Massage Ethics: Client asks for inappropriate massage

These are real ethical situations presented by students in our Massage Ethics class.

Male Client, Female Therapist.

The massage therapist had finished a full body massage with the client. During the last moments of the massage the client asked if he could book another massage for the following day. The therapist thought this was a bit strange as most people do not immediately rebook consecutive days. She thought through her schedule and determined that she could work him in the following day. He agreed and then stated that perhaps tomorrow she could actually complete the “full” body massage. Red flags went up as she reviewed the work she had just completed and she recognized she had already provided him a full body, including head and feet work. He gestured below his abdomen. Not having a problem with communication or boundaries, she stated that she had provided a full body massage and there were not other parts of the body she could address. She asked him if he was referring to his genitals. He immediately backed off and told her he would call to schedule another one. Of course, she never heard from him.

This situation, while uncomfortable, was handled very well by the therapist. She was able to find her voice and state her boundaries clearly and quickly. The tension was reduced by her firmly stating she was a professional who did not provide that type of service.

The following are tactics you can use for many of the ethical situations you will face;

1. State the obvious in a non-judgmental way. “I provided a full body massage. Are you asking for a sexual component?”
2. State the boundary. “I do not offer any type of massage that is sexual in nature. I will no longer be able to work with you if that is what you are requesting.”
3. Decide if you will continue the session or rebook based on the communication established.
4. Trust your instinct. If something feels off, it probably is.

Massage Therapy Sessions: Working With-- Not On Clients

The English language is full of words that have multiple connotations. Occasionally, I will ask someone if they have received any bodywork lately and their reply will be: “No, my car is running fine.”

It is a bit funny if you think about it, the analogy of working with a 1991 Honda Civic and a 1968 Human Being. The comparisons are vast. However, there is obviously a world of difference.

I often overhear therapists talking about working on this client or working on that client, with descriptions that sound a lot like a mechanic working on an automobile. This paradigm often involves locating the problem and then “fixing” it.

It is my belief that there is a fundamental difference between “working on” a client and “working with” the same client. We can work on an inanimate object with the intention to replace a part or repair damage. However, the human body requires interaction that is far more complex. If our technique becomes mechanical and our approach becomes procedural, we lose the ability to see each client for whom they are and recognize the unique way in which they receive massage. Albert Einstein once said, “All means prove but a blunt instrument if they have not behind them a living spirit.”

I have no doubt that there are automobile mechanics in the world that work with the “soul” of the cars that they service. In the end, despite all the metaphors, a car is not a living organism. In his book, The Anatomy of Change, author Richard Heckler describes three ways to work with the body: working on the body, working with the body, and working through the body. Take a moment to reflect on these different approaches. Which one would best describe your approach to massage and bodywork?

Here is my invitation. Try replacing the phrase “I worked on a client today…” with “I worked with a client today…” and notice the difference, if any, for you as a therapist.

Words are powerful. Choose them wisely.

Massage Ethics: Boundaries

“We often find where another’s boundaries lie by overstepping them”, one of my teachers would say. Discerning boundaries are hard enough to figure out for oneself, much less those that exist in relationship with another. Most of us live well into our life before we are consciously aware of our limits and expectations. Life is full of situations that require both. How well we communicate these limits and expectations will dictate much of our happiness, especially in relation to others.

One of the most powerful words in our self-care vocabulary might surprise you. It is crucial to maintaining clear intentions and designing a balanced life. It is not commitment, perseverance, community, compassion, nor reflection. It is not wisdom, strength or courage. In fact, it only contains two measly letters!

Consider this quote by Thomas Merton: “The rush and pressure of modern life are a form, perhaps the most common form, of its innate violence. To allow oneself to be carried away by a multitude of conflicting concerns, to surrender to too many demands, to commit oneself to many projects, to want to help in everything is to succumb to violence. The frenzy of the activist neutralizes work for peace. It destroys the fruitfulness of work, because it kills the root of inner wisdom which makes work fruitful.”

Notice the way Merton uses the word violence. It is not the connotation we are used to hearing. I would translate his usage into the word depletion. I suspect that what he is really getting at here is knowing when to say when and realizing our limitations, even when we want to save the world. He is really speaking about not just self-care but care of how we move through the world. More is not always better.

Jazz virtuoso, Louie Armstrong, often would use an entire solo section to play just one note. Where other musicians would showcase their speed and technical bravado, Louie would opt for scarcity. Occasionally, producers would ask him if he might like to add a bit more for variety. I imagine he would turn to the producer in his cool way and utter the powerful word with only two letters, "NO".