National Organizations and the Definitions?

0

Has anyone besides me noticed that there are no longer arguments among the profession as to what chiropractic is?  I wish I could say it is because we are all in agreement.  Perhaps, to some degree, it is because we have matured as a profession.  Mostly, it is because the three major factions (represented by the national associations) have pretty much settled into their positions with the knowledge that they will not likely move others off theirs.  This has rendered any discussion regarding the definition of chiropractic a waste.  It would be nice to think that with this settling-in there will also be respect for the rights of others to practice their particular models.  That would definitely be a sign of maturity.

The ACA says chiropractic is anything and everything you want it to be, and that they really do not care what it is.  That is why their members, who also wear college presidents’ hats, had no objection to the vitalistic component of the recent ACC definition.  They have their agenda and it does not include or necessitate arguing over definitions.

The ICA, being the number two organization in size and “trying harder,” says we know what chiropractic is but we are not going to say anything because we want to embrace enough new members so we can be number one.  Whatever your definition is, we will not offend you with ours or suggest yours is not chiropractic.  As a result, the “organization of B.J.” is full of confused chiropractors practicing the full gamut of procedures and practices most of whom feel quite comfortable in the organization.  The FSCO is number three and resigned to the fact that it will probably always be the smallest of the national organizations.  Consequently, it has no problem defining chiropractic, or at least defining the practice of straight chiropractic.  But as the smallest, it is not in a position to argue the definition in order to change the others.  It is content with simply presenting its approach and allowing those who agree that chiropractic is the correction of vertebral subluxations to enable the body to work at its fullest potential to join them.  All the FSCO desires is to be left alone to pursue its model and to allow like-minded chiropractors and/or schools to do likewise. 

As a member of the third group it would be nice to know that the present lack of public contention and dispute is because we are being left to pursue our approach unimpeded.  The fear, of course, is that the lack of public debate is because those who have another viewpoint are working surreptitiously to deny us the freedom to practice our unique model of chiropractic and consequently, do not want the light of public debate to expose their clandestine activities. v14n2

Be Sociable, Share!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *