52. Reiki in National Health Care Systems and Academia
Yes but... Ideally in the front row together with allopathic medicine
You can watch this video free of charge.
The complete archive comprises 66 films and is available in 5 languages.
In some countries Reiki has entered into academia. This development and globalisation dilute the essence of the practice. Phyllis Furumoto does not support this but acknowledges good work done.
So I have to hold it in my big self as another option for people to come to Reiki.
In regular Reiki 1 and 2 “folk-art” for family and friends is taught. There is value in further training for “public practitioners” (office registration, fee structure, keeping records and accounts, etc.) and there may be legal requirements (anatomy, physiology).
I really loved in Germany that practitioners learn the characteristics of diseases so that they wouldn’t treat it.
Receiving of treatments is equally important as the giving. Professionals need to learn dealing with, e.g. allopathic medical doctors. The terms “complementary” and “alternative” suggest a secondary choice. It should be up to the person who is being treated whether they make Reiki their primary or their secondary care.
When complementary therapy is used as a primary therapy, it means that allopathic medicine has resigned. Undue pressure is the result and the value of the treatment, which may be beyond healing in the traditional sense, is out of sight.
Each school of Reiki could have their own public practice program. That would be ideal. I don’t believe that I could mentor and instruct students from another system because I would always be running up against disrespecting their practice.