HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2)
2008-05-07 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

BOGUS, UNREGISTERED AND DEREGISTERED HEALTH PRACTITIONERS

The Hon. J.D. HILL (Kaurna—Minister for Health, Minister for the Southern Suburbs, Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts) (12:00): I move:

That this house requests that the Social Development Committee examine the report on harms associated with the practice of hypnosis and the possibility of developing a code of conduct for registered and unregistered health practitioners in the context of its current inquiry into bogus, unregistered and deregistered health practitioners.

Members may remember that, a year or two ago now, I moved in this house a bill in relation to psychologists in South Australia—the regulation of psychology—and at the time I committed the government to looking at the issue of hypnosis. Hitherto and currently in South Australia, hypnosis in a de facto way is regulated by the psychology laws in that only psychologists in this state, plus doctors and dentists I think, can practise hypnosis, hypnotherapy. That is an exclusive right that is kept to them.

The legislation I introduced at the time removed that exclusivity. The reasons for doing that were: the recommendations that had flowed through to South Australia from COAG; the fact that no other state regulated hypnosis in this way; and the lack of evidence that the lack of regulation of hypnosis had caused any detriment in the community.

The other issue which was really a more philosophical one was: what is hypnosis? If I set myself up as a dream therapist, a relaxation therapist, a counsellor in grief, or any of these things, and I used some of the practices which were associated with hypnotism, am I practising that or am I practising something else, and who would really know? They were the kind of issues.

I accepted that there were concerns about these issues and I said that I would have a report prepared by department. That has now been done and I have tabled it in this place. I commend the authors of that report: it was a very thorough piece of work. My recommendation now to the parliament is that we refer that report to the standing committee of the parliament, the Social Development Committee, which is currently looking at the issue of unregistered health practitioners, and ask it to take into account this report and to consider whether or not we should create a regulatory framework for it and make recommendations to the house. I think that is a sensible way of doing it.

I was grateful to the opposition at the time that I moved it for supporting that general thrust, and the opposition in the other place did not seek to restore hypnotism to the legislation and make it an exclusive province of psychologists. I think they are all the issues that I can bring to the house. It seems to me a sensible thing to do, and I commend the motion to the house.

Ms CHAPMAN (Bragg—Deputy Leader of the Opposition) (12:03): I indicate the opposition supports the motion. It is certainly accurate, as the minister points out, that the government introduced the Psychological Practice Bill some time ago. The opposition raised a number of concerns about the proposed legislation, including psychometric testing and who should undertake it. Another main area of concern related to those who should be qualified and under what regime or regulation to operate the practice of hypnosis. We are pleased that the government listened.

The minister gave his undertaking to inquire into the latter matter and, indeed, he has done so. I have received and read the report and, as indicated, it is one which looks at the question of how we deal with the establishment of a code of conduct for those who use this methodology in the course of their practice, and then, ultimately, if they are to operate, whether they should be included in the psychological practice act for registration. I simply make the observation and place on the record the opposition's agreement to have this matter considered as promptly as possible, and it is for that reason that we ask the Social Development Committee to consider this in light of its current inquiry.

It is to be noted that the current inquiry is into bogus, unregistered and deregistered health practitioners, which arose out of concerns raised at the time—I think by the member for Taylor—about cranks operating in practice and who were holding themselves out to be healers and giving an unfair and certainly an incorrect assessment, and then publishing that to prospective people who are hoping to be healed. It was certainly unrealistic and it was imposing great grief on the community.

I hasten to add that, whilst that is the extent of the Social Development Committee's current inquiry, in no way is the opposition in supporting this motion suggesting that those carrying out hypnotherapy are in some way bogus practitioners. We are certainly not. We would be looking for an outcome which would ensure the protection of the public as future patients and the responsible administration of hypnosis in the future by whoever and whatever professional group is to be authorised to undertake that practice. The opposition supports the motion and is agreeable to that being presented today and voted on.

The Hon. J.D. HILL (Kaurna—Minister for Health, Minister for the Southern Suburbs, Minister Assisting the Premier in the Arts) (12:07): I thank the opposition for its support. I underline the point made by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, that is, in referring this to the Social Development Committee, it is not to reflect on the those who are practising the art of hypnotherapy or hypnosis. It is just a convenient committee to look at these issues. I agree with the deputy leader that we would not want to reflect in any unfair way on those who do this.

Motion carried.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT