Setting the record
straight
WCA president interviewed on ICA/WFC issue
Seldom has any chiropractic political issue created the type of interest and
controversy within the profession as has the role of the World Federation of Chiropractic
(WFC).
In the last several weeks, hundreds -- if not thousands -- of e-mail messages
and traditional letters have been circulated about the topic. Many have contained
questions directed at Terry A. Rondberg, D.C., president of the World Chiropractic
Alliance (WCA), which has been instrumental in exposing some of the WFC's recent power
plays.
In the following article, Dr. Rondberg answers many of those questions and
clarifies the WCA's position on chiropractic freedom throughout the world.
>>> QUESTION: What is the basis for the WCA's objection to the WFC?
Answer: The WCA strongly supports academic and political freedom, and does not
seek to silence opposing viewpoints. The WCA objects to specific behaviors and policies of
the WFC that adversely affect subluxation-centered chiropractic.
>>> QUESTION: What WFC policies and activities adversely affect
subluxation-centered chiropractic?
Answer: There are quite a few. Let's begin with the WFC definition of
chiropractic:
"A health profession concerned with the diagnosis, treatment and prevention
of mechanical disorders of the musculoskeletal system, and the effects of these disorders
on the function of the nervous system and general health. There is an emphasis on manual
treatments including spinal manipulation or adjustment." (Auckland, 1999.) See WFC website.
>>> QUESTION: What's wrong with that definition?
Answer: It frames chiropractic as a medical specialty for the treatment of
musculoskeletal disorders. Furthermore, it implies that manipulation is synonymous with
adjustment. But the most dangerous aspect of this definition is that it fails to mention
vertebral subluxation. It also fails to acknowledge the vitalistic aspect of chiropractic.
>>> QUESTION: It does mention the nervous system, doesn't it?
Answer: Only in the context of musculoskeletal disorders. And if we look at the
scope of practice statement contained in the WFC's prescription drug policy, the direction
of the WFC is clear:
"The scope of chiropractic practice includes the management of patients
with acute and chronic headache, neck pain and back pain and other neuromusculoskeletal
disorders." (Auckland, 1999. See WFC website:
http://www.wfc.org/english/statements-1.html).
>>> QUESTION: What is the WFC's policy on drugs in chiropractic?
Answer: The current WFC policy states that the practice of chiropractic does not
include the use of prescription drugs. There is no statement excluding proprietary drugs.
It is claimed that this was a concession to some European D.C.s who wish to use vitamins,
which are classified as non-prescription drugs in some countries. Obviously, the statement
could have been worded to include nutritional supplements, but not drugs.
>>> QUESTION: The "secretary-general" of the WFC makes
frequent reference to the WFC's "authority" in international affairs. What is
the source of this "authority?"
Answer: There is none. Only governments have authority over their citizens.
Private, non-governmental organizations are strictly voluntary. They have no authority
whatsoever. The authority to regulate professions and educational institutions rests
solely with governments.
>>> QUESTION: Isn't the WFC "approved" by the World Health
Organization (WHO)? Doesn't this give it authority?
Answer: Absolutely not. Recognition as a non-governmental organization (NGO) by
a United Nations (UN) agency does not confer any authority. Nor does it indicate
"approval" of the policies of the NGO.
In the case of the World Health Organization, it simply means that ongoing
collaborative projects are being undertaken by WHO and the NGO. For further information
concerning WHO NGOs, visit their web site at http://www.who.org.
>>> QUESTION: Is it true that the WCA applied for status with WHO and
was refused?
Answer: No. The WCA has been in communication with WHO, but to date has not
formally applied for status.
>>> QUESTION: What is the status of the WCA relative to the UN?
Answer: The WCA is associated with the Department of Public Information (DPI) of
the UN. Organizations eligible for this association must share the ideals of the United
Nations Charter, operate solely on a not-for-profit basis, and demonstrate an interest in
UN issues.
In addition, they must have a proven ability to reach large or specialized
audiences, and have the means and commitment to disseminate information about the UN.
>>> QUESTION: What activities has the WCA participated in as a result
of this association?
Answer: Six prominent articles have appeared in The Chiropractic Journal
concerning UN issues.
The WCA main representative associated with the DPI-UN attends weekly briefings
at UN Headquarters in New York City. He is also a member of the NGO Health Committee.
A WCA representative was in attendance at the 52nd Annual DPI/NGO Conference and
Reception.
The WCA sponsored a workshop titled, "The Role of Chiropractic Care in
Global Wellness" at the 1999 International Conference of NGOs in Korea.
>>> QUESTION: Is it true that the WFC filed a complaint against the WCA
with the UN Department of Public Information?
Answer: Yes. In a letter signed by the WFC secretary-general, it was alleged
than the WCA was ineligible for status, and that the WCA abused its status.
First, the UN-DPI conducted its own determination of eligibility during the
WCA's application process.
Second, the "abuse of status" accusation stemmed from one factor: a
newspaper editorial error. The phrase, "associated with the Department of Public
Information" had been inadvertently excluded from an opinion piece in The
Chiropractic Journal. The complaint was from the WFC secretary-general, not the UN-DPI.
>>> QUESTION: The WFC emphasizes the importance of democratic process.
Did the secretary-general of the WFC consult with the member associations before filing
the complaint?
Answer: No. The secretary-general admitted that the complaint was made without
consulting the membership. Instead, it was a unilateral action on the part of "the
Executive."
This admission was recorded on videotape (Chiropractic Town Hall Meeting,
Meadowlands, NJ, February 2000).
This admission clearly contradicts the assertion by the same individual that the
WFC "moves very cautiously and only on the clear direction of its member
associations. For example, it took the WFC four years and two congresses to pass its
resolution that there should be no use of prescription drugs in the practice of
chiropractic, a relatively simple and uncontroversial issue." (Letter from the WFC
secretary-general to the ICA representative to the WFC, dated January 31, 2000).
>>> QUESTION: What was the result of the complaint?
Answer: Thankfully, the WFC has been unable to interfere with the positive
impact the WCA has had. The UN-DPI correctly sees this as an internal issue. I think it
has also adversely affected the credibility of the WFC's claims to democratic process.
>>> QUESTION: Does the WFC have the authority to "approve"
schools and colleges?
Answer: Of course not. Authority to confer academic degrees rests with state and
national governments, and those accrediting agencies recognized by such governments.
>>> QUESTION: But hasn't the WFC admitted this?
Answer: That's the problem. The secretary-general of the WFC has made
contradictory statements concerning this issue.
In a letter dated January 1, 2000, to the ICA representative to the WFC, the
secretary-general of the WFC stated: "The WFC has no mandate, expertise, or interest
in any of the technical areas of chiropractic education, whether curriculum, faculty,
accreditation of programmes or otherwise."
In the same letter, the WFC secretary-general wrote: "Finally, in dealing
with a question raised by one member, does the WFC recognize or refuse recognition for
chiropractic colleges, and, if so, on what authority or basis? The short answer is
no."
Later, on the same page, the author contradicted himself when he said:
"Similarly, the WFC will refuse recognition if a college is unaccredited and opposed
by the national association... In this general sense, the WFC does recognise chiropractic
colleges." (Letter from the WFC secretary-general to the ICA representative to the
WFC, dated January 31, 2000).
Confused? You should be.
>>> QUESTION: Is it true that the WFC is attempting to control
educational programs?
Answer: The WFC "Tokyo Charter" relates to educational activities. The
WFC secretary-general has written, "Obviously there is academic freedom for anyone to
provide postgraduate education to chiropractors wherever a class can be gathered"
(letter from the WFC secretary-general to the ICA representative to the WFC, dated January
31, 2000).
Yet, this is contradicted by the statement on the WFC website which states that
the Tokyo Charter "is also relevant to individual chiropractors providing education
in another country."
The WFC policy statement titled, "Non-interference and Respect for National
Authority" states: "Individuals and organizations in the chiropractic profession
should only commence professional activity in another country, other than the private
practice of chiropractic, with the prior knowledge and approval of the doctors of
chiropractic in that country and any national association and other relevant professional
organization they may have formed."
>>> QUESTION: Why is this a problem?
Answer: The WFC only allows one member organization per country, except in the
United States. If more than one national association exists, the WFC selects the one it
wants. In Japan, the WFC recently terminated the membership status of one organization and
admitted another. By controlling which of several organizations may be members, the WFC
can control the philosophical orientation of the organization.
>>> QUESTION: Does the WFC attempt to control programs by non-members?
Answer: Yes. The policy statement titled, "Seminars for Non-Chiropractors
in Another Country" states that "member associations should take all steps
within their powers to prevent their members and all other chiropractors in their
respective countries from engaging in such seminars or other educational programs and that
member associations shall notify the World Federation of Chiropractic of any such activity
to enable appropriate action to be taken."
Although it may be claimed that this is only to prevent the teaching of
chiropractic technique, it is worded broadly enough to cover presentations to any lay
audience.
>>> QUESTION: Is it true that the WFC has made some serious accusations
regarding the WCA?
Answer: Yes. And many are simply factually inaccurate. The WCA is not a
proprietorship. It is a non-profit corporation. It is governed by a board of directors,
which seeks broad input from the membership through its advisory board.
In minutes of the WFC executive committee dated Tuesday, February 22, 2000, the
secretary-general reported on a "Chiropractic Town Hall Meeting" with leaders
from a variety of national and international chiropractic organizations.
The secretary-general claimed that the WCA representative to the UN-DPI was
introduced as "the Chiropractic Ambassador to the United Nations." This is
untrue. The program was recorded on videotape! Anyone who desires to do so can see that
the affiliation with DPI was properly announced. Use of the term "Ambassador" is
limited to those individuals selected by member states. There are no NGO
"ambassadors."
>>> QUESTION: The secretary-general of the WFC has claimed that the WCA
had given "D.C. status and membership certificates" to physical therapists.
Answer: First, the WCA is not a degree granting institution. It cannot, and has
not, given "D.C. status" to anyone. The WCA does provide for associate
memberships by non-chiropractors, as do many organizations, including the WFC.
Associate members receive a membership certificate and subscription to Health
Watch, the weekly online WCA report. It is certainly possible that physical therapists --
or other health care professionals -- might wish to receive Health Watch, and even join as
associate members. To suggest, however, that they would be given a D.C. degree is
preposterous.
>>> QUESTION: It has been suggested that opposition to the ICA's
support of the WFC stems from the fact that many subluxation-centered chiropractors
dislike the WFC secretary-general and president. How do you respond?
Answer: This is an effort to turn a rational discussion of issues into an ad
hominem situation. It does raise some important concerns, however.
First, since the WFC "Executive" may bypass the democratic process,
and the WFC is strongly identified with the secretary-general, their personal views tend
to be reflected in the actions of the WFC.
Furthermore, their selection by the membership suggests that they represent the
views of the constituency. If the leadership of the WFC is not supportive of
subluxation-centered chiropractic, it is reasonable to believe that this reflects the will
of the member organizations.
>>> QUESTION: What has the secretary-general written about subluxation?
Answer: In a paper titled, "Chiropractic in the 21st Century," the
secretary-general of the WFC recommended that chiropractic follow the path of osteopathy
in changing terminology.
He wrote: "Chiropractors must do something similar with chiropractic
subluxation -- use the term internally because of its rich history, but use another
externally. I would recommend joint dysfunction. They must acknowledge that adjustment is
manipulation, albeit precise and skilled, and that they do nothing unique -- they just do
an interesting blend of things better."
Equating subluxation with joint dysfunction strips away the neurological
component. Additionally, suggesting that manipulation and adjustment are the same thing is
incorrect. The idea that chiropractors offer nothing unique betrays an ignorance of the
fundamental tenets of our profession. Use of the imperative "must" is typical of
the coercive stance of the WFC and its secretary-general.
>>> QUESTION: The WFC has been running ads soliciting associate
memberships which claim that the WFC "has all 65 national associations of
chiropractors worldwide." Is it true?
Answer: No. The WFC only permits one member association per country, except in
the United States. This very policy makes it impossible for every national association to
be a member, even if they wished to be.
A communication addressed to "ICA colleagues" from the ICA
representative to the WFC states that as a result of a request to the WFC president on
January 10, 2000, "positive action" was taken on the issue of using the term
"all" in advertisements. However, an advertisement still making the false and
misleading claim of having "all" national associations as members appeared as
recently as March 20, 2000.
>>> QUESTION: Is it true that the members of the WFC national
associations represent the majority of practicing chiropractors worldwide?
Answer: Far from it. According to the WFC "Secretary-General's Report to
the Assembly" dated May 19, 1999, the total number of members in WFC member
associations was 18,074. This accounts for less than a third of practicing chiropractors
worldwide.
>>> QUESTION: How many members must a national association have, to
join the WFC?
Answer: ONE! According to the WFC "Secretary-General's Report to the
Assembly" dated May 19, 1999, some "member associations" have but one
member. The "national association" purporting to represent Russia is located in
New Jersey!
>>> QUESTION: It has been argued that the ICA needs to be in the WFC to
monitor its activities and provide input regarding subluxation-centered chiropractic. How
do you feel about that?
Answer: It's one thing to provide input and monitor activities. It's quite
another to join, thereby providing financial support, the use of your name, and acceptance
of WFC jurisdiction.
Consider this: Would it be reasonable for an African-American organization to
join the Ku Klux Klan on the grounds that, "Like it or not, the Klan is a key player
in race issues?" Would it make sense for such an organization to boast that because
they were on the inside, they negotiated a compromise where the Klan would only set fire
to 10 churches instead of 20?
Absurd? It certainly is. Instead of joining the KKK, civil rights organizations
have formed Klanwatch to monitor its activities. We should monitor the WFC, not join it.
>>> QUESTION: It's been stated that ICA input has resulted in a more
"subluxation-friendly" WFC. What do you say to this claim?
Answer: This is an excellent example of tokenism. The WFC will include forums on
subluxation to create the illusion of embracing the concept. Yet, its policies and
operations will reflect its musculoskeletal disease treatment orientation.
Consistently outnumbered and outvoted, the occasional minor concessions achieved
by the ICA are eclipsed by the general direction of the WFC. And the WFC isn't getting
better, it's getting worse.
>>> QUESTION: One WFC supporter in the ICA has stated that the WFC has
"become the organization that nations throughout the world turn to." Is this the
case?
Answer: More smoke and mirrors. Although the WFC would like to position itself
as the sole arbiter in chiropractic matters worldwide, it is not.
>>> QUESTION: You mentioned "tokenism." Would you expand on
that?
Answer: In recent years, the ICA has adopted a position of accepting a minority
role in organizations that seek to suppress subluxation-centered chiropractic. Its goal
has been to mitigate the inevitable damage, rather than build a structure which supports
chiropractic.
The two best examples of this are the Mercy Guidelines and the WFC. As long as
the ICA accepts the role of a minor token player, consistently outvoted by the
musculoskeletal majority of these organizations, it will never achieve its potential.
>>> QUESTION: Wasn't this the concern with the proposed ACA/ICA merger?
Answer: Yes. The concern was that "lip service" would be paid to the
subluxation view until the deal was consummated. At that time, there was concern that the
ICA view would be lost. Although the formal merger did not occur, a de facto merger has
been successfully engineered by the anti-subluxation forces.
>>> QUESTION: What do you mean by a de facto merger?
Answer: By creating a plethora of "alphabet soup" organizations
ranging from the CCGPP to the WFC, and getting the ICA to accept token minority status
within them, the ICA has been prevented from achieving its rightful role as a champion of
subluxation-centered chiropractic.
>>> QUESTION: Are you encouraging people to leave the ICA?
Answer: Absolutely not. I'm encouraging them to hold their leaders accountable
for the "sacred trust" which B.J. passed to our keeping. I am urging them to be
the moral conscience of the ICA Board. And, I'm encouraging them to join and support the
WCA.
>>> QUESTION: What is your response to the suggestion that you are
trying to make this a "black and white" issue?
Answer: It IS a black-and-white issue. In any organization, there are moral
decisions and strategic decisions. There can be no compromise on moral issues which go to
the heart and soul of an organization's reason for existence. Participation in the WFC is
a moral issue, not a strategic issue.
>>> QUESTION: Do you agree with some who say your position is extreme?
Answer: Perhaps Barry Goldwater said it best: "Extremism in the defense of
liberty is no vice...moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue!"
Return to index
