I originally wrote and crossposted this as a response to a post on the Omnigrads list (an EXCELLENT list for graduates of training programs taught by Gerry Kein) as part of a thread regarding an advertisement for a short-term hypnotherapy training course that offers certification with one of the large national organizations. I’ve removed specific quotes and have edited this so it’s general to the issues rather than to the specific ad or responses. The advertisement specifically stated that there are “no educational requirements” to be a hypnotist and pushed the impression that “anyone” can do this and enter this exciting profession. There was also a rider that if you bring in another student, you will receive US$100 off your own tuition.

Some folks feel this type of advertising hurts our profession.

Partly, yes, and partly . . . why do you think that? The thing about it is that there was nothing untruthful in the ad. He’s framing things to give an impression that certainly seems to equate his program to a disreputable diploma mill operation . . . but he is merely framing, he is not misleading. The bit about “bring in another student and you get $100 off” seems tacky but it is not uncommon among trainers.

One person has noted that diplomas and the like are simply receipts and we should be reminded that one half of all doctors graduated in the bottom of their class.

I would suggest that diplomas are more than receipts, they represent that you have completed a course of study and got at least minimum competence . . . even a doctor who graduated from the bottom of his class passed the coursework and got the basic skills. You may not be comfortable with a doctor who was at the bottom (I wouldn’t be) but at least he still had to get his lisencing. Many folks who pass their law degree do not in turn pass the bar exam or at least they take it a few times. Most hypnosis training programs do not have a mimimum competence requirement in practice. There may be a token exam of a few questions multiple choice or there is a blanket graduation. A number of trainers feel they must pass everyone so as to please the consumers. Many of the large hypnosis organizations actually encourage this lack of general competence standards as they are in the business of growth and meberships, not in the business of educational competence. Some trainers will give an exam and guarantee that their students will pass it . . . they do this by administering the test as a group oral quiz where he asks for folks to volunteer the answers, correcting any wrong ones, while the class as a whole writes down the responses. I personally know at least one certified trainer’s trainer for a large hypnosis organization who took the basic course and never hypnotized anyone and then went to the trainer’s training unable to speak English where he was unable to understand any of the instruction or to take the test and yet he passed with the qualification. Needless to say, the first class he taught to paying students was a disaster and another trainer stepped in. He was furious with the system in that he actually thought he would be getting skills rather than just credentials and had gone into quite a lot of debt to pay for his trainings and travel. He is now trying to learn actual skills but is very let down by the folks in the org. he came into contact with.

Some feel the aforementioned advertisement strategy should be an affront to all professional hypnotists as it gives the uneducated public the message that all of this is very easy, that anyone can do it, and that there really are no standards.

This is all well and good . . . except that . . . it IS very easy, anyone CAN do it, and there really AREN’T any generally accepted universal standards. Heck, to be a hypnotist you need only know how to do hypnosis and to practice as a lay Hypnotherapist/hypnotist professionally in most areas you don’t even need that certification (with very specific exceptions, more popping up each day).

There are no true standards to be a lay hypnotist . . . at least not educational ones. There are no educational requirements so there really is no point getting upset if folks point that out as a way to attract customers to their training. There are some very fine hypnotists working out there without a high school diploma, folks who dropped out of school years ago and found this field to be something they were drawn to. Others have a high school degree but nothing else. Of course, there are also plenty of university-educated folks as well as a number with advanced degrees. While I certainly don’t agree with the bulk of the psychology faculty at the university where I teach who hold an official position that only someone pursuing an advanced (graduate) degree in psychology should be allowed to study hypnosis, I do personally prefer that folks have at least a high school degree . . . given the length of the course and the requirements of the organizations, anything else is evidently icing. However, if we’re going to start pushing for educational prerequisites, perhaps we should start looking at what that means and why. If folks truly believe there should be such prerequisites, then they might want to go ahead and join the organizations that already require them . . . the professional societies . . . and, if they don’t meet those standards, they might consider going to reputable accredited schools to get them.

Personally, I am more concerned about what happens after people get into the course rather than what they did before it . . . which speaks to purpose of the courses and what competencies are expected for certification.

One person seemed upset with the idea that someone was claiming that anyone can do hypnosis.

Anyone CAN do it. It really is that EASY to learn. If all you want to learn is hypnosis, I can teach it to you in an afternoon, a basic simple approach. However, if you want to be a Hypnotherapist, I believe you need to practice the skills and master therapeutic processes as well.

If we want stronger standards . . . and I do . . . then the training regimen needs to be modified. There should be a stronger distinction between “hypnosis” and “hypnotherapy” courses. The hypnosis course is very simple and really anyone can do it. However, the “hypnotherapy” courses could consider adding not only techniques but therapy and counseling topics as well as educational and competence requirements and more thorough training, really beat it into their heads, on scope of practice and ethics practice as well as actual hands on do the thing practice. While our scope of practice says we should not be doing medical or psychiatric conditions, a large number of folks doing the work will ignore this or they simply can’t recognize paranoia or schizophrenia when they see it. The thing is, at this point, we are a fringe profession hoping for legitimacy. There are folks in our ranks who will never gain legitimacy outside of our little niche . . . the lay hypnosis corner.

One person noted knowing that many trainers with at least one of the larger lay hypnosis organizations advertise this way but that the orgs should have advertising guidelines to curtail it.

Maybe and maybe not. This depends upon what the org’s goals are. Yes, some standards about truth in advertising or professional decorum might be useful, but they really need to be congruent with what the organization is in business for. Organizations need to decide what they are about . . . not just the large groups, any organization . . . are they about raising the bar for competence and skill sets or are they about increasing memberships as quickly as possible? Of course, you can have it both ways, but the current paradigm for most trainers is increased revenue rather than stricter training standards. A number of the courses are “about” hypnosis rather than “how to do” hypnosis and yet they pretend that the graduates are somehow qualified to see strangers with serious issues facing them, and your client’s issues are always serious to them, and start mucking about in their lives — “put your X on the dotted line and you’re a big time hypnotherapist type guy.”

To some, this is in part about the ethics of our field. To you and to me, this perhaps SHOULD be one of many reforms needed in our profession . . . but it is not currently the case. An advertisement like the one posted is common practice and neither misleads nor breaks any ethical code. It may seem tacky to some, but it is not unethical at this stage of the game.

Personally, I prefer a more toned down approach in the wording of advertising, something that implies a steady professionalism . . . but that would be a preference, it’s not an ethical consideration. Even the folks who use scare tactics in their ads are technically not breaking any rules or guidelines (other than decorum . . . and, yes, there are now more folks using the “you must learn to protect yourself from evil hypnotists and fight fire with fire” approach which really is rather reprehensible in my view). I really feel there are other more serious issues at fault with the status quo than this.

The reform needed is not at merely at the advertising level . . . with proper training reforms then the changes in advertising practices will follow.

All the best,
Brian