After rolling various ideas around for years now, something finally clicked for me the other night. We're also discussing it on alt.fan.landmark on the thread "Let's kick some ideas around."

As preface, I think we all know that what began as est 35 years ago has burgeoned into an entire industry: spin-off LGATs; business/corporate trainings/consultants; life coaches; even some of the teen behavioral boot camps.

The entire industry is either totally without standards and regulation, or is self-regulated. All anyone has to do is "proclaim" that they're qualified to train life coaches, ~transform~ your business or your life, and they're in business.

Almost every other service profession I can think of has standards and licensing requirements. From doctors and nurses, dentists, psychotherapists, to school teachers and even hair dressers and barbers. This one snuck up on society, and I think it's about time to do something about it.

Seems to me, in the long run, we need to have the goal of asking congress and/or state legislatures to take on the matter. Study the industry, hold public hearings, pass regulatory legislation.

I see this as being comparable to establishing standards and licensing teachers and schools, and to the protection and advocacy (P&A) system which exists to protect the rights of recipients of mental health services. I served on one of the P&A state commissions. This system was established by federal law, which also mandated that each state adopt standards at least as protective. (Some states have gone farther than the federal standards.) Each state also has a commission to receive and investigate complaints of abuse. In the state where I was involved, it was a very cost-effective system. Each district in the state had one full-time staff person, and shared office space and secretarial support with another agency. Add on a few administrators at the state level. The district commission members, appointed by the governor, who did most of the work, were all volunteers. Of nine members, three were professionals, and six were lay members (to guard against professionals protecting their own profession). This really was one of the best things I've ever done. :)

Now, I don't have the ear of any legislators, so I think we need to begin by establishing a website to build public awareness and support. Maybe a website + a blog + a petition.

There would have to be an organization sooner or later, but those take a while to set up.

While I think we could start brainstorming about what standards are needed, I'd like to keep it open in the beginning. I made the mistake once of setting up an online petition that specifically addressed the situation as it then existed. Well, the dang situation got a lot worse, and the petition didn't cover it. Starting over would have meant losing all the signatures.

Assuming the idea has merit (I hope, I hope, I hope) existing organizations and professionals would get behind it.

Whatcha'll think?

estie

I think this is a good idea. The main problem I can think of, however, is deciding who is qualified to decide on the licensing standards, administer any applicable exams, and judge qualifications. It would be easy for an LGAT to infiltrate such a government agency or self-regulatory organization.

estie,

I think it's an excellent idea and is exactly what's needed.

skeptic

Quote
Gulab Jamon
I think this is a good idea. The main problem I can think of, however, is deciding who is qualified to decide on the licensing standards, administer any applicable exams, and judge qualifications. It would be easy for an LGAT to infiltrate such a government agency or self-regulatory organization.

Exactly. The field of naturopathy has licensing issues. LGATs and their "technology" are big with naturopaths. NDs are only licensed in about 12 states, and it is illegal to practice as a physician in the others. They are self-regulated, including the accreditation processes of their "medical schools." My Landmarkian doctor was a naturopath and Landmark is quite active on naturopathic school campuses. Even in non-licensed states, they can be "consultants", as long as they don't diagnose and treat. However, it probably wouldn't fly in court if the doctor said he was treating a racket instead of a diagnosis.

Quote
Gulab Jamon
I think this is a good idea. The main problem I can think of, however, is deciding who is qualified to decide on the licensing standards, administer any applicable exams, and judge qualifications. It would be easy for an LGAT to infiltrate such a government agency or self-regulatory organization.

Got any ideas? I think many psychologists, educators, and cult experts would be qualified to recommend licensing standards, and I've always liked to include the general public. Ultimately, it would be up to congress and state legislatures to make the decision.

It was specified, by law, that the P&A Commission I served on had 3 professionals and 6 lay persons in each district. Since I think the necessity here is for outside, independent regulation, there could be a stipulation that a majority of the regulatory body be persons who were not followers of any of the organizations they regulated. Being a follower could alse be seen as a conflict of interest.

estie

I think the problem mentioned is inherent in regulating any industry, and is not a reason to not regulate.

Yeah, but keeping asking questions. It makes me think.

estie

Okay, I've got a first draft of suggested standards for LGAT's put together. There's one I'm still debating, and I left some specifics to be determined. Definitions of terms will be necessary. I'd like to hear constructive comments and the rationale for them. Since I'm most familiar with estMark, suggestions regarding other LGAT's are especially requested. Bunch a heads are better than one.

estie

Some suggested ethics and standards for LGAT’s and LGAT-based entitites

The following is offered as an initial suggested list of ethics and standards for the Self-Awareness industry. Comments and suggestions are welcome. Ultimately, our goal is to ask Congress and/or state legislatures to study this field and establish standards and oversight/accountability mechanisms to regulate this industry.

1. Providers of self-awareness courses and services shall provide to prospective clients and customers a detailed “prospectus” which includes the following:
a. A statement of the specific goals, purposes, and outcomes of the program/service.
b. A statement describing all the methods which occur during the course and which are used to achieve these goals and outcomes.
c. A statement describing all potential risks and side-effects.
d. A statement describing the qualifications, certifications and licenses held by course leaders and/or service providers.
This information shall be provided before registration in any and all courses.

2. All teachers/leaders/instructors/facilitators of paid self-awareness courses must hold licenses certifying their preparation and fitness, as established by legislative action. At a minimum, such teachers should have earned a bachelor’s degree from an accredited institution of higher learning.

3. Providers of self-awareness courses shall provide all accommodations prescribed under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

4. Participants in self-awareness courses shall not be required to sign any agreement which limits their access to legal remedies.

5. All self-awareness courses shall meet the following minimum requirements:
a. 30-minute breaks every three hours for courses with 150 or less participants; 45-minute breaks every three hours for courses with 150 or more participants. These breaks shall allow bathroom use, eating, and relaxation at the discretion of the participants.
b. 90-minute meal breaks every six hours.
c. In the case of multiple-day courses, there shall be a break of at least ten hours before the resumption of the following day’s course.
d. No requirements, rules or agreements shall govern participants’ actions during breaks, outside the course room or when the course is not being actively presented.

6. Course participants shall not be prohibited or inhibited from taking regular prescription or over-the-counter medication as prescribed by a physician or at their discretion. Participants shall not be required to have the taking of medications approved by course personnel.

7. Course participants shall be free to sit anywhere within the course seating provided. Course participants shall not be inhibited from sitting beside anyone of their choice.

8. Course participants shall be allowed to wear and use watches and timepieces.

9. Course participants shall be free to take notes.

10. Course participants shall be free to leave and re-enter the course room when necessary, at their discretion.

11. Course participants shall be allowed to make or receive phone calls when necessary to them, in a way which does not disrupt the course.

12. No methods which promote susceptibility to suggestion or limit or impede course participants’ ability to make conscious choices and/or decisions shall be employed without advising the participants in full in advance and allowing them to freely choose whether to participate in that section of the course.

13. Course participants shall always have the right to decline to participate in any activity, process or exercise, without recrimination.

14. Course participants shall always have the right to leave a course and receive a full refund, or, following the completion of the course, be given a full refund upon request.

15. No more than fifteen minutes of any course shall be devoted to promoting registration in further courses.

16. It shall be the responsibility of any company/organization offering self-awareness courses to market its courses. Course participants/customers shall not be utilized as an unpaid sales staff.
a. No more than five minutes of any course shall be devoted to promoting marketing of the organization’s courses to friends, relatives, and acquaintances of the customers.
b. Course content shall never include targeting bringing in other customers.
c. Customers who market the company’s courses shall be defined as salesmen, and shall be paid sales commissions, as established by legislation.

17. No one under the age of 18 shall participate in a self-awareness course, unless such course is conducted by licensed psychotherapists, solely using methods accepted for psychotherapeutic use.

18. Customers of any company/organization offering self-awareness courses shall be paid for any work or services requested by the company/organization and provide by the customer, in accordance with U. S. Labor laws. Customers being trained to perform work within the company/organization shall never be charged for any part such training.

19. Companies/organizations providing self-awareness courses shall not call or contact customers or prospective customers against the wishes of the customer or prospective customer.

20. Companies/organizations providing self-awareness courses shall not extensively threaten or engage in litigation that comprises a pattern of intimidation inhibiting the free expression of ideas and opinions in variance with the claims of the self-awareness company/organization.

21. No one shall be required by his/her employer to take a self-awareness course. Further, neither explicit nor implicit pressure shall be utilized within the workplace to unduly influence any employee to take a self-awareness course. This would include, but not be limited to, a recommendation to take a self-awareness course by a superior.

22. Any study groups and oversight bodies established by legislation shall have free access to all educational/training/course materials and to all trainings and courses, including courses/trainings established for course leaders/facilitators, without restriction by the company/organization offering the self-awareness courses.

23. Any complaints or observations of unwanted course outcomes known to any companies/organizations offering self-awareness courses shall be reported to an oversight body as established by legislation. Since these courses claim to be life-altering, all unwanted outcomes during or subsequent to course participation shall be reported as potentially connected to course participation.

estie,

I think you just killed off the industry in 23 points!

Estie - are you still around? PM me if you can.

Hope