About a month ago I had an experience that got me thinking. With the holiday season upon us, I had been doing Stage Hypnotic Shows non stop since the middle of November. There was no reason to think that this 3 day run at a night club in Kansas was going to be any different. My props case was in the car and I was on my way out the door for the 3 hour drive to the club. Then the phone rang. The club owner was frantic. All the shows were sold out and this was one of the highlights of his year. There was just one problem. The District Attorney had just come in and told the owner that using hypnosis for entertainment purposes in the State of Kansas was illegal. He "cordially" explained that if we went on with the show, scheduled to start in about 5 hours, he would arrest me, the club owner and anybody who chose to volunteer to come on stage.
I was at a loss. I knew this law was on the books, but I've done plenty of shows in Kansas without any problems. In fact, I had just come from performing at Harrah's Casino just outside of Topeka, Kansas, without incident and this was probably the 10th time I've performed at that particular club. I guess Kansas and Oregon are the two states that still have these old laws on the books, and from what I understand, the DA had received a complaint from someone in town, so he was forced to follow up on it.

I'm very familiar with the problem up in Oregon. I helped a friend fight up there to get out of one of these binds. In fact, as I checked around, I found another good friend of mine had spent the night in jail in Kansas for refusing to stop a show he was doing at the Kansas State fair.
And then I chanced upon an article about how the very ethical television hypnotist, Paul McKenna, is fighting a lawsuit in England where he's being accused of "creating schizophrenia" in a volunteer. Is it possible? Of course it is. Any time any person talks to another, whether during a hypnotic session or while buying a loaf of bread, they run the risk of striking some neuron chain that might run someone off the deep end. Is he guilty? Of course not. Finding him guilty would be sentencing all of humanity to silence in case a chance comment caused someone a problem. 
Granted, while hypnotized a subject is more focussed and more intense in their thought process. But should we be held accountable for helping people learn to escape the monkey chatter and distracted thought process society has taught us to hide behind? Did he do anything more than simply bring to the surface a problem already mustering around inside, waiting for the appropriate moment to show it's head? Personally, if I had schizophrenic tendencies, I'd appreciate finding out and welcome the chance to deal with them.

But then, that's not what this is all about, is it? The real issue here isn't whether hypnosis can potentially cause harm. The real issue here is the fear society has of the unknown. When I stand before a jury and defend my right to hypnotize someone, I'm actually standing against every B rated movie and X rated article that portrays hypnotists as modern day Cagliostros. Granted, hypnosis does afford a certain amount of "power". Obviously a lot has been done that shows we are just scratching the surface of what's possible when a person manages to focus completely, but are hypnotists liable for "malpractice" issues?

I heard of a Psychologist once that actually ended up spending some time in jail for taking advantage of the normal affection clients develop towards therapists. Basically he had a crush on this married woman, and used their weekly hour session as an excuse for carefully manipulating her affections away from her husband, and causing her to see him as her savior and protector. The oasis in the mists of her otherwise arid life. It wasn't long before she started dreaming of her times with him and one thing led to another until she ended up filing for divorce. After much investigation the courts managed to get tapes of their sessions and eventually ended up convicting him of using his abilities to unfairly misdirect her thought process. Should he be held responsible? After 7 years of studying how the mind works and carefully orchestrating his "crime", he most certainly should. His situation had all the legal makings of a crime; premeditation, motive, ability, execution and victim.

Does that mean we should arrest every guy who ever sat at a bar and tried to sweet talk some girl into going home with him? How about a real Casanova type. Some body building poster model who tries to talk some poor, lonely housewife into taking off for a weekend. In fact, if that very psychologist, with all his training and abilities were to walk into a grocery store and try to pick up some lady at the produce counter, would we arrest him? Of course not. It's not the fact that he can, or even that his motives are bad that is in question here. It's the fact that he was hired as a professional to do a job and he tried to serve his selfish motives instead. There has to be motive or at the very least negligence, before a crime can be committed. My 3 year old son is not morally guilty of the fact that he once walked out of a convenience store with a candy bar. He didn't know better. If I hadn't returned it to the clerk, however, I would definitely be a responsible criminal.

So how does all of this relate to hypnotists? When in a stage or therapy setting, should hypnotists be held accountable for their actions? Most certainly. If I'm hired to entertain, and instead I try to make you a crook or talk your wife into coming home with me, I'm definitely responsible, and guilty of unethical malpractice. Is a hypnotist responsible for reactions that occur due to circumstances out of their control? I don't think so. Suppose a hypnotist is hired to help a crowd have a good time. Being ethical, he or she goes out of their way to warn those with physical weaknesses and mental problems to please not come on stage (as McKenna did). Are they responsible for what happens when a person suddenly chances upon some hidden past trigger that creates a negative reaction? I can't imagine how we could draw that conclusion. 

Imagine, on the other hand, that last week, while using time regression during a hypnotherapy session, a subject suddenly found himself confronting his father's death for the first time, something they weren't emotionally ready for. The traumatic experience might cause the person to have a breakdown or at the very least, require some amount of therapy. As long as the state is not requiring hypnotists to pass some competency test, or otherwise meet up to some level of regulation, this experience would have to be written off as an unfortunate accident. Of course, if next week the same hypnotist brought in another client and the same thing happens, it wouldn't be hard to prove negligence. He obviously should have learned his lesson. If, now, after going through it once, he forced a second client into the same problem, he's just being reckless.

No, hypnosis is not "safe". In the wrong hands, or for that matter, in untrained hands, there is a lot of potential for problems. But a person can only be held accountable for the amount of training required before they are permitted to use an ability or skill. As long as the "powers at be" insist on writing hypnosis off as side show mumbo jumbo, they're going to have to accept any and all damage caused by the untrained as their responsibility. They can't have it both ways. They can't expect us to "magically" know what they consider the "minimum acceptable amount of competency" if they never require us to study it. If, on one hand, hypnosis is nothing more than a fun game that exploits the placebo effect, then no medical or scientific authority has the right to get angry if suddenly a schizophrenic walks in as a result of a mistake done on stage, or in a therapy room. If they are willing to join hands with us and carefully study the effects and range of hypnosis, and then require a certain level of regulation that keeps mistakes from happening, then we are on our way towards a solution. 

But, unfortunately, that's probably a long ways from happening. I know, I personally have been a part of several in-depth studies done by Universities and Medical centers where the word "Hypnosis" was very carefully omitted from any grant application or resulting thesis for fear of labeling some "competent researcher" as a lunatic delving into some weird, new age type game playing. We carefully studied the effects of "suggestive manipulation" done on individuals experiencing an "altered state of consciousness". As much as I hate to say it, it's probably going to take a few of the McKenna stories before the scientific mainstream is shocked into facing up to their self imposed responsibilities as the "guardians of mental health". Eventually, after enough sacrificial subjects have been offered up to the conservative powers at be, someone, somewhere will decide the time has come to take a closer look at hypnosis.
Of course, there is the other alternative. Kansas managed to avoid the issue altogether by passing a law that says hypnosis can't be used "for entertainment purposes". When I looked into it, I guess it all stemmed from some problems they had back in the 60's when college guys at some campus were luring women into their rooms with the promise of "pleasures you can only experience through hypnosis". If, instead of just making it illegal, someone, back then, had taken the time to invite these guys into a lab somewhere and had them try and demonstrate these "incredible powers", Kansas might have been a forerunner in our race for knowledge. Instead, it now has become a laughing stock of the entertainment industry. 

Instead of canceling my show, I showed up, on time, to a full house. Rather than doing a hypnotic show, I quickly arranged to do a self hypnotic seminar a week later at a local hotel, and used 3 packed houses to sell tickets. I began by talking a bit about the mind, and how we are just starting to uncover some of the abilities of the 80% of uncharted brain mass. Of course, in an attempt to demonstrate just how powerful hypnosis really is, I did bring up 10 people who ended up barking like dogs, running up and down the isles singing YMCA and signing autographs as celebrities. I sold out the seminar, thanks in large part to the free publicity I got from all the local stations who were standing at the door of the club begging for an interview. When the cops came up to arrest us, they were all handed invitations to the seminar and copies of the law which clearly read "cannot be used for entertainment purposes". Promoting seminars, even if the audience happens to be entertained in the process, is perfectly legal in the Sovereign State of Kansas. They called their legal council and then walked away quietly. They also left us alone during the following 2 nights. Considering the extra $3,750 I made on the deal for a single 4 hour seminar, with relatively little promotional effort, I'm now in the process of organizing 2 more seminars, for this coming month, as near as I can to the town this all came down in. I might even consider selling the rights to this "only legal method of using hypnosis for entertainment in the state of Kansas". Imagine having state fairs allowing you to promote local seminars!
And the club where I performed is already trying to get me to go back next year.