Frequently Asked Questions About the Health Freedom of Access Legislation

What are complementary and alternative therapies?
Complementary and alternative therapies, also referred to as CAM (Complementary/Alternative Medicine), include therapies outside the realm of allopathic (drugs/surgery/radiation) medicine. These therapies include but are not limited to homeopathy, herbal therapies, exercise/movement, vitamins, relaxation methods, lifestyle, diet, imagery, energy healing, biofeedback and folk remedies (remember your mother’s chicken soup for a cold?). CAM emphasizes preventive and natural practices. Natural practices include healing modalities that work with and enhance the body's inherent ability to heal. Healthcare activities that involve a real danger of significant harm are regulated and licensed by the state, and for that reason are prohibited under this Act.
CAM may be used with allopathic medical care or used as an alternative to allopathic medicine, such as massage instead of a sleeping pill, hypnotherapy instead of a nicotine patch or homeopathy instead of anti-histamines.

CAM practitioners are currently practicing in Georgia. Why is this law needed?
Under the current law, most CAM practitioners can be found to be in technical violation of the law because state-licensing boards might consider their activities to be the “practice of medicine” or the practice of another licensed profession. Georgia does not recognize unlicensed healthcare professions and may use the full force of the state's police power to suppress these healthcare practices. In fact, CAM practitioners can be prosecuted even if their practices have nothing to do with medicine in the conventional sense and they have caused no physical or mental harm.

This policing action has had a chilling effect on the growth of healthcare choice in Georgia - at a time when more people than ever are seeking preventive and natural, non-toxic, non-invasive healthcare. These state policies curtail consumer freedoms by putting all natural practitioners, as well as those doctors and institutions that would hire them, at risk of closure and prosecution.

There are hundreds of natural healthcare providers practicing in Georgia with thousands of clients. The studies of use of alternative healthcare by the National Institutes for Health and Harvard infer that millions of otherwise law-abiding citizens may be being pushed outside of the law by outdated public policy when they choose an unlicensed practitioner in Georgia.

Because of this legal threat of prosecution, CAM practitioners have been inhibited and the public has been deprived of important information. CAM practitioners are reluctant to hold themselves out to the public, to develop practitioner standards and to disclose their credentials to clients. Thus, the public is denied access to information that would allow them to make informed choices about CAM practitioners and the theories on which their modalities are based. Existing laws discourage many individuals from training to become CAM practitioners and slows the development of CAM practices. These same laws discourage clients of CAM practitioners, who are also patients of licensed healthcare providers, from having their licensed providers and their CAM practitioners communicate with each other. This inhibits integrated care for consumers. Almost 80% of CAM clients do not tell their licensed provider that they are consulting CAM practitioners.
Medical licensing laws in the United States were developed because conventional medical care utilizes high-risk therapies such as surgery, radiation and pharmacology.

In Georgia, OCG 43-34-26, the definition of medicine states:
“If any person shall hold himself out to the public as being engaged in the diagnosis or treatment of disease or injuries of human beings, or shall suggest, recommend, or prescribe any form of treatment for the palliation, relief, or cure of any physical or mental ailment of any person, with the intention of receiving therefor, either directly or indirectly, any fee, gift, or compensation whatsoever … shall be deemed to be practicing medicine ...” (emphasis mine)

It is this broad language that is the problem. Under this definition, recommending an herb is viewed as the practice of medicine. To put it another way, our current laws do not distinguish between brain surgery and non-invasive practices that hold no demonstrable risk of harm.

If a CAM practitioner has formal training and is certified in his/her healing art, doesn’t that mean s/he can practice legally?
CAM practitioners who have formal training and are certified have met certain requirements that demonstrate proficiency in their healing modality. However, certification exams are administered by healing art organizations themselves and not by the state. For example, National Guild of Hypnotists certifies hypnotherapists. Whether or not the State of Georgia licenses a profession is a completely separate issue … and a business license is yet another issue.

Having a “license” means that a practitioner is approved by the State to legally practice within the scope of his/her license. Some CAM practitioners such as chiropractors are licensed by the state. However, many CAM practitioners are not licensed, even though they may be well trained, experienced and certified in their modality. Under the Act, CAM practitioners who are not licensed by the state will be allowed to practice their healing arts as long as they do not perform activities that create a real danger of significant harm to their clients. Of equal importance, for the first time they will be required to give information to their clients about their training and experience, including certification in their modality.

How will a CAM Health Freedom of Access Act benefit Georgia citizens?
The Act frees CAM practitioners to practice openly, while specifying that they cannot perform certain medical activities or put their clients at a true risk of significant harm. For example, CAM practitioners will not be allowed to perform surgery, prescribe legend drugs, recommend that clients discontinue drugs that were prescribed by a licensed provider or use or prescribe radiation. For the benefit of consumers, the Act requires CAM practitioners to disclose to clients their training and experience, to explain the rationale behind their method of treatment, to make absolutely clear to their clients that they are not “licensed” by the state and to keep records showing that they have disclosed this information to their clients.

The Act creates an atmosphere that will improve public safety. (1) the Act explicitly prohibits CAM practitioners from treating clients in a way that causes or creates a genuine risk of significant harm and it explicitly forbids certain medical activities; (2) it requires CAM practitioners to disclose their training and experience and the rationale behind their treatment; (3) by allowing CAM practitioners to practice openly, the Act facilitates the development and growth of organizational societies for practitioners of those therapies, which will improve the training and monitoring of their practitioner members; (4) by bringing CAM practitioners out of the shadows and giving their clients written information about themselves and their CAM therapy, the Act encourages and facilitates consumers communication between their licensed healthcare professionals and their CAM practitioners.

Since some licensed healthcare providers in Georgia can use CAM in conjunction with their standard treatments, why isn’t that enough?
Licensed providers are not always trained in CAM modalities, most are not intimately familiar with the range of modalities and some do not recognize or approve of CAM modalities. Individuals trained in CAM modalities are an important source of healthcare to members of the public. 69% of Americans use CAM modalities, most often for minor ailments or serious conditions for which conventional medicine can offer little in the way of therapeutic help. These problems include chronic pain, anxiety, chronic fatigue syndrome, sprains and muscle strains, addictive problems, arthritis and headaches. Over 95% of consumers who now use CAM modalities do so in conjunction with and not as a replacement for licensed healthcare.

While many physicians recognize and approve of CAM modalities, 60% of surveyed physicians referred their patients to CAM practitioners rather than performing those therapies themselves. Only 23% actually performed CAM modalities themselves.

What if a consumer has a problem with a CAM practitioner?
First, the consumer should talk to their practitioner and try to work out any problem with him or her. If that proves unsatisfactory, they can contact the practitioner’s certifying/professional organization. As a last resort, the Act does nothing to stop a consumer from seeking civil relief against a CAM practitioner or, depending on the nature of the problem, asking for action by the Georgia Department of Health, Solicitor General, the Composite Board of Medical Examiners, or other professional licensing board.

As always, responsibility ultimately rests with the consumer, for wisely choosing a practitioner who has good training, experience and skills. The disclosure and disclaimer mandates of this Act facilitate this process.

What can happen if a CAM practitioner practices in a prohibited area, creates a real risk of significant harm to a client, or doesn’t give a client the written information required?
Any CAM practitioner who practices in a prohibited area (such as performing surgery) or who creates a real risk of significant harm, is denied the protections of the Act and may be treated in the same way they could have been before the Act was passed. The offending practitioner may be criminally prosecuted, subjected to civil fines, be ordered by a court to stop the forbidden practices and obliged to reimburse the State for the costs of legal proceedings against them.

Any CAM practitioner who fails to provide written information about himself/herself or his/her therapy methodology, or fails to inform clients that he/she is not “licensed” by the state, may be fined civilly, ordered by a court to fulfill these requirements and obliged to reimburse the State for the costs of legal proceedings needed to force compliance with the law.