Our History
Minnesota Natural Health Legal Reform Project
A 501[c]4 non-profit political action organization

Health Freedom – Ensuring Access to Our Healing Practitioners

History of Health Freedom Initiatives in Minnesota
In 1996, consumers and practitioners of natural health care heard the news: St. Paul Naturopath Helen Healy had been charged with "practicing medicine without a license." She was issued an injunction by the Minnesota Attorney General’s office to close her practice. Simultaneously, in similar cases, the Medical Board was disciplining the area’s leading holistic medical doctor, and the Dental Board was disciplining the leading mercury-free dentist.

The Minnesota natural health community rose up to protest what seemed to be arbitrary actions to shut down natural health practitioners. The natural health community initiated protests, marches, and thousands of calls and letters to the Medical Board and Attorney General’s office. Eventually, the Medical Board worked out a compromise with Dr. Healy, enabling her to continue to practice. But many in the natural health community knew that what had happened to Dr. Healy and the other practitioners could happen again - to any naturopath, homeopath, herbalist, massage therapist, energy worker, or licensed or unlicensed natural health practitioner of any kind. After all, the medical statute in Minnesota, much like that found in every state, states that a person may not practice medicine unless licensed, and here is the definition of practicing medicine: "offers or undertakes to prevent, diagnose, correct, or treat in any manner or by any means, methods, devices, or instrumentalities, any disease, illness, pain, wound, fracture, infirmity, deformity or defect of any person." And any licensed practitioner such as a doctor or dentist was required to follow the prevailing standard of care for their profession, so using alternative methods of care could put them at jeopardy of losing their license.

Existing laws meant that no one could legally practice alternative healing methods, licensed or unlicensed. If they were a licensed practitioner using alternative medicine, they were practicing outside the standard of care for their profession. If they were practitioners of a healing modality that had never been licensed, then they were guilty of practicing medicine without a license, and could be criminally prosecuted at any time. These practitioners could be prosecuted regardless of whether or not there were any patient complaints.

The Creation of Minnesota Natural Health Legal Reform Project – The Voice of Health Freedom in Minnesota
The Minnesota Natural Health Coalition was born, with a mission to educate people about health freedom principles; and the Minnesota Natural Health Legal Reform Project was created to lobby the legislature to restore consumer access to the healers of our choice.

The group first approached the problem by considering that the solution was to create licensure for all natural healers. We would license naturopaths, homeopaths, herbalists, massage therapists, Shiatsu practitioners, yoga teachers, aromatherapists, healing touch, Feldenkreis ... As we began to look at the prospects of creating all of these scopes of practice, we started to realize the absurdity of that approach! If a person is licensed as a homeopath, he can’t advise a client to take vitamin C - that would be the nutritionists’ exclusive domain. If a person is licensed to do Qi Gong, she couldn’t suggest some herbal echinacea, without the herbalists crying foul! Nor could an herbalist do a simple hands-on energy healing. We started to realize that creating all of these separate boxes would exclude any healer from imparting the wide range of centuries-old wisdom that work together to restore health. This would be counterproductive for consumers and practitioners alike.

We began to realize that the system of licensure is a system of setting up boxes - boxes which shut people out. We learned that natural health care, which works by gently strengthening the body’s ability to heal itself, does not fit into the old paradigm of licensure.

After all, the old paradigm of licensure exists to protect the public from health care procedures which carry a risk of harm – treatments such as surgery, radiation, and pharmaceutical drugs. Given the gentle, non-invasive, non-toxic nature of holistic healing services, with a very low incidence of adverse effects, was it even appropriate to legislate who could do this and who couldn’t? After all, how does one quantify the credentials for the compassionate laying on of hands? Is energy healing an inherent gift, or is it learned through mentoring? Or can these skills only be acquired by formal schooling? We came to understand that the provision of natural health care should not be restricted to only a few. Gentle, safe modalities of natural health care should always remain in the public domain.

As they wrestled with these ideas, The Minnesota Natural Health Legal Reform Project began looking for a different approach. Why not simply restrict the practice of any modality which has demonstrated a significant amount of potential harm to clients? Absolutely, surgery and prescription drugs should not be in the public domain. Neither should dentistry or chiropractic. They should be regulated to ensure competency. But gentle, non-toxic wellness services should be able to be freely administered.

A creative new approach was passed: Statute 146A
After four years of hard work in the legislature, a creative new bill was overwhelmingly passed. Statute 146A created a safe harbor exemption from the medical practice act. It acknowledged the right to engage in healing practices that do not pose an imminent risk of significant harm to the public, and the fundamental right of all people to use whatever health care options they deem helpful to restoring their health and wellness. The bill set up an office in the Minnesota Department of Health to receive complaints and take actions on complaints if indicated. It required unlicensed practitioners to avoid a list of prohibited actions, and it required that practitioners give disclosure statements to their clients stating that they are not licensed health care practitioners, and describing their education and training.

Statute 146A has worked well in Minnesota. Minnesota consumers have access to the healing practitioners they desire, and they have the information needed to make informed choices. And Minnesota has become a model for other states seeking to ensure access to all healing choices. A new nonprofit organization, National Health Freedom Coalition was created to help spread health freedom to other states, and six states now have health freedom exemption laws; 19 additional states are working toward the passage of health freedom acts.

After 11 years, the Minnesota Natural Health Coalition and Minnesota Natural Health Legal Reform Project continue to work to maintain and secure the public's free access to the modalities of healing of their choice. The citizens want to be able to choose from the wide range of differently educated practitioners that exist today, and that must continue to exist as we move into the future.

The Minnesota Natural Health Legal Reform Project is a 501[c]4 non-profit political action organization.
MNHLRP; PO Box 315; Rosemount, MN 55068; Email mnhlrp@charter.net; (651) 322 - 4542