Divorce is a very serious concept that can't be considered lightly.
Yes, as Dr. Miller points out, each group does have its own schools and its own accrediting agency. In addition, it appears that each group now has its own practice guidelines: the Mercy Center Guidelines for most of the profession and the Windham Guidelines for the SCASA/WCA group.
But is this the best for chiropractic as a whole?
Is this the best for our patients and the general public?
Let's explore this option for a moment:
Currently, the chiropractic profession is composed of a very large mainstream group, but on the fringes are two distinct extremes:
On the far left, there is the National Association for Chiropractic Medicine (NACM). The few (probably less that 400) DCs that belong to the organization have closely aligned themselves with the National Council Against Health Fraud (NCAHF). The NCAHF is the same chiropractic-bashing organization that fosters the writings of William Jarvis, Ph.D. (the president) and Steven Barrett, M.D. (one of the more powerful members). In fact, whenever one of the NCAHF members writes an article bashing chiropractic (using the customary outdated and obsolete information), they always encourage the reader to locate "preferably a member of the National Association for Chiropractic Medicine."1
On the far right is the Straight Chiropractic Academic Standards Association (SCASA) and the World Chiropractic Alliance (WCA). The total number of _dues paying members_ is kept secret, but the estimates usually don't exceed 1,800. They are very vocal for their size and hope to be perceived as organizations that would represent that portion of the profession that the International Chiropractors Association (ICA) represents.
The NACM group would probably rather not be included in the profession anyway. They keep to themselves and are very quiet.
The SCASA/WCA group insists that they are an "alternative" and continues to seek recognition (one of the biggest concerns of SCASA is to increase the number of states that will accept SCASA graduates to more than 14).
The questions are: Who really wants this divorce and what does a divorce within a health care profession consist of?
Yes, Dr. Miller and many other frustrated DCs would probably like to see an end to the constant acts of disunity. But it doesn't take a chiropractic historian to see that this has been the trend for some time. The establishment of separate schools, accrediting standards, and practice guidelines have paved the road for divorce. But what is divorce in this context?
In the context of a marriage, divorce is when two parties who once supported each other and lived together decide to end their relationship. Applying this concept to chiropractic, the 96% ACA/ICA/CCE majority and the SCASA/WCA minority haven't supported each other since the inception of SCASA or WCA. Neither group can cut off "diplomatic relations" that have never existed.
In his letter, Dr. Miller suggests the SCASA-straights establish a new degree ("SC") that will allow everyone to be able to tell the difference. This is obviously not to their advantage.
So what's the answer?
Do you have an idea of what a divorce might consist of? Do you think it would be healthy for the profession? How about the impact on the public? Is this what you want?
If this is something you've thought of, please speak up. This may be more of an issue than anyone realizes. A "divorce" may be the unspoken desire of much of the profession.
If you have a thought on this, pro or con, please send it to:
The Great Divorce?
P.O. Box 6100
Huntington Beach, CA 92615
Reference:
1. Barrett S: Health schemes, scams and frauds. Consumer Reports. Consumer Reports Books Mt. Vernon, NY, 1990
DMP Jr., BS, HCD (hc)
Click here for more information about Donald M. Petersen Jr., BS, HCD(hc), FICC(h), Publisher.