an architect under the new architect school.
Iain added that’s the same as Jesus and Christianity.
Lucy said the CHC has a category and process for inclusion of long time practitioners.
Peter said that would change as of this year and that after a time. To have recognition will require everyone to do an exam.
Caroline said homeopaths learn in different ways. Some may not be able to see it through in an exam setting. We can’t categorically say it works that way. If there is to be an exam we could use the CHC – could we also have another category as well in our organization.
Laurie said is this more than we really need (in the exam)
Caroline asked is an exam appropriate for all homeopaths?
Laurie said then there is the problem of English as a second language – someone speaking Punjabi may then have a problem
Caroline said they would be at a disadvantage with such an entrance exam.
Peter asked is there any restriction to having an oral exam?
Susan said to formalize an oral exam is a whole other experience and includes the development and skill of the evaluator as well
Discussion followed between Susan, Peter, Caroline and Iain as to the possibility of preparing for an oral exam similarly as preparation for a written one each requires specific educational skills. Wondering if an oral one is more appropriate or even possible.
Susan said the title protection guidelines are not detailed and we could define the exam as we want to as there are no exam guidelines provided.
Marie said the application is only three pages and no details are laid out.
Tina asked could the exam be an interview.
Caroline said you could present your information, education, skills, the way you practice.
Laurie said alternatives could be provided.
Caroline said you could do both or either, present or write or do a small project so all the bases are covered.
Iain said that is more work for the examiners. Interviews are challenging.
Susan said Julia and I do it and some are easy to see and some are extensive and take lots of energy.
Tina said the hospital has a panel interview with standardized forms that are used for the interviewers.
Susan said the pharmacy is structured that way, the meetings are formal, notes are taken…
Caroline said that is the same as marking an exam – making sure all the bases are covered requires a reference list.
Laurie said our own exam could be simple adding that we have enough exam questions in the computer already if the full CHC exam was more than needed. If we need alternatives we could use them or not, or a combination of 2 or 3 ways. Then it comes into how the work is done…
Peter added or a choice of 2 out of the 3 options.
Caroline added or do a film for viral marketing….
Laurie asked what if someone doesn’t want an exam.
Peter said that’s the grandfathering…how much need becomes the future?
Iain said grandfathering saves Susan and I and prevents us becoming an institutional hypocrisy.
Peter said and people coming in expect to do the exam.
Susan said that was the same for us, with the differing educational programs at VHA over the years.
Lucy asked are we able to get those people we need to keep out, out? That weird case that we had – there is a fine line…
Iain said there was a huge line in that case.
Susan added that we needed to take all of this with a grain of salt.
What about addressing the meat of the document?
Peter said I sent an email in reply….
Iain said I read the wrong one. You cut out how to run the educational aspects?
Susan confirmed we cut that all out.
Peter said there is an economic aspect of this. If you are the one to set the standards so that only you can do it …the osteopaths in England did this. It is an ambush that can happen without being aware, a few legal words can do it – it is very dangerous.
One Toronto school would love to do this. There is an economic interest…
Caroline said VHA is moving to integrate medical into a cohesive context. Some are putting science as a separate issue and as a predominate aspect a part from homeopathy.
It is important to be aware of having more medical science than homeopathy. It is important to see what’s being done. It leads straight into the medical model versus Homeopathy. Not just is it inappropriate for us, we also need to view it all with a critical eye. That one school in Toronto wants such a degree of medical awareness and knowledge…what is necessary and what is medical, it is important to differentiate – we don’t want to be medical experts.
Susan said we did take some of the medical terminology out.
Marie said the competencies at this level are all we are looking for…how to back up our competencies – we don’t even have what the title would be – professional homeopath maybe, we can’t use certified or registered.
Susan added it’s in the context of BC. For example there is a union that called and wanted to differentiate any homeopath from one that our BCSH deemed professional.
Lucy continued saying she received the call from John who asked about Homeopaths being registered. She informed him of our membership process, continuing education requirements, and referred him to our list of educational qualifications.
It turned out he was with the Sheet Metal Workers Union and they wanted to include homeopathy in their coverage options for Union members. They will now be accepting claims from homeopaths who must have the educational requirements as per the acceptance list of BCSH.
Peter added that Unions are a good way to get insurance coverage.
Lucy said she had asked him about the union so now we know they think this is valuable and this can be part of opening up the scope of inclusion of homeopathy in insurance policies.
Nathalie asked which company it is?
Lucy said she didn’t know yet but will get in touch with him again in a short while to offer sending information by pdf to their members and to ask more questions about how we got on their list. This may become part of a plan to approach other unions and make a presentation. The decision was already made on their part when he contacted Lucy. He just wanted to know which are the professional indicators. He found Lucy through the BCSH website. So it’s good to have the website and it was good to have it newly fixed up to aid in differentiating who to go to or not.
Marie said there are so many qualifications out there, this would be good to have a title like Professional Homeopath or something similar to distinguish the level of professional ability.
Iain said that is good news. He added that Caroline’s remarks earlier referred to the importance of the philosophical approach chosen through out the entire document not just the appendices. And that he saw Peters point as a different approach. Anyone who has made a list must think of these aspects. We need to check to see if it’s philosophically to our taste and if parts stand out that are not…There are many detailed points and many philosophical errors and flaws to be shot down in this document and it will take a fine reading to pick all of these out.
Marie asked Peter to give some examples.
Peter referred to the use of language as critical…prognosis and diagnosis being words used frequently that are dangerous. There are many used through out the document. In the section pertaining to homeopathic case taking we should change the word prognosis to make a homeopathic equivalent. It doesn’t make sense otherwise.
Caroline added that we don’t know the outcome or cure of every case…
Susan said we were trying to walk a fine line differentiating between medical and homeopathic thinking.
Caroline said you could lose the homeopathic thinking if you adopt the medical language.
Nathalie added this was the same situation for Chinese Medicine.
She asked if we could use homeopathic diagnosis?
Saima asked if there was a homeopathic equivalent?
Iain said diagnosis is only in the appendices – in the rest it is prognosis.
Peter said that the proving section has no clarity on how our drug tests differ from other medicines and that the reference to placebo is dangerous. There is a different process from a drug test…
Caroline added that we would need to make the individuality very clear.
In the homeopathic and research section where provings are discussed in relation to the allopathic drugs…it should state instead that” provings are different from”, otherwise we are following someone else’s protocol.
Iain referenced #431 under Research. There is a public research statement and a clinical scientific research statement and a community research statement. Get rid of any ‘peer’ statement.
Peter added that homeopathic practice is about individualism and every case is treated as an individual and that there is consequently no precise way to deal with every case.
Caroline said it is about the individual… so it is not possible to do all cases the same way.
Nathalie asked if we could borrow the naturopathic wording?
Iain said we don’t say some things, as it won’t be accepted to get a title if we say them.
Peter said the first item must always say this is an individual process and some of the ways this can be done are…not you have to do it all of these ways. That way the use of it is understood and there doesn’t have to be any question of it then.
Nathalie said that lots of people use homeopathic remedies not according to the Law of Similars. So could we just go back to that as a minimum requirement of usage?
Marie said that doesn’t apply in the other sections.
Nathalie said it has to be in the case management section.
Caroline said it has to be about the individual process.
Nathalie said we could refer to the Organon.
Lucy said that might be too much.
Nathalie said we could just quote the Organon and not reinvent the wheel.
Iain said at different times we use individuation and at other times we use…. they are all aspect of one elephant.
Nathalie said that could be difficult as we are talking to people who don’t understand homeopathy.
Iain said in general whenever we are noting any list of tasks there must be preceding it a framed sentence…people can’t be held to have succeeded without the Law of Similars and individuation. Watch out for list without repeating the frame of these functions. So there is no chance of any sub function flowing from the pyramid ….first and second levels only? No – always it comes from the top of the pyramid always down…
Peter said all lists are inclusive, have to do all of them…every case is individual and the following methods can be used or employed, would be a better type of wording…
Susan said a large number (of methods) are unconscious, part of our thinking as a homeopath.
Lucy said if you follow that structure line by line you might not get to the remedy needed
Pater and Caroline said yes…
Lucy said it could say suggested but doesn’t have to apply…
Peter added…you don’t need to use all of those (methods) all of the time.
Caroline said you might go immediately to something…
Susan said the list is an awareness of approaches – not a necessity.
Nathalie said use the law of similar…
Marie said this is good we haven’t stepped back and looked at it this way. Homeopaths should be aware of doing these things. It’s good to have fresh eyes.
Iain said every tool mentioned is an option downstream from the more important function of the situation, to cure, to match patterns, all are optimal tools and don’t describe ..no tool can comprehend the goal.
Marie said we would preface every wording, every list with that…
Peter said he would pass on by email wordings he has concern with.
Marie said we changed all words from patient to client. And all sections prefaced with “must demonstrate” we tried to remove those, anywhere that wording make it a requirement we are trying to make it more vague.
Iain commented on #619 to 621…not be judgemental…
Caroline commented on using able rather than must.
Peter said under case management, the line stating, “assessing the multi-various action of a remedy”, has left him still working out what that means!
Saima said that regarding standards of practice, where she comes from she has found homeopaths to be all over the place and it gives people the wrong idea often…maybe we could also define non homeopathic use of remedies – ie using it for a particular disease…
Peter replied that it is dangerous to specify negatives – and better to specify what it is rather than what it is not. The differences are often so fine…
Caroline said the assumption is there in giving the remedy for first aid, acutes, case taking…
Saima said homeopathy doesn’t use a mode – it is very fluid – to apply – hard to explain this to others. Could one try to make a model a picture, a diagram of stages of case taking and remedy choice?
Peter said case taking, remedies…. gesturing a model of one going off from the other but joined…
Caroline said we have a philosophy that is our model.
Saima said, a picture…
Susan said if anyone wants to get involved more closely with this process please let us know.
Marie added please send your information and ideas to her by email. And that we will continue to work on the standards of practice and send out rewrites over and over during the year with the plan to have it completed to vote upon by next years AGM.
Marie said the purpose of this is primarily if there are any violations of the code of ethics or the reserved acts list
Nathalie said that the Naturopaths have a committee to deal with the complaints and they deliberately take an educational approach rather than disciplinary. They take the position that the person does not know and are not condemning or warning but approach with education for the practitioners.
Susan said that is the trend in the area of health care in general regarding errors and omissions.
Marie said that the chiropractor’s association posts any infractions under disciplinary action on their website.
Marie said that the post describes what the infraction is for instance advertising when they shouldn’t have along with the repercussions such as what the fine would be. This allows the public to see that it is a no harm situation.
Caroline remarked that is good for transparency.
Marie added, to protect the public. Especially in our case as there is no college and are backed up by peers only.
Peter said that the Homeopaths in England ran into problems as they had no proper process before and a situation came up that got very messy. They had to define a process that included fairness and rights for everyone involved. We need processes involved that are spelled out with how to use them or it can get legally messy.
Marie said this needs a committee.
Peter said that the one case he referred to became a revenge case and as a result they now have a process in place. He suggested we check with them. They have a complaints officer now because they went through that problem.
Marie asked for any other suggestions.
Iain asked if it is required?
Marie replied yes however we can make it how we want it. She added that she would have to ask how comprehensive it has to be.
Peter said it has to be comprehensive since it has to be used as a working document.
Laurie said the document is not just for them.
Nathalie said it is only for our members though.
Peter said if you put the way you practice into that there could be problems from that ie not repertorizing a case….
Marie responded that it would be used only for serious infractions of the code of ethics, confidentiality, violation of a patient, code of ethics issues, not for practicing the best homeopathy you can (or not).
Peter said, practice in a safe manner, was used as a way to be grandfathered in and referenced as the way one individual chose to define it….causing problems….
Iain said, practice professionally, could be used the same way…
Marie said nothing we do can endanger the patient. She added that chiropractors have included violation of advertising rules. They are not able to claim to treat or cure or go against the reserved acts list.
Nathalie asked what about giving repeated high doses?
Peter reiterated that you can’t go into the way you practice.
Nathalie asked then what about the way a practitioner and patient communicated?
Tina said the doctors have malpractice what do we have?
Laurie said as membership – we might keep you out of the “club” for a while, or not.
Marie said breaching the code of ethics? Maybe they would have to take a course in ethics?
Tina said teachers who don’t teach? Some type of education is provided…why would someone be disciplined?
Caroline said they could work with someone as a supervisory capacity for a while?
Nathalie added that often a warning for discipline is the result of not listening to the patient.
Caroline added that patients aren’t always right. If they are aggravated the remedy might be working.
Nathalie added that’s the education part the need for more information.
Christy said they might stop seeing the homeopath.
Caroline added they might not.
Iain said disciplinary action happens after a review. This includes an objective BCSH person talking to the people involved. The outcome may be that they need better communication.
Iain said somebody proceeds to determine an outcome. BCSH would have to take the role of complaint officer before any decision to have disciplinary action could be made.
Nathalie said there would be a need to prepare a budget for the complaint procedure, phone calls, travel etc. Depending on how big the membership though we are smaller now…
Susan said the worse case scenario could be a patient that is never satisfied. There was a case with a pharmacist who clearly did no wrong yet still ended up in civil court. There are people who have this as their state.
Nathalie added there would need to be an honorarium paid to those involved.
Peter said what about a third party complaint. This is also possible. He cited an example of a homeopath who went out with a patient three years after and the ex complained this was not proper and made a civil complaint.
Laurie said or what about an old person dying and the family construes you are taking advantage of them – how to deal with that situation?
Marie said this discussion is all a very good start and that we will have to revisit this topic next year.
Iain said this is about moving away from a face to face community and we are still a small community at this stage, Complaints have been made before and dealt with satisfactorily. This reflects larger numbers and is a requirement more then. Now it could be an enormous burden on small numbers to put in a structure for larger numbers. This should be slow tracked. We have solved problems before it should be slow tracked at this stage for now.
Laurie agreed the longer we can slow track the better. It’s messy. What’s the up side?
Susan said people are looking for more professionalism in general. The health community at large can’t refer to us without registration. Insurance people require more professionalism.
Caroline said this is not the only road to go, we could lose the individual nature and compromise the homeopathic process.
Susan said we want to use a light touch to standardization and to preserve the individuation.
Caroline asked if we step into that process could we stop the rest?
Nathalie said the goal is to preserve the right to use that word. This process may be 13 years ahead. If your foot is in the door no one can take it from you. It doesn’t have to be perfect. Your request for the title is in there.
Susan added patients like us to be legitimized.
Caroline added that 10 or 15 years is a short time in the education process.
Nathalie added she was not for regulation before but now times have changed.
Susan added there are many changes in the workforce – before yearly employee interviews were used. Now it is known they don’t work well so are being phased out. The approach in pharmacy is that we are here to protect the public.
Caroline said that maybe taking the precedent now, through this work, the path we take would be different than we foresee it.
Lucy added perhaps under disciplinary action we can say as required for the individual case.
Iain joked Fluoric acid for some and not for others!
Marie asked everyone to email her any further concerns.
Laurie added thank you for doing all of this work.
Saima described the two versions for brochures. One is the infomercial version, written more gently.
The other is more serious and includes how other homeopaths have written about homeopathy.
Marie asked should we go for feed back or discuss other choices?
Laurie asked Saima if there was anything else and which Saima preferred her self.
Saima said she preferred the second version, as the first doesn’t have much information in it. She said she can do many versions and we can start over if we prefer.
Marie said she would email the brochure options to all the members for feedback with a deadline of two weeks.
Laurie said thank you Saima and added this might get her some CEU’s!
Marie remembered we had not done a show of hands to vote on accepting the CEU’s changes to bylaw. A show of hands was requested. Voting resulted in unanimous acceptance of the new CEU’s bylaw.
Marie noted that we already covered the topic of PR firms in Item 2 under review of last year’s activities.
Election for position of Membership Secretary, Secretary and Student Representative
Marie stated that Christy volunteered to be membership secretary.
The vote resulted in her acceptance by acclamation.
Marie said we still need a secretary and student rep.
Peter said they asked the students and they didn’t have anyone step forward but added that they will try again.
Marie asked if anyone could suggest any member who was not present in the meeting who could be nominated for the position of secretary.
Marie and Lynn both said that Katharina Riedener might be willing to take on the secretary position if approached by the board.
Iain agreed that she is very organized.
Susan also suggested Cheryl who had offered to the board an idea to organize a course.
Christy also mentioned Sabrina who is a new member.
Lynn asked if it would be possible to have a new board member as just a board member at large and have the secretary position rotate among the other board members.
Susan said they had tried that previously and it did not work well.
Marie will ask these suggested members if any one of them would be willing to become a board member.
Location of 2013 Case Conference and volunteers:
Options were reviewed and advantages discussed – Vancouver as a known location has an advantage and can often get more people to attend.
Lucy described the camp Jubilee setting at Port Moody and how this would be a good opportunity for more socializing as well as still having the case conference happening.
Vancouver Island was discussed and was the interior of BC. There was a general leaning toward the camp idea.
Laurie asked if the conference had to be in March adding the camp date would be best if at a warmer time, like May.
Iain said there was a time before when the date was extended.
Susan added there is a limit to the extension according to the rules of the society that applies only to having the AGM within a certain time limit. She said she would check the limits.
Marie suggested we could do the AGM and the conference at a separate time to avoid that problem.
Laurie asked if we could give out of towners a financial break if it was in Vancouver.
Iain said the interior people have to fly here and that is expensive for the board to cover.
Susan said if they present a case they don’t have to pay for the conference.
Tina said for her to go to the island it would be the time factor that is most limiting.
Iain asked about the costs at the camp.
Lucy said it is comparable to the YMCA costs. She thought it might be more costly if we went in May or June.
Caroline suggested booking early might save costs. She added that the camp sounded good to her.
Lucy reiterated it would be a more social time – with down time, we could do our videos there and play.
Marie said the consensus seems to be the camp but not in March, and to have the AGM at a separate time.
Iain said or we could just keep it within the limits of the extended time.
Susan said she would look into that. There is a 60 day extension permitted.
Marie said we would work it out.
Marie read Cheryl Sherry’s email regarding having BCSH members come together and design a course targeting beginners in homeopathy.
Caroline said that is a conflict of interest for them and that they have already been working on many different courses. They have already worked out a way of using a longer introduction of first aid. The school has many new ideas and can teach in many different ways as proposed here in Cheryl’s email. They have a course that is pretty well ready to go in September. This email request just further identifies the need for their course. Caroline said she will email the ideas to Marie and we can go from there.
Peter said he would like their 3rd and 4th year students to be automatic members of the BCSH. He asked if it would be possible to offer a group rate?
Tina said that nurses have an automatic membership like that and it is attached to the last year of their tuition fee.
There was general agreement this was a good idea and some discussion around whether the cost could be included in tuition for that year.
Peter said he didn’t want to include the cost in tuition.
Marie agreed to discuss this further with the school in order to make this happen.
Peter said he’d like to see a Canadian journal as a way of bringing the societies and schools together. Joining together to produce a high quality work.
Lucy said the CSH had been thinking about it also.
Peter said he would like to see everyone come together with this.
Everyone agreed this would be a good idea.
Marie thanked everyone for coming to the AGM and closed the meeting.