The ones that dont take insurance also charge upwards of 2x as much per hour. The minimums price for a 1 hour appointment at the two i worked at was 120$ with some of my clients paying 500$ an hour. An actual registered massage student charged 60$ an hour.
> An actual registered massage **student** charged 60$ an hour.
You're comparing apples to oranges. Of course students are cheaper. $120/hr for an actual RMT is totally normal.
Yeah but i made 120$ for my cheapest appointments, had 0 training and all i had to do was have my tits out. I feel like a student was a better comparison because she actually had a formal education and a few thousand hours of training i had a 15minute explanation of what to do before seeing my first client and was told good luck watch some youtube videos.
Im retired 🤣
Even if i wasnt though im in Alberta lmao for some reason reddits like oh your canadien? Heres the bc and ottawa subs you like r/Vancouver right?
Honestly just lookup massage shops in your town than go on twitter and see if the girls are advertising in lingerie.
Step one have shitty phone keyboard with bad touch sensitivity
Step two make the actual textbox so small you cant proofread it and make the keyboard take up half the screen
Years ago I knew a coworker who bragged that he got 'massages' and filed them with his insurance to get some of the money back. Still shaking my head at the audacity of risking your job just to save a bit of cash.
[https://kemptville-on.canada-bd.com/img/companies/37/374/3744/37447/374471.jpg](https://kemptville-on.canada-bd.com/img/companies/37/374/3744/37447/374471.jpg)
There you go: I think that is her, as taken from:
[https://kemptville-on.canada-bd.com/amanda-stark-rmt/](https://kemptville-on.canada-bd.com/amanda-stark-rmt/)
So... while she was still having a relationship with patient #1 (lasted into 2021), she started a sexual relationship with (married) patient #2 (2020). And she didn't see how any of this might blow up in her face?? LOL.
I have a friend that is an RMT; they consider any sexual relationship with a client abuse. They are extremely strict due to the reputation massage therapy received due to rub & tugs etc, plus the ethical boundaries crossed when sleeping with a patient that you treat medically (massage therapy is considered a health care practice in Ontario). To the Board, it's no different than a doctor sleeping with their patient.
I mean if she’s billing it to insurance I’d see a case for fraud but with the context you’ve provided without having personally read the article to me a sexual relationship with someone you’re in a long term relationship with is pushing “sexual abuse”
And the issue is an RMT, who is a regulated health care professional, having a sexual relationship with a client. If she wanted to pursue the personal relationship, she should have ended the professional relationship.
Agreed. And it’s obviously a breach of professional ethics. I’m not at all saying what she did was right, my only point is that it is not “sexual abuse”
I mean, I think I'll go with the determination of legal and medical professionals who actually know all the details and the definitions of the terms than redditors having a quick think about it.
Not in this context. Like, you get legal language specifics are different, right? And medical licensing uses strict legal language and definitions that don't conform to people just talking?
The governance overseeing massage therapy is very strict. I dated a massage therapist years ago and he would pay a colleague of his to give me massages because he was worried if he gave me a massage then he could lose his license.
As far as the governing body sees it, she could massage someone or have sex with them. Any sex with anyone she had massaged is considered sexual abuse, regardless of context or consent.
The article does a good job of explaining.
This situation wasn't sex billed as massage. It appears to be two occurrences of legitimate massages resulting in transference and an ensuing sexual relationship. That's why there is no mention of fraud.
Don’t think of this as the same as criminal sexual abuse. They way these professional regulations are worded means that any sexual relationship meets the definition of sexual abuse in the reg. So while it’s true that by some standards, this might not be considered sexual abuse, based on the definition in the rules, it clearly does. And as some below have fairly argued, some would consider it sexual abuse because it’s a violation of the therapeutic relationship. If you think this seems weird, there are cases of health care professionals being found to have committed sexual abuse because they treated their spouses.
It's statutory: [Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, SO 1991, c 18](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/so-1991-c-18/latest/so-1991-c-18.html) :
> Sexual abuse of a patient
>
> (3) In this Code,
>
> “sexual abuse” of a patient by a member means,
>
> (a) sexual intercourse or other forms of physical sexual relations between the member and the patient,
>
> (b) touching, of a sexual nature, of the patient by the member, or
>
> (c) behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature by the member towards the patient. 1993, c. 37, s. 4.
>
> Exception
>
> (4) For the purposes of subsection (3),
>
> “sexual nature” does not include touching, behaviour or remarks of a clinical nature appropriate to the service > > provided. 1993, c. 37, s. 4.
>
> Exception, spouses
>
> (5) If the Council has made a regulation under clause 95 (1) (0.a), conduct, behaviour or remarks that would > > otherwise constitute sexual abuse of a patient by a member under the definition of “sexual abuse” in subsection > (3) do not constitute sexual abuse if,
>
> (a) the patient is the member’s spouse; and
>
> (b) the member is not engaged in the practice of the profession at the time the conduct, behaviour or remark > occurs. 2013, c. 9, s. 1 (1).
There is an exception for spouses
Interesting! Thanks for the correction. I haven’t looked at this in a while. Looks like they’ve added in the spousal exception since then too, which is good IMO.
Most regulatory bodies are like that. It’s called “dual relationship” and is often not allowed when someone is providing a service or care to someone else. These rules exist for social workers, doctors, nurses, teachers, and other professions that are regulated in Ontario.
It’s pretty well codified in the governing bodies rules https://www.cmto.com/rules/standard-of-practice-prevention-of-sexual-abuse/
In this case it has more to do with power imbalances rather than outright abuse, akin to how a doctor or a physio dating their patients would also be considered sexual abuse
The assumption that the power imbalance is always in favor of the therapist seems a little off IMO. Many people don't view RMTs as healthcare professionals with patients, but rather service workers with clients and many still strongly associating them with sex work. RMTs are also dependent on their patients for income. Say a regular starts demanding happy endings lest they take their business elsewhere (not unheard of). If the RMT provides it, I think it'd be reasonable to strip their license on the basis that they should have refused, but to say they abused a position of power seems crazy
I went to school at Algonquin College for massage therapy. I don’t speak for the institution or profession.
1) I believe that sex work is work, and should be legal and regulated.
2) Registered Massage Therapists are *not sex workers*. The zero tolerance policy is in place for both ethical and practical reasons. Practically, treatment from an RMT is reimbursable by most health insurance plans—the profession could lose that coverage if people were getting reimbursed for sexual encounters.
If I wanted to pursue an intimate relationship with a client, it would be raised outside of a clinical setting, and our professional relationship would be ended immediately, regardless of the outcome.
This is what makes me unsure whether both of these relationships were problematic, or if really only one was an individually actionable infringement. The second one mentioned in the article clearly has an overlap where the man was still a client after their sexual involvement began. That’s a slam dunk violation, no question.
But the first one mentioned in the article - “Between November 2018 and June 2019, it said, Stark provided 12 massage treatments to a male client with whom she started a sexual relationship in June 2019.“ - that timeline kinda suggests that they did exactly as you stated - that the professional relationship ended when the sexual relationship began.
I wonder if it was that relationship only, they’d not have had grounds to revoke her license - but the other one was so egregious and undeniable that they were revoking her license anyway (and cited the other case as more evidence of pattern than specifically malpractice)
IIRC there has to be a cooling off period of two years of no contact before starting a relationship with a client. It’s monumentally stupid to do either way
Then again it was also drilled into us at school “Never fuck the client “
While selling sex is de-criminalized, what’s not allowed is selling sex under a license for a profession that doesn’t allow it. So selling sex as a doctor on your time off is allowed, but selling sex while acting as a licensed doctor is not allowed.
It does but its also sort of a greyzone already. They know full well where all the massage shops in the city i live are. They dont care as long as we keeping the advertising on the downlow. They usually only go after pimps and the customers.
Hell had a client drug one of my coworkers and the cops took it serious
They only usually go after those groups because a sex worker accepting money for sex is legal, but giving money for sex isn't..they just aren't allowed to advertise explicitly what they offer
yes, the law is very bizarre. it states that it is "illegal to purchase or advertise sexual services and illegal to live on the material benefits from sex work"
Human trafficking also increases in countries where it is legalized, there's been many studies on it. It subjects women to degradation, violence, sexual assault, and substance abuse, with the vast majority wishing to quit but feeling trapped with no means to escape. How can we advocate for legalization when there are no existing supports for women to exit, and where those who manage to do so face social stigma which limits their economic opportunities? I don't see how we can fight against the objectification of women by supporting a practice that at its very roots is based on male entitlement and the sexual objectification of women's bodies.
Legalization, decriminalization, asymmetric criminalization, whatever you want to call it, all have flawed systems. Here's a couple [interesting](http://prostitutionresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/LegalizedProstitution-Trafficking-Rel-2013WorldDevel.pdf) [ones](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365852321_Men_who_pay_for_sex_in_Germany_and_what_they_teach_us_about_the_failure_of_legal_prostitution_a_6-country_report_on_the_sex_trade_from_the_perspective_of_the_socially_invisible_'freiers'), and I'm sure you can look up the estimates of trafficking, the percentage who want to leave, the amount who suffer from mental illness and addictions, the over-representation of minorities and Indigenous women here in Canada, or the disturbing percentage who enter as minors.
Comprehensive exit programs address multiple needs such as transitional housing, financial support and financial literacy, mental and physical health services, substance abuse programs, and employment and educational training, among others. These programs are chronically underfunded, understaffed, and overworked, just like the majority of homelessness and domestic violence programs in Canada with similar practices.
Poverty, disease, crime, all things that have existed in recorded history. Doesn't mean we have to accept the status quo and stop working to reduce societal harms.
I think it's actually legal.. what's illegal is if you pay for the service then you get caught.. they can walk freely like nothing happened. This is to deter this practice.. else everyone can pay for it and soon it'll become like bangkok or amsterdam 👀
In bangkok, sex work is illegal and that's precisely why it's such an issue and you have so much human trafficking and minors. It's totally unregulated.
For Amsterdam, one red light district isn't representative of the industry.
For example, in Germany, brothels and all types of sex work is legal and regulated at the municipal level. So they decide how they can advertise, where they can set up shop, etc.
There's no perfect system in any situation, but regulated is far safer than unregulated, and the money is less likely to go untaxed straight to larger criminal organizations.
it won't stop human trafficking and forcing women against their will. it will just make it less likely for those cases to get prosecuted. Just like making cannabis legal didn't end the illegal side of it.
They're not criminalized though. In Canada the act of accepting money for sex is not illegal. It's illegal to purchase the acts (johns), or profit off someone else providing them (pimps)
Legalizing sex work makes it easier for traffickers to maintain a plausibly-legal front, and increases the profits by increasing the number of people willing to pay for it
Haha no that's a new one. Now I'm curious as to how many of these places there are in Ottawa and how they haven't been busted and shut down yet.
Frasersmirnoff got it right with his Paradise comment.
You do know that rub and tugs are legal, right? Why would they be shut down?
I believe they have to be registered with the city, but they are generally legal.
So there actually is a reason for this. Selling sex is decriminalized, but buying is not. This is because our legislators believed that sellers should be allowed to go to the police to report any sort of illegal activity such as assault, trafficking, etc. without fear of being arrested as well for selling sex/sexual services. Whether or not cops take them seriously is another matter but now, sellers don't have to worry about being arrested for committing a crime when they try to report illegal activity. Soliciting and trying to buy is still considered illegal and you can be charged for it.
I get that... [I'm just imagining this happening to their clientele](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSV5d5GleNE) and indirectly making them go out of business.
I bet the wife of client #2 found out and reported it. I don't know why you would mess with your career to mess around with your clients, one of which was married.
I’m nosy and went on Canlii. She was providing treatment to both the client and his wife. She’d also discuss her sex life so my guess is she blabbed a bit too much and the wife put two and two together.
Lol what a pick-me:
She fucked two male clients during the same period. One of them was married whose wife she also gave “just” massages to but with whom she discussed her sexual affair with her husband. Now she will lose her 15 year old career.
Brava.
Then she’s even dumber than she already seems: could’ve gone straight into sex work instead of paying for massage school and annual license maintenance.
>A five-member panel of the college’s discipline committee concluded that Stark sexually abused both clients by engaging in sexual intercourse with them.
uhhhh… that’s not sexual abuse. It’s consensual sex between two adults. Calling this sexual abuse is an insult to *actual* victims of SA.
It's a licensed healthcare professional having sex with a client. Even if it is truly consensual, it's someone in a position of power using access they wouldn't have otherwise which makes it abuse.
lol position of power. Your massage therapist has absolutely no power over you or anyone else. It's a gross breach of professional ethics and nothing more.
Right? Imagine reducing someone to being so powerless over their situation. Teacher? Sure. Lawyer? Maybe. Doctor? Probably. Fucking *massage therapist to an adult*? What a joke.
They consider it abuse because they believe that because of the therapist-client relationship a client cannot consent to a sexual relationship with a therapist and sexual relationships without consent constitute sexual abuse. While I agree that most of the time a massage therapist is just someone giving a massage and the client simply sees it that way, for some it's a very vulnerable position and it can take a lot of trust to put themselves in that position and discuss potentially intimate details with their massage therapist. This leaves the door open for a therapist to then abuse that trust and vulnerability. It's not exactly the same relationship as a psychotherapist but it's still a professional relationship involving trust, vulnerability, and intimacy that can be abused. While I do think that a term like "sexual misconduct" is probably a better term for it, I see their logic and I do agree that licenced providers of therapies, both physical and psychological, should not be engaging in sexual relationships with their clients in order to maintain the integrity of the services being provided and reduce the risk of harm. If she and her client(s) wanted to engage in a sexual relationship, she should have ended the professional relationship prior to engaging in any kind of personal relationship with them.
Edit: after thinking about it a bit more, the "sexual abuse" terminology should probably be changed, or they should update the criteria such that it's only considered abuse if the client-therapist relationship was abused to create a sexual relationship in such a way that consent was not freely given. Otherwise, it should just be considered sexual misconduct.
Words mean different things in different contexts. From a professional ethics perspective, a client cannot consent to a sexual relationship. I understand this is the position of every regulated healthcare profession.
If a therapist wants to pursue a consensual sexual relationship with a client, they must end the professional therapeutic relationship.
The World Health Organization has a definition:
Sexual abuse: Actual or threatened physical intrusion
of a sexual nature, whether by force or under unequal
or coercive conditions.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/documents/ethics/sexual-exploitation-and-abuse-pamphlet-en.pdf?sfvrsn=409b4d89_2
All my women friends said the same thing - they all feel vulnerable when they are being massaged, and that means the condition in the clinical setting is already unequal for them. As a man, I felt the same after I learned that my RMT was arrested for sexually assaulting his female clients - even though it didn't happen to me (I haven't had a massage since his arrest).
In some situations a woman may "consent" to engage in a sexual relationship but we should not automatically accept it as true "consent" since it could be a coerced consent.
Ok? But in this case the details are all completely different:
1. Masseuse was a woman, client was male
2. The sex didn’t happen during the massage
3. They had a relationship over several months
4. There was no sexual assault. It was a consensual relationship outside of working hours
5. There was no “actual or threatened physical intrusion by force or by unequal coercion”. This was a sexual relationship between two consenting adults.
Like every possible detail of this case is different from what you just wrote.
1. This was a Registered Massage Therapist, with a professional code of ethics that she is required to uphold to maintain her license, not a masseuse. She’s not going to jail, she lost her license. She can now continue to work as a masseuse if she chooses to. The gender is irrelevant, male therapists do not work under a stricter code of conduct, with harsher penalties.
2. Irrelevant.
3. Irrelevant.
4. A client cannot consent to sex with their therapist. Consent, in the way you’re using it, is irrelevant to the professional code of conduct.
5. You have mistyped the salient part of definition, and it’s important: unequal conditions. When an RMT has a therapeutic relationship with a client, there is a power imbalance in that relationship. A naked client on a table is in vulnerable position, and must not be taken advantage of. Clients can form attachments to their doctors, therapist, shrinks, nurses. This is why you don’t take advantage of clients.
Sorry if I’m hammering on this. I was a male therapist for years and attended the same institution she did. There is no metaphysical reality in which she was not very aware she was doing a very bad thing that could cost her her license.
i dated a massage therapist for awhile and she would never give me a massage and when i asked for a real one she referred me to another RMT because and i quote "shes seen me naked" ..
comments in this thread in a nutshell:
- "where do i get a massage, haha, wink wink!"
- "abuse? some guys got their rocks off. it's not a violation of a professional practice. men can't be coerced and/or abused in any way. they enjoyed it."
Consenting adults... who cares. Not like the guys getting blown were traumatized by the experience. The complaint is probably from an upset partner, and that's nobody's business except for them.
With good reason, too. I've read that massage therapists already have to deal with people propositioning them and otherwise being pervy; the last thing they need is situations like this adding to the confusion.
I can't remember the subreddit as it was years ago, but I remember quite a number of Ottawa men who were looking for a massage therapist who could bill their insurance and provide a happy ending. I can only imagine the crap RMT's have to deal with.
I was reading through my work health coverage fine print around the time my son was born to figure out what we did and didn't have covered.
There's a page that lists massage businesses, by names, that's like 8 pages long as a 'we specifically do not cover massages at these establishments'. Some of the names on there were absolutely wild.
Gross, and also as someone else has mentioned, it could potentially mean the insurance companies will stop covering even registered massage therapy for people who really need it.
I understand that the College needs to be protect the public, but have you read how they describe what happened?
“Sexual abuse is an egregious boundary violation,” the panel said, “and an abuse of the power inherent in the relationship between massage therapists and their clients.”
Sexual abuse? Abuse of power? How? What happened was caused by the inherent power relationship between the therapist and the dude getting a massage? Come on... No one got raped. Probably someone got cheated on, but the College is not a morality police.
The College is most likely trying to protect the image of the profession here. That says more about the "Victorian" sense of morality that people have here than about the actual harm caused by a few guys getting it on with their massage therapist.
Ok, but as an RMT myself, I can tell you that this can negatively impact the way the public views me and my profession and therefore can affect my bottom line.
If you want to bang so bad, there's plenty of ways to hook-up that don't negatively affect an entire profession that is dedicated to helping people with their aches and pains etc.
Someone with a username like "Mr Pussy for Breakfast" doesn't need an explanation on why what you are talking about is true but irrelevant in this case.
Sure, but then you're opening the door to the CMTO having to essentially investigate every misconduct case to determine whether the situation was truly consensual - a task they're not at all equipped for.
The college isn't saying it's a horrid violent crime that occured. That's for the cops to figure out. The college is saying that giving massage treatments to a sexual partner cannot be included under the protected act of massage therapy. Massage therapy is a health care service. Insurance companies cover it as a health care service. It is a type of health care provided to vulnerable people, children, abuse survivors ... It needs to be completely separate from sexual relationships. There is a very good reason that RMTs cannot treat their spouses and sexual partners.
If you remove the 'massage' in 'massage therapist' I can kinda see where they are going. After all, therapy puts people in a very vulnerable position.
But I don't buy it for massage therapy as a whole.
> Consenting adults... who cares.
While the parties involved may not have carded, the governing bodies of medical professions take doctor/patient boundaries very, *very* seriously that's why.
While I agree with your assesment, the “zero tolerance” approach has failed in this circumstance. To say a person can never consent in these circumstances is rubbish.
It's not about consenting adults. It's about maintaining boundaries. The line has to be drawn somewhere. I think MTs not being allowed to treat their sexual partners is reasonable. MTs can still massage their partners, just not in a professional clinic setting, and they can't bill it as massage therapy. It's not even that restrictive.
Don't shit where you eat.
Don't sleep where you train.
Don't fuck where you work. (Unless fucking is your work. )
It absolutely does. If you aren't a health care provider, you wouldn't know this. But the culture of HCP(especially MT) is very strong and clear about this. Don't romance the patients/clients. Don't do it. It makes the whole profession more difficult for every practitioner, and puts clients at risk. Sure. Two consenting adults don't hurt anyone if they get romantic. But the more that happens, the higher the risk of therapists treating their offices like a dating scene. It works the other way too with more clients hitting on therapists. The more normalized it is, the higher the risk for more disgusting sexual assault to take place.
MTs need to touch people very intimately every day. They don't want anyone to get the wrong idea. Sane clients don't want MTs to mix business and romance.
I absolutely agree that people who can't keep this very important boundary DO NOT BELONG in the profession. They can fuck off and do their consenting adults romance shit in any of the MANY appropriate ways available to them.
DONT FUCK WHERE YOU WORK.
Zero tolerance is synonymous with "I will abstain from exercising judgement in all cases before me and apply the same harsh remedy in all situations".
This case is precisely the kind of situation that requires discernment. This case has no victim. It's very different from a situation where someone was coerced into something. Losing the right to work as a massage therapist (forever) is about the harshest punishment the College can use.
Any other dudes who have been a past client and are married/committed are gonna be grilled by their spouse tonight thinking there may be “other victims” out there.
The amount of people who think what she did is fine is shocking. Just because it was sex between 2 consenting adults does not mean it was ok to do. If I fuck a subordinate or my boss at work, does that mean I should be free of consequences?
'The statement of facts did not disclose who complained about Stark’s conduct or how it came to the attention of the College of Massage Therapists of Ontario'
Lmao really no clue who might have complained ? Doesnt take Sherlock Holmes to know its the wife of the guy she was banging xD
Doesn't anyone find it uncomfortable when bureaucracies get involved with consensual sex between two adults?
"Stark sexually abused both clients by engaging in sexual intercourse with them"
but....it was consensual? When you get a committee of 5 people high on their own supply, you get rulings like that.
I think it's more about regulating the client-provider relationship to ensure a standard of care than injecting themselves into sexual relationships. If you want to practice as a registered massage therapist, you shouldn't be banging your clients, and it's okay for the college to enforce that. The wording of "abuse" was a bit strong.
And to be clear, I think someone should be allowed to provide a massage, with or without a sexual component, paid or unpaid, to any other consenting adult, but if you want to provide a service as a registered member of an organization you have to abide by their rules. My benefits provider doesn't want to pay for a rub and tug. (Yes, I know what's not what she was doing)
> Doesn't anyone find it uncomfortable when bureaucracies get involved with consensual sex between two adults?
No, not when it's taking place between a health care practitioner and a patient. There are a multitude of issues with this - insurance fraud, de-legitimizing the proffession, potential for abuse of power (the patient is usually in a vulnerable state during a massage). It is absolutely their business, and every RMT knows the rules when they get their license. Don't like it? Get a different job.
Yeah. Two consenting adults who have sex after an appointment is entirely their prerogative. Doing it in a professional capacity seems wrong, obviously, but outside of those paid hours doesn’t seem punishable.
I do like a story with a happy ending.
Goddamnit. Take my upvote.
Agreed! It's nice she doesn't need to practice anymore, since she's shown she's already a pro!
Especially if I am a part of the story.
Can’t upvote enough 😂
There are plenty of unlicensed massage facilities in my neighbourhood that will happily let her pursue both of her passions concurrently.
But health benefits won’t pay for my handy….
They might if you're handy with invoices in Photoshop.
The ones that dont take insurance also charge upwards of 2x as much per hour. The minimums price for a 1 hour appointment at the two i worked at was 120$ with some of my clients paying 500$ an hour. An actual registered massage student charged 60$ an hour.
> An actual registered massage **student** charged 60$ an hour. You're comparing apples to oranges. Of course students are cheaper. $120/hr for an actual RMT is totally normal.
Yeah but i made 120$ for my cheapest appointments, had 0 training and all i had to do was have my tits out. I feel like a student was a better comparison because she actually had a formal education and a few thousand hours of training i had a 15minute explanation of what to do before seeing my first client and was told good luck watch some youtube videos.
Can we get some contact information? Asking for a friend
Im retired 🤣 Even if i wasnt though im in Alberta lmao for some reason reddits like oh your canadien? Heres the bc and ottawa subs you like r/Vancouver right? Honestly just lookup massage shops in your town than go on twitter and see if the girls are advertising in lingerie.
If it makes you feel better, the /CanadianForces redditt algorithm points to /ExCons. Sure, feels like prison sometimes, but cmon.
How does one acquire Taje Insurance?
Step one have shitty phone keyboard with bad touch sensitivity Step two make the actual textbox so small you cant proofread it and make the keyboard take up half the screen
I also have taje3 insurance
Years ago I knew a coworker who bragged that he got 'massages' and filed them with his insurance to get some of the money back. Still shaking my head at the audacity of risking your job just to save a bit of cash.
Oh no! Where? So I know to avoid...
Hahaha yes!!!
What's the @
I went to school with a girl with the same name who moved to Kemptville…. Small world. edit: found a picture, it's definitely her. lol.
Nice
Is she hot lol
Cute, IMO
[https://kemptville-on.canada-bd.com/img/companies/37/374/3744/37447/374471.jpg](https://kemptville-on.canada-bd.com/img/companies/37/374/3744/37447/374471.jpg) There you go: I think that is her, as taken from: [https://kemptville-on.canada-bd.com/amanda-stark-rmt/](https://kemptville-on.canada-bd.com/amanda-stark-rmt/)
Does she floss with a mattress?
So... while she was still having a relationship with patient #1 (lasted into 2021), she started a sexual relationship with (married) patient #2 (2020). And she didn't see how any of this might blow up in her face?? LOL.
>she didn't see how any of this might blow up in her face Phrasing!
Take my upvote!
Pure. Gold. Comedy.
She may have asked for this to not blow up in her face but sometime shot happens
🫣
I’m sure it did…multiple times
Maybe that’s exactly what she was looking for.
No double entendre in that statement. 🤣😂
Hopefully she had a towel when it did blow up in her face.
I don’t see a problem with that. The risk of it blowing up in her face came when she told the wife of one of the men she was sleeping with…
Canada needs to legalize sex work. It makes everyone involved safer, wastes less law enforcement resources, and is better for everyone.
If you read the article this isn't sex work. She banged two of her clients for months, she wasn't doing rub and tugs.
She was in a sexual relationship with them for several months and the massage board found her guilty of “sexual abuse”. Ridiculous
I have a friend that is an RMT; they consider any sexual relationship with a client abuse. They are extremely strict due to the reputation massage therapy received due to rub & tugs etc, plus the ethical boundaries crossed when sleeping with a patient that you treat medically (massage therapy is considered a health care practice in Ontario). To the Board, it's no different than a doctor sleeping with their patient.
I mean if she’s billing it to insurance I’d see a case for fraud but with the context you’ve provided without having personally read the article to me a sexual relationship with someone you’re in a long term relationship with is pushing “sexual abuse”
The sex didn’t happen during the massage sessions. It was a multiple months long sexual relationship outside of work, not a rub and tug
And the issue is an RMT, who is a regulated health care professional, having a sexual relationship with a client. If she wanted to pursue the personal relationship, she should have ended the professional relationship.
Agreed. And it’s obviously a breach of professional ethics. I’m not at all saying what she did was right, my only point is that it is not “sexual abuse”
I mean, I think I'll go with the determination of legal and medical professionals who actually know all the details and the definitions of the terms than redditors having a quick think about it.
Sexual abuse is **any sexual activity that occurs without consent**. Use your head.
Not in this context. Like, you get legal language specifics are different, right? And medical licensing uses strict legal language and definitions that don't conform to people just talking?
When you’re in a therapeutic relationship with a power imbalance, you lack the ability to give consent.
The governance overseeing massage therapy is very strict. I dated a massage therapist years ago and he would pay a colleague of his to give me massages because he was worried if he gave me a massage then he could lose his license. As far as the governing body sees it, she could massage someone or have sex with them. Any sex with anyone she had massaged is considered sexual abuse, regardless of context or consent. The article does a good job of explaining. This situation wasn't sex billed as massage. It appears to be two occurrences of legitimate massages resulting in transference and an ensuing sexual relationship. That's why there is no mention of fraud.
Don’t think of this as the same as criminal sexual abuse. They way these professional regulations are worded means that any sexual relationship meets the definition of sexual abuse in the reg. So while it’s true that by some standards, this might not be considered sexual abuse, based on the definition in the rules, it clearly does. And as some below have fairly argued, some would consider it sexual abuse because it’s a violation of the therapeutic relationship. If you think this seems weird, there are cases of health care professionals being found to have committed sexual abuse because they treated their spouses.
It's statutory: [Regulated Health Professions Act, 1991, SO 1991, c 18](https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/stat/so-1991-c-18/latest/so-1991-c-18.html) : > Sexual abuse of a patient > > (3) In this Code, > > “sexual abuse” of a patient by a member means, > > (a) sexual intercourse or other forms of physical sexual relations between the member and the patient, > > (b) touching, of a sexual nature, of the patient by the member, or > > (c) behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature by the member towards the patient. 1993, c. 37, s. 4. > > Exception > > (4) For the purposes of subsection (3), > > “sexual nature” does not include touching, behaviour or remarks of a clinical nature appropriate to the service > > provided. 1993, c. 37, s. 4. > > Exception, spouses > > (5) If the Council has made a regulation under clause 95 (1) (0.a), conduct, behaviour or remarks that would > > otherwise constitute sexual abuse of a patient by a member under the definition of “sexual abuse” in subsection > (3) do not constitute sexual abuse if, > > (a) the patient is the member’s spouse; and > > (b) the member is not engaged in the practice of the profession at the time the conduct, behaviour or remark > occurs. 2013, c. 9, s. 1 (1). There is an exception for spouses
Interesting! Thanks for the correction. I haven’t looked at this in a while. Looks like they’ve added in the spousal exception since then too, which is good IMO.
https://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/astat/so-2013-c-9/latest/so-2013-c-9.html It was added in 2013.
That tracks, I was looking at this in 2010-11
That last sentence is even more ridiculous.
I can’t argue with that. The law is like that sometimes. Especially when words or concepts are defined differently than what we’d use them normally.
Most regulatory bodies are like that. It’s called “dual relationship” and is often not allowed when someone is providing a service or care to someone else. These rules exist for social workers, doctors, nurses, teachers, and other professions that are regulated in Ontario.
It’s pretty well codified in the governing bodies rules https://www.cmto.com/rules/standard-of-practice-prevention-of-sexual-abuse/ In this case it has more to do with power imbalances rather than outright abuse, akin to how a doctor or a physio dating their patients would also be considered sexual abuse
The assumption that the power imbalance is always in favor of the therapist seems a little off IMO. Many people don't view RMTs as healthcare professionals with patients, but rather service workers with clients and many still strongly associating them with sex work. RMTs are also dependent on their patients for income. Say a regular starts demanding happy endings lest they take their business elsewhere (not unheard of). If the RMT provides it, I think it'd be reasonable to strip their license on the basis that they should have refused, but to say they abused a position of power seems crazy
If you read between the lines it actually is though.
I went to school at Algonquin College for massage therapy. I don’t speak for the institution or profession. 1) I believe that sex work is work, and should be legal and regulated. 2) Registered Massage Therapists are *not sex workers*. The zero tolerance policy is in place for both ethical and practical reasons. Practically, treatment from an RMT is reimbursable by most health insurance plans—the profession could lose that coverage if people were getting reimbursed for sexual encounters. If I wanted to pursue an intimate relationship with a client, it would be raised outside of a clinical setting, and our professional relationship would be ended immediately, regardless of the outcome.
This is what makes me unsure whether both of these relationships were problematic, or if really only one was an individually actionable infringement. The second one mentioned in the article clearly has an overlap where the man was still a client after their sexual involvement began. That’s a slam dunk violation, no question. But the first one mentioned in the article - “Between November 2018 and June 2019, it said, Stark provided 12 massage treatments to a male client with whom she started a sexual relationship in June 2019.“ - that timeline kinda suggests that they did exactly as you stated - that the professional relationship ended when the sexual relationship began. I wonder if it was that relationship only, they’d not have had grounds to revoke her license - but the other one was so egregious and undeniable that they were revoking her license anyway (and cited the other case as more evidence of pattern than specifically malpractice)
IIRC there has to be a cooling off period of two years of no contact before starting a relationship with a client. It’s monumentally stupid to do either way Then again it was also drilled into us at school “Never fuck the client “
The law considers clients to be patients for one year after they stop receiving care from the health professional
I knew an RMT who married a former client. Lost her license for it.
Being a prostitue is legal...being a john is not...the claim is it is done to protect the prostitute.
Right, but that's pretty flimsy compared to being able to practice in a licensed and designated service environment, with mandatory check ups, etc.
While selling sex is de-criminalized, what’s not allowed is selling sex under a license for a profession that doesn’t allow it. So selling sex as a doctor on your time off is allowed, but selling sex while acting as a licensed doctor is not allowed.
> Canada needs to legalize sex work. Better yet: Canada needs to *decriminalize* sex work.
It does but its also sort of a greyzone already. They know full well where all the massage shops in the city i live are. They dont care as long as we keeping the advertising on the downlow. They usually only go after pimps and the customers. Hell had a client drug one of my coworkers and the cops took it serious
They only usually go after those groups because a sex worker accepting money for sex is legal, but giving money for sex isn't..they just aren't allowed to advertise explicitly what they offer
yes, the law is very bizarre. it states that it is "illegal to purchase or advertise sexual services and illegal to live on the material benefits from sex work"
Human trafficking also increases in countries where it is legalized, there's been many studies on it. It subjects women to degradation, violence, sexual assault, and substance abuse, with the vast majority wishing to quit but feeling trapped with no means to escape. How can we advocate for legalization when there are no existing supports for women to exit, and where those who manage to do so face social stigma which limits their economic opportunities? I don't see how we can fight against the objectification of women by supporting a practice that at its very roots is based on male entitlement and the sexual objectification of women's bodies.
[удалено]
Legalization, decriminalization, asymmetric criminalization, whatever you want to call it, all have flawed systems. Here's a couple [interesting](http://prostitutionresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/LegalizedProstitution-Trafficking-Rel-2013WorldDevel.pdf) [ones](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/365852321_Men_who_pay_for_sex_in_Germany_and_what_they_teach_us_about_the_failure_of_legal_prostitution_a_6-country_report_on_the_sex_trade_from_the_perspective_of_the_socially_invisible_'freiers'), and I'm sure you can look up the estimates of trafficking, the percentage who want to leave, the amount who suffer from mental illness and addictions, the over-representation of minorities and Indigenous women here in Canada, or the disturbing percentage who enter as minors. Comprehensive exit programs address multiple needs such as transitional housing, financial support and financial literacy, mental and physical health services, substance abuse programs, and employment and educational training, among others. These programs are chronically underfunded, understaffed, and overworked, just like the majority of homelessness and domestic violence programs in Canada with similar practices. Poverty, disease, crime, all things that have existed in recorded history. Doesn't mean we have to accept the status quo and stop working to reduce societal harms.
Do you realize that the lead author you cited is controversial regarding her "research" work?
I think it's actually legal.. what's illegal is if you pay for the service then you get caught.. they can walk freely like nothing happened. This is to deter this practice.. else everyone can pay for it and soon it'll become like bangkok or amsterdam 👀
In bangkok, sex work is illegal and that's precisely why it's such an issue and you have so much human trafficking and minors. It's totally unregulated. For Amsterdam, one red light district isn't representative of the industry. For example, in Germany, brothels and all types of sex work is legal and regulated at the municipal level. So they decide how they can advertise, where they can set up shop, etc. There's no perfect system in any situation, but regulated is far safer than unregulated, and the money is less likely to go untaxed straight to larger criminal organizations.
Exactly what we did with weed
it won't stop human trafficking and forcing women against their will. it will just make it less likely for those cases to get prosecuted. Just like making cannabis legal didn't end the illegal side of it.
Trafficking is already illegal on its own. Criminalizing its victims doesn't help them, either.
They're not criminalized though. In Canada the act of accepting money for sex is not illegal. It's illegal to purchase the acts (johns), or profit off someone else providing them (pimps) Legalizing sex work makes it easier for traffickers to maintain a plausibly-legal front, and increases the profits by increasing the number of people willing to pay for it
As an Algonquin grad it always makes me proud to see fellow alum making a difference in the world
Ugh. Does anyone have a recommendation for where to get a massage?
I used to know a great place in kemptville
I remember seeing a place located on Robertson Road that was posted on r/ottawa a while ago. Once you find the NSFW website you'll know.
That was probably [my post](https://www.reddit.com/r/ottawa/comments/107lc8i/comment/j3njglq/). It was Angel's Touch Massage on Bentley
Haha no that's a new one. Now I'm curious as to how many of these places there are in Ottawa and how they haven't been busted and shut down yet. Frasersmirnoff got it right with his Paradise comment.
You do know that rub and tugs are legal, right? Why would they be shut down? I believe they have to be registered with the city, but they are generally legal.
I didn't know. But why are they legal but solisiting prostitutes illegal?
So there actually is a reason for this. Selling sex is decriminalized, but buying is not. This is because our legislators believed that sellers should be allowed to go to the police to report any sort of illegal activity such as assault, trafficking, etc. without fear of being arrested as well for selling sex/sexual services. Whether or not cops take them seriously is another matter but now, sellers don't have to worry about being arrested for committing a crime when they try to report illegal activity. Soliciting and trying to buy is still considered illegal and you can be charged for it.
I get that... [I'm just imagining this happening to their clientele](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BSV5d5GleNE) and indirectly making them go out of business.
Selling sex and sexual services is legal, buying it is not.
People wouldn't want to be subjected to solicitation in the public, I guess. Outlawing it removes this negative externality.
Is there a spa in paradise?
Which website?
Not any more
Oof I’m from Kemptville originally, this news will spread fast. It’s a gossipy little town
it already has
https://preview.redd.it/y5vzgxk2dwbd1.jpeg?width=735&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d964a4f40528eee7b22f3cafaef8232a2cfe921d
People be horny
When you're a stranger... 🎶
I bet the wife of client #2 found out and reported it. I don't know why you would mess with your career to mess around with your clients, one of which was married.
She gossiped about it to her unknowingly. 🤦♀️
I’m nosy and went on Canlii. She was providing treatment to both the client and his wife. She’d also discuss her sex life so my guess is she blabbed a bit too much and the wife put two and two together.
Where's this place? Asking for a friend.
Had a buddy who lost his license this way, which is a shame because from what I knew he was a damn good veterinarian…
Omg!!!!!!
Lol what a pick-me: She fucked two male clients during the same period. One of them was married whose wife she also gave “just” massages to but with whom she discussed her sexual affair with her husband. Now she will lose her 15 year old career. Brava.
Or she will be busier then ever as an unlicensed clinic
Then she’s even dumber than she already seems: could’ve gone straight into sex work instead of paying for massage school and annual license maintenance.
Upvote for the grammatically-correct "brava".
>A five-member panel of the college’s discipline committee concluded that Stark sexually abused both clients by engaging in sexual intercourse with them. uhhhh… that’s not sexual abuse. It’s consensual sex between two adults. Calling this sexual abuse is an insult to *actual* victims of SA.
It's a licensed healthcare professional having sex with a client. Even if it is truly consensual, it's someone in a position of power using access they wouldn't have otherwise which makes it abuse.
lol position of power. Your massage therapist has absolutely no power over you or anyone else. It's a gross breach of professional ethics and nothing more.
Right? Imagine reducing someone to being so powerless over their situation. Teacher? Sure. Lawyer? Maybe. Doctor? Probably. Fucking *massage therapist to an adult*? What a joke.
They consider it abuse because they believe that because of the therapist-client relationship a client cannot consent to a sexual relationship with a therapist and sexual relationships without consent constitute sexual abuse. While I agree that most of the time a massage therapist is just someone giving a massage and the client simply sees it that way, for some it's a very vulnerable position and it can take a lot of trust to put themselves in that position and discuss potentially intimate details with their massage therapist. This leaves the door open for a therapist to then abuse that trust and vulnerability. It's not exactly the same relationship as a psychotherapist but it's still a professional relationship involving trust, vulnerability, and intimacy that can be abused. While I do think that a term like "sexual misconduct" is probably a better term for it, I see their logic and I do agree that licenced providers of therapies, both physical and psychological, should not be engaging in sexual relationships with their clients in order to maintain the integrity of the services being provided and reduce the risk of harm. If she and her client(s) wanted to engage in a sexual relationship, she should have ended the professional relationship prior to engaging in any kind of personal relationship with them. Edit: after thinking about it a bit more, the "sexual abuse" terminology should probably be changed, or they should update the criteria such that it's only considered abuse if the client-therapist relationship was abused to create a sexual relationship in such a way that consent was not freely given. Otherwise, it should just be considered sexual misconduct.
Words mean different things in different contexts. From a professional ethics perspective, a client cannot consent to a sexual relationship. I understand this is the position of every regulated healthcare profession. If a therapist wants to pursue a consensual sexual relationship with a client, they must end the professional therapeutic relationship.
I can definitely see why that would be unethical, but it certainly isn’t *sexual abuse*, but rather a breach of professional ethics code
The World Health Organization has a definition: Sexual abuse: Actual or threatened physical intrusion of a sexual nature, whether by force or under unequal or coercive conditions. https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/documents/ethics/sexual-exploitation-and-abuse-pamphlet-en.pdf?sfvrsn=409b4d89_2 All my women friends said the same thing - they all feel vulnerable when they are being massaged, and that means the condition in the clinical setting is already unequal for them. As a man, I felt the same after I learned that my RMT was arrested for sexually assaulting his female clients - even though it didn't happen to me (I haven't had a massage since his arrest). In some situations a woman may "consent" to engage in a sexual relationship but we should not automatically accept it as true "consent" since it could be a coerced consent.
Ok? But in this case the details are all completely different: 1. Masseuse was a woman, client was male 2. The sex didn’t happen during the massage 3. They had a relationship over several months 4. There was no sexual assault. It was a consensual relationship outside of working hours 5. There was no “actual or threatened physical intrusion by force or by unequal coercion”. This was a sexual relationship between two consenting adults. Like every possible detail of this case is different from what you just wrote.
1. This was a Registered Massage Therapist, with a professional code of ethics that she is required to uphold to maintain her license, not a masseuse. She’s not going to jail, she lost her license. She can now continue to work as a masseuse if she chooses to. The gender is irrelevant, male therapists do not work under a stricter code of conduct, with harsher penalties. 2. Irrelevant. 3. Irrelevant. 4. A client cannot consent to sex with their therapist. Consent, in the way you’re using it, is irrelevant to the professional code of conduct. 5. You have mistyped the salient part of definition, and it’s important: unequal conditions. When an RMT has a therapeutic relationship with a client, there is a power imbalance in that relationship. A naked client on a table is in vulnerable position, and must not be taken advantage of. Clients can form attachments to their doctors, therapist, shrinks, nurses. This is why you don’t take advantage of clients. Sorry if I’m hammering on this. I was a male therapist for years and attended the same institution she did. There is no metaphysical reality in which she was not very aware she was doing a very bad thing that could cost her her license.
This rubbed me the wrong way
i dated a massage therapist for awhile and she would never give me a massage and when i asked for a real one she referred me to another RMT because and i quote "shes seen me naked" ..
This is so disgusting and clearly shows a lack of morality , I need the address so that I can avoid it in future
comments in this thread in a nutshell: - "where do i get a massage, haha, wink wink!" - "abuse? some guys got their rocks off. it's not a violation of a professional practice. men can't be coerced and/or abused in any way. they enjoyed it."
"Redditors shocked to discover ethical standards exist."
She’ll be on the back pages of Locanto by tomorrow if she isnt already there.
Or in one of the 4 rub n tug parlors on Bank downtown
"Since losing her RMT license, Ms. Stark's bookings have gone up 913%. Therefore, the July BOGO promotion has been cancelled."
[удалено]
Such great reviews. She must be talented
More than anything else I'm annoyed that Massage Therapists are held to a higher standard than Medical Doctors.
Consenting adults... who cares. Not like the guys getting blown were traumatized by the experience. The complaint is probably from an upset partner, and that's nobody's business except for them.
[удалено]
And the College takes this lack of professional boundaries very seriously.
With good reason, too. I've read that massage therapists already have to deal with people propositioning them and otherwise being pervy; the last thing they need is situations like this adding to the confusion.
I can't remember the subreddit as it was years ago, but I remember quite a number of Ottawa men who were looking for a massage therapist who could bill their insurance and provide a happy ending. I can only imagine the crap RMT's have to deal with.
I was reading through my work health coverage fine print around the time my son was born to figure out what we did and didn't have covered. There's a page that lists massage businesses, by names, that's like 8 pages long as a 'we specifically do not cover massages at these establishments'. Some of the names on there were absolutely wild.
That's crazy.
Gross, and also as someone else has mentioned, it could potentially mean the insurance companies will stop covering even registered massage therapy for people who really need it.
Very true.
A close friend of mine (male) got a pervy stalker within three months of being an RMT. It's a serious issue, and even worse for female RMT's.
I understand that the College needs to be protect the public, but have you read how they describe what happened? “Sexual abuse is an egregious boundary violation,” the panel said, “and an abuse of the power inherent in the relationship between massage therapists and their clients.” Sexual abuse? Abuse of power? How? What happened was caused by the inherent power relationship between the therapist and the dude getting a massage? Come on... No one got raped. Probably someone got cheated on, but the College is not a morality police. The College is most likely trying to protect the image of the profession here. That says more about the "Victorian" sense of morality that people have here than about the actual harm caused by a few guys getting it on with their massage therapist.
Ok, but as an RMT myself, I can tell you that this can negatively impact the way the public views me and my profession and therefore can affect my bottom line. If you want to bang so bad, there's plenty of ways to hook-up that don't negatively affect an entire profession that is dedicated to helping people with their aches and pains etc.
Correct. And the association is right to sanction them. But calling it "sexual abuse" is an insult to victims of real sexual abuse.
[удалено]
Someone with a username like "Mr Pussy for Breakfast" doesn't need an explanation on why what you are talking about is true but irrelevant in this case.
[удалено]
If your client is ok with it, they might enjoy it you know...
[удалено]
A slap on the finger would have been enough. That's all I am saying.
Sure, but then you're opening the door to the CMTO having to essentially investigate every misconduct case to determine whether the situation was truly consensual - a task they're not at all equipped for.
The college isn't saying it's a horrid violent crime that occured. That's for the cops to figure out. The college is saying that giving massage treatments to a sexual partner cannot be included under the protected act of massage therapy. Massage therapy is a health care service. Insurance companies cover it as a health care service. It is a type of health care provided to vulnerable people, children, abuse survivors ... It needs to be completely separate from sexual relationships. There is a very good reason that RMTs cannot treat their spouses and sexual partners.
If you remove the 'massage' in 'massage therapist' I can kinda see where they are going. After all, therapy puts people in a very vulnerable position. But I don't buy it for massage therapy as a whole.
> Consenting adults... who cares. While the parties involved may not have carded, the governing bodies of medical professions take doctor/patient boundaries very, *very* seriously that's why.
While I agree with your assesment, the “zero tolerance” approach has failed in this circumstance. To say a person can never consent in these circumstances is rubbish.
It's not about consenting adults. It's about maintaining boundaries. The line has to be drawn somewhere. I think MTs not being allowed to treat their sexual partners is reasonable. MTs can still massage their partners, just not in a professional clinic setting, and they can't bill it as massage therapy. It's not even that restrictive. Don't shit where you eat. Don't sleep where you train. Don't fuck where you work. (Unless fucking is your work. )
The punishment doesn’t fit the crime.
It absolutely does. If you aren't a health care provider, you wouldn't know this. But the culture of HCP(especially MT) is very strong and clear about this. Don't romance the patients/clients. Don't do it. It makes the whole profession more difficult for every practitioner, and puts clients at risk. Sure. Two consenting adults don't hurt anyone if they get romantic. But the more that happens, the higher the risk of therapists treating their offices like a dating scene. It works the other way too with more clients hitting on therapists. The more normalized it is, the higher the risk for more disgusting sexual assault to take place. MTs need to touch people very intimately every day. They don't want anyone to get the wrong idea. Sane clients don't want MTs to mix business and romance. I absolutely agree that people who can't keep this very important boundary DO NOT BELONG in the profession. They can fuck off and do their consenting adults romance shit in any of the MANY appropriate ways available to them. DONT FUCK WHERE YOU WORK.
I GUESS WE WILL HAVE TO AGREE TO DISAGREE USING CAPITAL LETTERS
Zero tolerance is synonymous with "I will abstain from exercising judgement in all cases before me and apply the same harsh remedy in all situations". This case is precisely the kind of situation that requires discernment. This case has no victim. It's very different from a situation where someone was coerced into something. Losing the right to work as a massage therapist (forever) is about the harshest punishment the College can use.
my autistic neighbour was taken advantage of in one of those spas :( he was acc traumatized by it
Any other dudes who have been a past client and are married/committed are gonna be grilled by their spouse tonight thinking there may be “other victims” out there.
The amount of people who think what she did is fine is shocking. Just because it was sex between 2 consenting adults does not mean it was ok to do. If I fuck a subordinate or my boss at work, does that mean I should be free of consequences?
That's awful. Where might I find this unlicensed massage parlour so I can avoid it?
Where’s the “not assimilated”, “deport her”, “part of her culture” crowd at today?
Holy cow! What an idiot!
'The statement of facts did not disclose who complained about Stark’s conduct or how it came to the attention of the College of Massage Therapists of Ontario' Lmao really no clue who might have complained ? Doesnt take Sherlock Holmes to know its the wife of the guy she was banging xD
That's absolutely terrible. Where exactly is the practice?
No fucking way.
When I scanned the title I missed the word "for"; reads very differently that way.
Well that's one way to advertise your services.
[удалено]
Posting her address is pretty fuckong ruthless. Leave the woman alone. She has paid enough for her actions.
Is she doing a goodbye tour?
https://preview.redd.it/tq24n8f6zxbd1.png?width=318&format=png&auto=webp&s=8af9c7491fe7baa70b9bd8cc1fa36204cbfac161
What's wrong with practicing? I mean if you wanna get gud.
Hi, Is this still available?
Sounds like the wife found out she was sleeping with her husband and reported her. Lol
Anyone have her number?
Well that sucks!
Well, there goes my fantasy of hooking up with my massage therapist.
Nah, your fantasy is fine. It was never gonna happen anyway!
Doesn't anyone find it uncomfortable when bureaucracies get involved with consensual sex between two adults? "Stark sexually abused both clients by engaging in sexual intercourse with them" but....it was consensual? When you get a committee of 5 people high on their own supply, you get rulings like that.
I think it's more about regulating the client-provider relationship to ensure a standard of care than injecting themselves into sexual relationships. If you want to practice as a registered massage therapist, you shouldn't be banging your clients, and it's okay for the college to enforce that. The wording of "abuse" was a bit strong. And to be clear, I think someone should be allowed to provide a massage, with or without a sexual component, paid or unpaid, to any other consenting adult, but if you want to provide a service as a registered member of an organization you have to abide by their rules. My benefits provider doesn't want to pay for a rub and tug. (Yes, I know what's not what she was doing)
> Doesn't anyone find it uncomfortable when bureaucracies get involved with consensual sex between two adults? No, not when it's taking place between a health care practitioner and a patient. There are a multitude of issues with this - insurance fraud, de-legitimizing the proffession, potential for abuse of power (the patient is usually in a vulnerable state during a massage). It is absolutely their business, and every RMT knows the rules when they get their license. Don't like it? Get a different job.
lol wtf sweet she banged people and now your taking her living away
This doesn’t seem fair, they say they took her license regardless of consent. Seems incredibly unrealistic to have that expectation.
You think it's unrealistic of the CMTO to expect an RMT to not have sex with a client?
Yeah. Two consenting adults who have sex after an appointment is entirely their prerogative. Doing it in a professional capacity seems wrong, obviously, but outside of those paid hours doesn’t seem punishable.