Homeopathy & the Law

(a statement by the Australian Homeopathy Association)

Current Regulatory Context

Australian Federal Government reports have recommended that there should be effective and accountable structures to ensure that complementary medicine practitioners are appropriately qualified and work within appropriate standards of ethical and professional behaviour to safeguard consumers.

In this regard, the homoeopathic profession in Australia has achieved some major milestones in the past decade. As a result, the profession has already achieved the type of organisation and selfregulation suggested by the Government. The homoeopathic profession, in conjunction with the Federal Government, established National Competency Standards in Homoeopathy in 1999. These standards are incorporated in the Government’s Health Training Package, and define what should be taught in accredited courses in homoeopathy as conducted by registered training organisations. These were first established in 2002, and are reviewed biennially by the profession in conjunction with the Government. The Australian Homoeopathic Association (AHA) supports this process, and has provided significant input by participating in the industry reference group representing the profession.

Perhaps the most significant advance took place when an independent national registration board was established, also in 1999, for homoeopaths who meet the government-endorsed standards. This board, the Australian Register of Homoeopaths (AROH), is the national register and self-regulation body for homoeopaths, replacing the registration role which had previously been fulfilled by the various homoeopathic associations throughout Australia. The AHA was instrumental in supporting the establishment of this registration board and has significant on-going representation on the board.

The criteria for registration with AROH are based on the National Competency Standards in Homoeopathy mentioned above, including underpinning knowledge, clinical competencies, medical sciences, etc. In addition, practitioners must maintain their professional registration annually which includes meeting continuing professional development (CPD) requirements, and maintaining indemnity insurance. Registered practitioners are recognised by all the major health insurance funds for the purpose of rebates on consultation fees.
Thus, as of 2010, the profession is operating under a system of ‘self regulation’ with government endorsed competency standards in homoeopathy, and a national registration system established by the profession. However, there are no statutory regulations controlling the practice of homoeopathy by individuals, or protection of the title of “homoeopath”. Unfortunately this means that currently anyone can legally call themselves a homoeopath, although health insurers will only acknowledge the services of registered practitioners for the purposes of rebates on homoeopathic consultations.

Sadly, to-date, this matter has not become a matter of priority for our State Health Ministers despite ongoing submissions by the AHA. Government priority is determined by the ‘risk’ involved for the general public in any therapy, and since homoeopathy is considered to be a low-risk therapy there is no sense of urgency to implement the relevant legislation.