Is there a practical definition of unity for the chiropractic profession?
Is unity an ideal, or can we really hope to attain it?
Recently, a few states have been striving for chiropractic unity.
Even Arizona has been able to find common ground for its two warring state organizations (one was not a true association, but a private corporation), which formed one association after officers in the private corporation were implicated in a state political scandal involving illegal campaign contributions (please see "Arizona Legislators Indicted in Sting Operation" in the March 15, 1991 issue, "Chiropractic Unity in Arizona" in the May 10, 1991 issue and "WCA President Admits to Violating Arizona Campaign Contribution Laws" in the November 22, 1991 issue).
On the other hand, Oregon has expanded from two state associations to four, with the original two now involved in merger negotiations. The additional two state associations appear to be the product of the state's workers' compensation problems (please see "Oregon: Compensation or Retribution" in the July 4, 1990 issue and "Oregon Update: Chiropractic Researcher Discredits SAIF Report" in the August 29, 1990 issue).
But what is unity?
Does unity mean one state association?
Does unity dictate one national association?
The relative benefits of unity and diversity could be debated for years to come. Most recently, Chester Wilk, D.C. has made a plea for one national association (please see "The Dichotomists Within Chiropractic" in the September 1, 1991 issue). In response to this article, Gerard Clum, D.C., expressed his "...view that diversity and open debate are essential elements..." (please see "Propagation of Destructive Myths" in the October 11, 1991 issue).
On an international scale, the two national chiropractic associations in Australia merged to form the Chiropractors' Association of Australia (please see "Australian National Associations Merge!" in the October 24, 1990 issue). More recently in Japan, the seven major national associations have formed a coalition (please see Unity - A Turning Point for Japanese Chiropractic?" in the August 16, 1991 issue).
It should be noted, that in the case of both Japan and Australia, it was not a warm, syrupy, altruistic feeling of unity that brought the chiropractic profession together. It was in fact the realization that the national government within each country would not establish a strong relationship with the chiropractic profession until it could speak with one voice. This fact, coupled with substantial threats to the profession was the true impetus to unity.
What does all this say about chiropractic in the United States?
Does unity dictate one national association?
While there are several splinter groups, the major national associations are the International Chiropractors Association (ICA) and the American Chiropractic Association (ACA). An attempted merger of the two failed in 1989 (please see "Merger Fails" in the March 1, 1989 issue). But talk and hopes of merger are still very much alive. Many DCs across the country have continued to express this desire.
The question is put to you: Does unity necessitate one national association? Please use the coupon below to express your answer. You may add your own comments. If you don't wish your name published with your comments, please mark the box "please withhold my name." Comments without names will NOT be published. The results will be published in an upcoming issue.
Name __________________________
___ ACA member
___ ICA member
___ FSCO member
Does chiropractic unity require one national association? ___ YES ___ NO
___ Please withhold my name.
Comments:_________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
Please mail to "Chiropractic Unity"
P.O. Box 6100
Huntington Beach, CA 92615
or fax (714) 536-1482
Click here for more information about Donald M. Petersen Jr., BS, HCD(hc), FICC(h), Publisher.