Sheldon:
I don't know why this question is directed to me. I am not the voice of the establishment. I have publicly championed liberal academic requirements for training in hypnosis. When I began 25 years ago, only doctoral-level professionals could belong to the major professional hypnosis societies. The Erickson Foundation has trained Masters-level professionals from its inception, and gradually the American Society of Clinical Hypnosis relaxed its standards.
Okay, Sheldon, brace yourself: I am going to take you to task and be hard on you.
It is illegal to practice without a license. That is the wisdom of the law. Why train people in hypnotherapy when they are legally prohibited from using the training? It seems immoral and manipulative.
Speaking from the point of view of the consumer, I would not take my car to an unlicensed mechanic. I would not take my psyche to an untrained practitioner.
The public needs a way of making informed choices and licensure helps despite its limitations (and even abuses by professionals). I have seen more examples of nonprofessionals who have provided damaging hypnosis to fragile people without understanding their psychodynamics than I have seen of professionals causing iatrogenic problems through hypnosis.
And, Sheldon, why do you fail to identify yourself by name, degree and location? Why not stand up for your convictions?