House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Parliamentary Committees Social Development Committee: Review of the Department of Health Report into Hypnosis SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: REVIEW OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH REPORT INTO HYPNOSIS Adjourned debate on motion of Hon. P.L. White: That the 29^th report of the committee, entitled A Review of the Department of Health Report into Hypnosis, be noted. (Continued from 23 September 2009. Page 4033.) The Hon. P.L. WHITE House of Assembly Taylor The Hon. P.L. WHITE (Taylor) (17:33): I got halfway through my speech on 23 September. With leave, I will continue. I had given the background to this particular inquiry and explained how the Social Development Committee had been asked to review the department's report in the context of an ongoing inquiry we were doing—an inquiry we spoke about this morning—into bogus, unregistered and deregistered health practitioners. A motion of the Hon. John Hill, Minister for Health, referred the matter to our committee and that is how this report comes about. While hypnosis can be difficult to define, our committee was told that it is generally considered to be an altered state of consciousness in which an individual has an increased susceptibility to suggestion. Evidence suggests that hypnosis can be a useful adjunct to psychological therapy. It may also assist in the management of a range of symptoms and conditions, including chronic pain, obesity and sleep disorders. The Department of Health's report notes that the introduction of the Psychological Practice Bill in 2006 needs to be viewed in the context of the National Competition Policy Agreement principles. Those principles state, amongst other things, that legislation should not restrict competition unless it can be demonstrated that it is in the public interest to do so. The department's report also notes that in the mid-1990s the Australian Health Ministers Advisory Council established a set of criteria to be used for assessing whether a profession should be regulated by the legislation. The criteria, which was re-endorsed in 2007, posed a number of questions, including one which asked: do the activities of the occupation pose a significant risk of harm to the health and safety of the public? In 1996 the advisory council decided that there was no need to regulate hypnosis and hypnotherapy on the grounds that there was no demonstrable harm. The Department of Health's report goes on to summarise the main reasons that support the removal of current restrictions on the practice of hypnosis. First, hypnosis is not considered to pose a significant risk of harm to the health and safety of the public. Secondly, hypnosis can be difficult to define so it is possible for similar services to be provided under different names. Finally, other professionals may wish to use hypnosis as part of their treatment but are unable to do so under the current legislative restrictions. On this last point the committee notes that the current legislative restrictions on the practice of hypnosis prevent a range of health practitioners, including specialist mental health care nurses, from using hypnosis to assist their patients. Conversely, current legislation allows a number of registered professionals to practise hypnosis, irrespective of whether they are appropriately trained to do so. In Australia and other comparable countries, very few jurisdictions regulate the use of hypnosis and hypnotherapy. Accordingly, the committee notes that the current restrictions placed on the practice of hypnosis and hypnotherapy in South Australia are out of step with other interstate jurisdictions. The committee received only a small number of written submissions. For the most part these submissions supported the lifting of existing restrictions. However, one submission from the South Australian Society of Hypnosis strongly opposed the removal of those restrictions on the grounds that it would be make it possible for untrained and unskilled individuals to practise hypnosis. While the committee notes the society's concern, it considers that there is a strong case for current restrictions on the practice of hypnosis to be lifted. However, the committee is also of the firm view that lifting the current restrictions on the practice of hypnosis should not occur in isolation. The committee believes that other measures should be put in place to protect the public in the interim. To that end, the committee has called for the introduction of a new regulatory framework to ensure that only those who are properly trained and have met the appropriate standards of education are able to practise hypnosis. In addition, to ensure that there are no adverse effects from the lifting of current restrictions, the committee has recommended that an evaluation be undertaken within two years of the introduction of the new regulatory framework to assess its impact. Mr PEDERICK House of Assembly Hammond Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (17:38): I acknowledge the member for Taylor's contribution on the hypnosis report of the Social Development Committee. We both made contributions earlier today on the inquiry into bogus, unregistered and deregistered health professionals and, in much the same way, a lot of similar issues were raised during the hypnosis inquiry into the regulation (or lack of regulation) that was involved in that industry. As the member for Taylor indicated, there needs to be a regulatory framework brought into place so that the industry can be brought under some control because there could be issues with people operating in an unprofessional way. They might think they are doing a great job, and you see all kind of things on television shows where people make out they can hypnotise 10 people at a time or something like that, and I wonder whether anything is happening at all. As with the inquiry we spoke about earlier today, I think that framework needs to be put in place so that it can be a management regime in the line of hypnosis. I commend the report. The Hon. P.L. WHITE House of Assembly Taylor The Hon. P.L. WHITE (Taylor) (17:39): I thank members for their contribution. This was an important piece of work. Our finding was to reinforce the department's report into hypnosis, and I look forward to the minister's further action in this regard. Motion carried. Mr PENGILLY House of Assembly Mr PENGILLY: Madam Deputy Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the house. A quorum having been formed: