The Rolf Method of Structural Integration Verses Rolfing & Trade
Have you ever heard the saying six one way, half a dozen the other? One of my most influential mentors used to tell me this all the time when I was asking questions about something that was essentially the same thing. I remember hearing this answer over and over again as a kid drove me crazy. Then one day it clicked. I asked a question and he gave me the same six one way, half a dozen the other answer and I looked at him and he smiled. I smiled when it finally made sense.
As we work hard to get Structural Integration off the mystical mountains and into the limelight, people can often be confused by the name of this therapy. When we look at the most common and conventional types of manual therapy, everyone knows physical therapy and massage therapy. The number of people who have heard of and received Rolfingor Structural Integration or the Rolf Method of Structural Integration or whatever term a school puts on their graduates, is only a fraction compared to physical therapy and massage therapy. Not only does Joe’s audience not know much about structural integration or Rolfing, but the medical community is in the same place as Joe’s audience. So how can we clear up this confusion of terms?
Rolfing is a proprietary term reserved for Rolfing Structural Integration practitioners who have graduated from the Rolf Institute. Anyone who has completed training at any of the other Structural Integration schools may not use the terms Rolfing, Rolfer or Rolfed at any time. Rolfing is a brand name for the Structural Integration process.
Over the years, as Ida P. Rolf developed her life’s work, her clients and students referred to the process as Rolfing for short, above the name of her work, Structural Integration. Common slang might be something like, I got Rolfed today, or I’m going to see my Rolfer, or do you know anything about that Rolf stuff? The politics surrounding this confusion can create a difficult and cumbersome task for people seeking and learning about structural integration. Let’s say a person has worked with a Rolfer and moved to a new city. They go looking for another Rolfer for ongoing care, but can’t find any because there may not be any Rolfer in that particular town. Your Rolfer may never have referred to the job as Structural Integration, the actual name of the process, and the person doesn’t know what to do. However, in this new city there may be structural integrators, but the person does not know that this structural integrator has been taught and practices the same as his Rolfer.
We are now in a period of time where we have many excellent schools teaching some derivatives of the Rolf Method of Structural Integration. Most schools refer to their graduates as structural integrators, but some may have their own label or term. A good example of a language problem can be seen when looking at cars or automobiles. I remember my best friend’s family and how they referred to their cars. His parents said “ok let’s all get in the car”. My friend always said “okay, let’s get in the Chevy”. Both were referring to the same car, but my friend was referring to the make of the car and his parents just called it a car.
There was a difficult period of time in the political aspect of the world of Structural Integration and great divisions developed between certain schools. As a result, there are some who will tell you that if you are not seeing a Rolfer you are not getting the real work of Ida P. Rolf. That the Structural Integrators and Rolfers are totally different, practicing and carrying out different lines of work. This is absolutely not true. If someone has graduated from an accredited Structural Integration school, they can feel secure knowing they are receiving quality care. As a practitioner who did not graduate from the Rolf Institute, I face this situation all the time. I have clients who come to me and say “I was Rolfed 20 years ago. I think it’s time to get Rolfed again. Can you Rolf me?” Then I have to take the time to explain the legal links and ramifications of terminology and trademarks. This can be confusing to people.
Imagine if there was only one college or university in the entire United States, or in the world, that could teach a particular therapy or degree program. There would be millions and millions of people who would have to leave without having the opportunity to receive that education or the help that could come from that person’s education.
As more quality Structural Integration schools appear, we can know that more and more people are being trained to high levels in the Rolf Method of Structural Integration. As a result, more people are able to receive and experience this amazing process. A good example of this concept is looking at people who work towards their Master’s degree. When we see that a person has achieved their Master’s Degree, we don’t say “well, their Master’s Degree is from Washington State University and not Gonzaga University, so it doesn’t count.” We know that both schools have good reputations and offer excellent programs.
However, there are things we need to keep in mind. With the addition and development of more individuals or schools that teach Structural Integration, how do we know that the students graduating from these schools or programs are capable and competent? There are people and programs that say they are teaching Rolfing or Structural Integration, but they fall short. Many of them will give weekend workshops or call Structural Integration another form of deep tissue work. This is where we should spend our time protecting people.
So how can you tell if your doctor has received the proper training? One of the best resources is the International Association of Structural Integrators (IASI). IASI’s mission is to be the leading professional organization for the advancement and promotion of Structural Integration as a cornerstone of health and wellness through education, community and communication. IASI has a list of schools that have been approved to teach Structural Integration. You can find this list on their website at http://www.theiasi.org.
IASI has established standards of education, ethics, and professionalism that schools must meet to receive approval. These standards are what separate the people who actually teach Dr. Rolf’s work from those who teach a severe watered-down variation of the work. IASA was also the driving force in the development of the Certification Board for Structural Integration (CBSI). CBSI strives to examine and uphold standards of ethical and professional practice in the provision of services through an accreditation program that promotes the competency of Structural Integration professionals. You can learn more about the exam at http://www.siexam.org. The CBSI helps identify individuals who have received adequate training in Structural Integration through the use of a psychometrically valid test. This process is another big step in unifying the world of Structural Integration and differentiating it from other manual therapies.
As a practitioner and teacher of Structural Integration, I believe it is my responsibility to try to share this information with as many people as possible. Each and every day that I wake up and am able to share my knowledge and passion for the Rolf Method of Structural Integration, I am truly grateful. I am able to do this through my clients in my practice, the students at my school, my fellow Structural Integrators and Rolfers, and the community at large through lectures and presentations. But, the level at which this happens can be delayed and stalled by getting caught up and caught up in the political tensions of the terminology.
As you search for your structural integration professional, I encourage you to ask lots of questions and do the same research you would or should do when searching for any other healthcare professional. Use the tools mentioned above, and when you do, I think you’ll find that the difference between a Rolfer and a Structural Integrator is six one way, half a dozen the other.