They should have seen it coming...

[English Lady]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7351199.stm

Mediums and spiritualists fear changes to laws regulating the industry could leave them open to malicious civil action by sceptics.

The union representing spiritual workers is to lobby the government over changes to the industry's regulation.

The Fraudulent Mediums Act is due to be repealed next month and replaced by new EU consumer protection regulations.

The British Humanist Association said the change offered vulnerable people greater protection against fraud.

Under the 1951 Fraudulent Mediums Act, prosecutors have to prove the medium or healer had intended to be fraudulent in order to secure a conviction.

But under the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, which comes into force in the UK on 26 May, it will be the medium's responsibility to prove they did not mislead or coerce vulnerable consumers.

'Religion'

The Spiritual Workers' Association says making mediums subject to the consumer-protection regulations does not recognise spiritualism is a religion.

It plans to lobby the government over the issue on Friday.

Its founder Carole McEntee-Taylor, told BBC News: "The problem is that it's turning spiritualism the religion into a consumer product, which it is not."

She said the change in law left mediums more vulnerable to prosecution.


We hope that the new regulations will make real changes to the current situation, where psychic practitioners are permitted to make completely unsubstantiated claims
Hanne Stinson
British Humanist Association

She said: "The Fraudulent Mediums Act protected the medium because it meant person receiving the information was taking personal responsibility.

"They would have to prove the medium was fraudulent or giving them advice which make them make a decision which would cost them money."

The British Humanist Association's chief executive Hanne Stinson, said the current law was not fit for purpose.

He said: "We hope that the new regulations will make real changes to the current situation, where psychic practitioners are permitted to make completely unsubstantiated claims and to take payment for their services, without fear of legal action.

"It is high time that this industry is better regulated, with adequate protections for consumers."

Susie Collings, of the College of Psychic Studies welcomed the new rules, saying they would tighten standards, discourage "less than ethical" practitioners and make it easier for the public to understand what to expect from a reading.

However, she said: "There is always the possibility that mediums will be targeted by people intent on making money by suing what they see as easy targets and that is a big concern for the individual."

So, what do people think? I personally think it's a very good idea but I wonder what other members of the AH might make of it.

(PS sorry for bad title, I couldn't resist)

 

[wehstar]

I loved the episode of Derren Brown where he pretended to be a psychic for an hour, had a room full of 20 people absolutely convinced, and then told them as they were leaving that it was all a big con, and that if he could do it... others were but for unethical reasons.

Wider issue as to whether we live in a Nanny state. I mean, I wouldn't make any significant decisions based on some psychics say so. But then I'm not vulnerable.

 

[Liar]

So it's religion then? Cool. As long as meduims stop selling it as if it was a commercial service. You can't have it both ways.

That goes for other religions too, by the way. I should be able to sue Scientologists. And does the Christian churches charge anything for caertain religious services? If so, I should be able to sue them too if I feel that God did, in fact, not bless me.

Right?

 

[English Lady]

So it's religion then? Cool. As long as meduims stop selling it as if it was a commercial service. You can't have it both ways.

That goes for other religions too, by the way. I should be able to sue Scientologists. And does the Christian churches charge anything for caertain religious services? If so, I should be able to sue them too if I feel that God did, in fact, not bless me.

Right?

If you pay for it, certainly and I think that's the point.

As far as i know, churches don't charge for services...least none I know do *L*