The following is a case study demonstrating how the Inquiries, Complaints and Reports Committee (ICRC) addressed a client’s complaint about comments made by their Registered Massage Therapist/Massage Therapist (RMT/MT) during treatment. 

Case Study Summary 

During a Massage Therapy appointment, a client found the intake process to be invasive. While seeking treatment for back pain, she was asked unnecessary questions about her health history. During the intake process, she disclosed that she has been diagnosed with infertility and takes birth control pills. The RMT/MT inquired about her menstrual cycles and questioned why she was taking birth control pills if she couldn’t bear children. The RMT/MT said that some people diagnosed as infertile may still be able to become pregnant in the future. 

During treatment, the RMT/MT noted that having large breasts may present cancer risks and discussed breast massage. He also discussed exercises that could reduce the risk of cancer and mentioned the cancer risk of moles. The client felt uncomfortable during the conversation, especially since she was undressed.  

CMTO investigated and interviewed the RMT/MT, who: 

• Said he tries to make his intake process as thorough as possible to avoid contraindications.  
• Admitted he should not have asked about the client’s use of birth control. He stated that the conversation was becoming awkward, so he made the comment regarding infertility.  
• Acknowledged he should probably not have discussed exercises to prevent cancer but reiterated that the exercises he suggested would stimulate lymph flow. 
• Stated that the scope of Massage Therapy includes anything that is a health risk that the RMT/MT can offer advice on. 

ICRC’s Perspective: 

The ICRC reviewed the complaint and determined the RMT/MT required remediation for the following reasons: 

• Prior to treatment, the RMT/MT asked questions that were inappropriate, insensitive, and overly personal.  
• The comment that some infertile people do bear children was an insensitive remark that showed a lack of respect for what infertility might mean to a client. 
• The discussion around cancer risk was outside of the RMT’s/MT’s scope of practice. Further, there was no clinical indication for the client to undergo a breast massage.  
• The RMT/MT should have referred the client to a general physician or dermatologist if he believed there was a medical concern with the client’s moles or other potential cancer risks.  

The ICRC provided an oral caution and ordered the RMT/MT to obtain ethics mentoring on staying within the scope of Massage Therapy, maintaining appropriate communication, and professional boundaries.