Sheldon:
Your lame attempts to legitimize yourself through anecdote and argument fall on deaf ears. Your anecdotes are unconvincing, although I admit that Ronald Reagan got much mileage of using stories and assuming that the listener would generalize. Your arguments also are unconvincing and filled with innuendo and half-truths. I will respond to some of your points:
1. "Hypnosis" is not legally defined in most venues. It is a technique, and customarily, the law does not define medical techniques. Practitioners can use techniques when they have adequate training. Surgeons can perform operations if and only if they are properly trained. Licensed therapists can offer gestalt, family therapy or hypnosis if they are properly trained. No legal entity could define the standard of care for every technique. Professionals must decide when their level of expertise meets the standard of care.
2. "Counseling" is sometimes legally undefined. "Psychotherapy" is defined in most venues. If one treats disease, including mental conditions outside of the law, it is illegal.
3. Public demand does not legitimacy create. Just because people buy snake oil (or even benefit from it), does not mean that schools should be invented to teach its formulation.
4. People seek a "back door" for numerous reasons including incompetence and grandiosity, e.g., they could not go to graduate school, or they believe themselves to be so special that traditional training and wisdom is beneath them. You infer that you can select and train students better than any graduate school. Come on.
5. Governments can certify schools lending an aura of legitimacy. Such certification should not be confused with accreditation, which requires competency.
6. Freestanding associations seem to have an aura of legitimacy. They provide "degrees" and authorize the use of letters after the name of members. Often, these organizations have no substance and merely confuse the consumer.
In summary, Sheldon, I do not want to hear from you again. You are wasting time and space.