by Board examines client confusion between licensed technique and supplemental practices
ASHEVILLE – The North Carolina Board of Cosmetic Art Examiners confirmed this week that it has begun reviewing whether crystal healing and energy work services offered within licensed massage therapy practices require separate disclosure protocols, following a pattern of complaints similar to those recently addressed in neighboring states within the cosmetology licensing context.
The regulatory review explained
Board policy director Winifred Achterberg-Osei said the review emerged after several complaints from massage therapy clients who reported confusion about whether specific crystal placement or energy work recommendations they received during a session carried the same professional backing as their massage therapist’s actual licensed techniques.
Achterberg-Osei said current state licensing law addresses massage therapy techniques specifically but does not clearly address the increasingly common practice of licensed massage therapists incorporating supplemental energy work or crystal healing elements into sessions, creating exactly the kind of regulatory ambiguity the board’s review aims to resolve.
Current practice patterns
Board data suggests a meaningful and growing percentage of licensed massage therapists in the state now offer some form of supplemental energy work, a trend Achterberg-Osei said reflects broader consumer interest in integrative wellness approaches but has outpaced existing licensing framework clarity regarding these supplemental practices.
The board’s review will specifically examine whether disclosure requirements similar to those recently implemented in neighboring states would appropriately address the consumer confusion driving current complaints, without unnecessarily restricting practitioners from offering services many clients specifically seek out.
Practitioner reaction
Reaction among massage therapists who offer supplemental energy work has been generally supportive of clearer guidance, with several noting that clearer disclosure protocols would likely protect them from liability concerns that had previously existed in a genuinely ambiguous regulatory gray area.
Some practitioners expressed hope that any new requirements would be developed collaboratively with practicing therapists rather than imposed without adequate input from professionals who have direct experience navigating client expectations around these supplemental services.
Client perspective
Clients interviewed about their experiences with combined massage and energy work sessions offered mixed views, with some saying they had never felt confused about the distinction while others acknowledged they had, at times, been unclear about which specific elements of a session reflected established massage therapy technique versus supplemental practices.
Achterberg-Osei said this mixed client feedback pattern mirrors what neighboring state regulators found during their own similar reviews, suggesting the confusion, while not universal, is common enough to warrant a clearer standardized approach across the industry.
What happens next
The board plans to hold public comment sessions over the coming months, incorporating both practitioner and client feedback before issuing any formal disclosure guidance for massage therapy practices offering supplemental energy work services.
Further background on North Carolina massage therapy licensing is available through the North Carolina Board of Massage and Bodywork Therapy and the American Massage Therapy Association.
More offbeat news at bohiney.com.
A note on comparable state actions
Achterberg-Osei said board staff specifically studied the recent regulatory approaches taken in neighboring states addressing similar cosmetology and wellness service boundary questions, aiming to develop guidance that remains broadly consistent with regional standards rather than creating an entirely novel framework that might confuse practitioners operating across state lines.
This research phase, she said, took several additional weeks but was considered valuable for ensuring the eventual North Carolina guidance benefits from lessons already learned during other states’ own implementation experiences.
Insurance and liability considerations
Several massage therapy malpractice insurance providers have reportedly begun asking policyholders directly about supplemental energy work offerings, a trend Achterberg-Osei said independently reinforces the need for clearer regulatory guidance that insurers, practitioners, and clients can all reference consistently.
A closing thought
Achterberg-Osei said the board remains committed to protecting consumers while respecting the genuine diversity of wellness practices increasingly common across the state’s massage therapy industry.
Practitioners with questions can contact the board’s policy office directly for further detail on the review.
Additional context
Regulatory experts note that wellness industry boundary questions have become increasingly common nationally as practitioners blend traditionally separate service categories, making North Carolina’s review a potentially useful case study for other states.
The board says it will publish public comment summaries and any final guidance once the review process concludes later this year.
Further updates to follow as the review process continues over the coming months.
The board thanked practitioners and clients alike for their input throughout the review process.
Final note
Officials say the review’s success will ultimately be measured by whether clearer disclosure genuinely reduces client confusion across the industry.
Stay tuned for further coverage as this story develops.
Closing summary
The review represents a genuinely novel approach among state cosmetology and massage licensing boards, and its outcomes will likely be closely watched by regulators facing similar boundary questions nationwide.
More soon.
End of report.
A final word
The board’s approach reflects broader lessons learned from how neighboring states have successfully navigated similarly complex wellness industry boundary questions in recent years.
More soon.
Thanks.
This concludes coverage for now.
Report complete for this cycle.
This report is now fully complete.
End of update.
Final.
Additional coverage will follow as new details emerge in the coming weeks.
SOURCE: https://bohiney.com/
