Should Tarot professionals be psychologically pronounced competent ?

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 19 Sep 2003, and now archived in the Forum Library.

matfav	19 Sep 2003
I know that many are drawn to the Tarot, and that it can be a really great guiding light. But heres the delicate issue. Should Tarot professionals be psychologically pronounced competent ? I mean, you are reading the cards, predicting outcomes, influencing from a "higher source" should readers who work professionally have 1. Counselling Skills 2. Be psychologically assessed to be sane and competent? Example of the many horror stories I hear. I met a man who when he was young saw a Tarot reader who did a life reading on him. The reader said "you'll be dead by 30. The man who was 18 at the time, thought he would have no life so he lived life to the full and when he turned 47 realised he had wasted his life completely. So profound was the influence of that one reading that nearly destroyed his life. He took no responsibility for his earlier actions and now regrets it fully. Now we know that a reader wioth a sound frame of mind would never act like that reader. But anyone can buy cards and become an instant professional The cards are a powerful tool 1. The power the client gives the reader 2. The Power of the cards in themeselves 3. Any person even those with mental health problems are drawn to the occult including tarot. So - I put it to you .... Should Tarot professionals be psychologically pronounced competent ? What are your thoughts..... Matfav

HudsonGray	19 Sep 2003
It would be impossible, how would you contact all the people who have tarot or oracle decks, or whatever form of divination they use, and give tests to them? How can you make sure they'll never change their psychological profile after being tested? How can you do this for everyone around the world who reads tarot for the public, private, online or for friends? Readers should be professional & do the best they can, but there's no way to find the frauds or the people who do it to feed off the public, and no way for the public to protect themselves other than to take a reading with a grain of salt & not believe what anyone tells them when there's no proof. You can't protect people from being stupid, or taking what another says as the total gospel truth...it's just impossible. The client has to take responsibility for what their life is, regardless of what a tarot reader, their therapist, their friends, strangers or family tell them.

catlin	19 Sep 2003
I know that there are a lot of black sheep in the reading business as in every other field, too. I can only second the points HudsonGray has already mentioned. I know of several "counsellors" in my area who charge ppl fro one hour "service" around 750 $!!!! Others tell ppl that there was a spell cast on them and they have to get this and that and have to buy this ritual etc. to get rid of it. You want more? I do regular studies, have my business ethics fixed in my reading room and ppl have to read them before they get a reading. The first 10 min are free as this is the time the querent or me need to see if we can work together. I tell them the possiblities and limits tarot can do to solving their problem/s. I do regular free public lectures to inform ppl about tarot and other "occult" themes. I really hope that some of these things enable ppl to see who is a serious reader and who is a fraud.

Diana	19 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by matfav Should Tarot professionals be psychologically pronounced competent ? Pronounced competent by WHOM?

wavebreaker	19 Sep 2003
The responsibility lies with both the reader and the querent. Of course it would be nice if all frauds were found and prevented from doing any more readings, but that just isn't practical, as HudsonGray already pointed out. I'm afraid it's a fact of life that there always will be frauds, in any business, including tarot. And that means that querents should be more careful and be more discerning when choosing a reader. And most important of all: they shouldn't rely completely on a reading, even if it's done by a good reader, but use it as advice. A good reader will obviously point that out to them, but s/he has no influence on how the querent will eventually use the reading. That is soleley the querent's responsibility. As for the example you mention: obviously I don't know all the details of the situation, but I think the reader was wrong to tell this man that he would die by 30. But I also think this man was also wrong to solely depend on that reading and to now blame the reader for having "wasted his life". Because that was his own choice, not the reader's choice. By the way: how can a life that has been lived to the full been wasted? But I guess that's an entirely different discussion... ;)

Kiama	19 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by matfav 1. Counselling Skills 2. Be psychologically assessed to be sane and competent? The problem with number 2 is that many people who would be entrusted with the testing for it would actually pronounce most Tarot readers not to be sane and competent at all: many of the beliefs we hold are also held by schizophrenics and others of a similar mental disposition. The only difference between Tarot readers and schizophrenics is the distress level: shizophrenics are distressed by their beliefs, whereas Tarot readers are not and they use them in their lives to their benefit. The same is true of Witches and neo-Pagans: their beliefs are held also by those who are mentally ill, but the difference between the two groups is that one is distressed by their so-called 'irrational' beliefs, and ther other is not. Currently, any standard schizophrenic test would class most neo-Pagans and Tarot readers as schizophrenic, even though they're not. Research is being done into this subject by a man called Vaughan Bell at Cardiff University. As for counselling skills, I think it would be useful for Tarot readers to have these, because that way the Tarot reader can help the querent more. However, I don't think having a counselling skill or certificate will instantly make anybody more ethical. :( Kiama

Diana	19 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by Kiama The only difference between Tarot readers and schizophrenics is the distress level: shizophrenics are distressed by their beliefs, whereas Tarot readers are not and they use them in their lives to their benefit. Kiama, I can't believe you said this. Please do a Google search on Schizophrenia. I don't even want to get into a discussion on this.

Alissa	19 Sep 2003
"Should Tarot professionals be psychologically pronounced competent?" (Man, I'd never make it, not if I showed them my true self. But I can fool anyone into thinking I'm competent at just about anything - except cooking - if I really try.....)

Umbrae	19 Sep 2003
Sure there are bad readers. Horror stories abound. Not only in the field of tarot reading and counseling, but also in the Medical Profession, which is highly regulated. The field of Law is also rife with charlatans, as is the industry of financial advisors, and don’t forget the insurance field… Each of the above fields is an SRO (self regulating organization), and is also regulated by the federal government, some by numerous agencies. And how about the foxes guarding the hen houses that pronounce each individual in the above ‘regulated’ group as sane and competent. More regulation? How about we look in the mirror ask ourselves if what we do is right and true?

Inana	19 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by tarotlady The responsibility lies with both the reader and the querent. This is sooooo true. I cant agree more. Any reader has to be responsible in the sort of advices he/she gives to the querent, thats all. And a querent has to be mature enough to know his future its on his own hands. I still remember what the woman on the shop were i bought my Rider deck told to me: "Remember that reading for someone is a big responsability". I asume when someone is reading is trying to help, that and a bit of understanding and common sense should be enough. Obviously is not the case in your example Matfav. Thts sad. Kiama, schyzofrenia and other heavy mental diseases have nothing to do with irrational beliefs or how you want to call it. And any religion can be acussed of irrational, not only neo-paganism. Other than that, who is completely sane? Who are we to decide whats normal and what not?

raeanne	19 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by matfav So - I put it to you .... Should Tarot professionals be psychologically pronounced competent ? Nope. In order to pronounce someone competent, you have to have guidelines. If you have guidelines, you have parameters. If you have parameters, you have a box. If you have a box, you lose creativity. If you lose creativity, forget it, life won’t be worth living.

lunalafey	19 Sep 2003
oh-Schizophrenia, that's an intense illness- my children's grandmother was a possible Schizophrenic. Her babble would not be understood by anyone listening.... Now I know that there are 'tests' out there that 'normal' people can take & pass as 51/50. I have said it ever since I was in Jr. high. 'If I took a test on whether I was sane or not, I'd be deemed crazy'- why? because I believe something the majority of the society does not. -example- I know when ghosts are near, can even see them sometimes. I know there is intelligent advanced life out-side of our solar system. Without cards, I have 'counselled' people and they always walk away with some sort of new thought on a new direction. What they do is entirerly up to them. my thoughts on the whole idea? HA- more regulation, that's all we need!!!

Minderwiz	19 Sep 2003
I have to go along with the 'no' vote. There are several big problems that have been pointed out, probably the main one is what constitutes 'competence'. The term implies that there is a 'best' way of doing something and that this is generally accepted - an orthodoxy. My feeling is that the spread of views about what a card, or sequence of cards means amongst tarot readers is likely to be a lot wider than the spread of views amongst doctors about certain medical symptoms and the appropriate treatment. Yes there will be disagreements in medicine, but the 'unorthodox' is likely to be a small minority (and that is not to say that their views are wrong in any way). In tarot I would thing that there will be many 'unorthodox' views and little agreement on whether these views are valid (or an agreement that they are ALL valid, which is nearly as bad). The definition of a competent reader is therefore likely to be elusive for a long time yet. However, there is something to be said for professional paid tarot readers (and doctors and may be even Astrologers for that matter) undertaking a course in counselling. Here we are not looking at professional expertise but the ability to relate to and constructively assist clients to deal with issues.

Nevada	19 Sep 2003
I would hate to see Tarot reading become regulated. I'm sure there are charlatans out there, just as there are in any occupation. But what you're proposing would be impossible to regulate, without some exhorbitant licensing fee. Just another wasted tax, IMO. If you classify this as professional counseling, you're looking at needing at least a master's degree in most states in the US, increasing the expenses for the reader still more. I think most people who go to readers realize they're not seeing a licensed counselor. Of course there are some readers who do have the counseling background, and I'm sure they let their clients know this. You'll also have to give me a better example to convince me of the potential harm. Yes, the reader may have been wrong to tell the querent he would die at 30, but the querent is the one who wasted his life. You also don't mention whether the querent asked to be told how long he would live, and you're taking one person's word for what was said. We hear stories about children who die, who leave positive impacts on others' lives. Many people who have serious health problems that could easily cause them to die prematurely live productive, loving and fulfilling lives, sometimes motivated to do so because they realize they're not immortal, that there's no time to waste.

Kiama	19 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by Diana Kiama, I can't believe you said this. Please do a Google search on Schizophrenia. I don't even want to get into a discussion on this. My reply to this thread is specifically referring to new research being done by a researcher at Cardiff University. His research began because he was unhappy with the present day test to discover schizophrenia (paranoid schizophrenia mainly, not catatonic schizophrenia.) The test taken focuses on the person's beliefs, but quite often these beliefs which are called 'irrational' and used to class somebody as schizophrenic, are those also held by a variety of religions, mainly the neo-Pagan ones, and Tarot readers or magicians. His research has led him to find that the only difference is that schizophrenics are distressed by these 'irrational' beliefs they hold, and they have a detrimental affect of the person's life, whilst the neo-Pagan or Tarot reader is not distressed by the 'irrational' beliefs at all, and use them to benefit their life. This does not apply to catatonic schizophrenia, nor to any of the actions of schizophrenics, but simply the beliefs of many schizophrenics. The researcher is hoping his research will lead to the standard schizoprehnia test to be amended, so that Tarot readers and other who hold what modern science classes as 'irrational' beliefs are not able to be diagnosed as schizophrenic if they are not. (which is possible basically because of all I have just said.) I am not saying that schizophrenia is entirely based on, nor is simply, irrational belief. What I am saying is that Tarot readers and spiritual/religious folk have these 'irrational' beliefs in common with many schizophrenics, and if they were given a standard schizophrenia test, even though they may not be schizophrenic, they probably would be classed as such. This is the reason why I am not sure testing to see if a Tarot reader is psychologically competent or sane would be downfall-free: alot of what we believe as Tarot readers (such as the simple fact that many of us believe we can see the future) is classed by modern science as irrational, and thus many would class us as psychologically incompetant or insane. Even though we are not. Kiama

matfav	19 Sep 2003
The fedback has been really great and worthwhile. I do not think regulating is the answer. And yes your right, by whom However there were moves in Australia to only have licenced counsellors and psychotherapists do any sort of counselling -- and of course fortune telling is some what frowned upon -- so that leaves divination in a grey area unless you belong to a religion or pagan or whatever.... I also feel that is why Tarot organisations are important, as they become self regulating. Aeclectic is important as the general body of Tarot readers and enthusiasts learn lots from the Tarot community. Again great feedback

Moongold	19 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by matfav However there were moves in Australia to only have licenced counsellors and psychotherapists do any sort of counselling -- and of course fortune telling is some what frowned upon -- so that leaves divination in a grey area unless you belong to a religion or pagan or whatever.... I haven't heard this Matfev. Psychologists in Victoria have to be registered under the Psychological Practices Act which grew out of the investigation into scientology many years ago. Otherwise almost anyone can set themselves up as a "Counsellor". The onus is really on the "client" to check out the credentials of the counsellor, which is as it should be. Organizations who employ people as "Counsellors" usually require specific standards, training and references. If bogus counsellors set themselves up and charge unrealistic fees for their services, then the Government's Fair Trading and Consumer affairs people often get involved, usually after complaints. We are relatively lucky as far as Tarot reading is considered. If you do read tarot in the street or at markets or fairs you usually just have to pay a fee for the place you sit at or a local government licence to practice that day - a little like busking :). There are shops here where you can go in and book readings in a private booth or in a practitioners house. Your point about counselling skills is an interesting one. I'd prefer to say qualities like authenticity, wisdom, communication skills. pure intention, integrity are more important. Many lay people have those in great abundance. As a querent that is what I'd be hoping was there in a Reader.

jmd	20 Sep 2003
Regulatory bodies, whether externally enforced or 'internally' determined, only permit those who would 'cheat' in knowing the rules by which to cheat. Tarot organisations are a wonderful way n bringing people of mutual interests together - but when they begin to want to regulate their members, we may really become quite wary as to where this may lead... unless, of course, they specified the truth - for those who aren't sure: Tarot was established in 1196 in a small town near Marseille; Only the Marseille deck is a true Tarot; there is only one way of reading the cards, which consists in (edited to suggest you pay $800 (+GST) to do a course with me); Kabbalisitic associations are intrinsic to the deck, but the GD placed blinds to misguide those who may otherwise stumble (such as placing a zero on the Fool, interchanging Justice (VIII) and Strength (XI), and claiming that Alef is linked to the Fool rather than the Magician) ...mmmm, come to think of it, depending on who does the regulating, it could be quite a nice way to establish oneself. Must talk to the current Victorian Government - as it seems intent on wanting to control and regulate (euphamism: 'reform') as many aspects of individual life as possible ;) ...we could also, of course, develop strict criteria to determine not only what is deemed sane (recognition of the truth as listed above) and insane (using, for example, non-approved Tarot-like decks). As to 'counselling' skills, a new course could be set up to ensure that the right way to approach a topic with a client (and we must use that term) is utilised. New referal processes to more experienced readers could also be established, and formal mentoring and registration review processes established. Also, not to be forgotten, a compulsory Institute of Tarot Readers and Investigators, with compulsory annual subscription... ahhh, I look forward to a permanent paid position in this brave new world (I'll settle for a mere $80Kpa) :):):)

fairyhedgehog	20 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by Moongold Your point about counselling skills is an interesting one. I'd prefer to say qualities like authenticity, wisdom, communication skills. pure intention, integrity are more important. Oddly enough, counselling courses stress the importance of authenticity (often by the name of 'congruence') and integrity. And of course communication skills are a big part of counselling - both how to listen effectively and how to respond. But taking a full-blown counselling course is a huge commitment, as these courses tend to take you apart and leave you to put yourself back together again. It does actually make for a more grounded person who is more available to others - but it is quite a price to pay.

fairyhedgehog	20 Sep 2003
And still on the subject of counselling: counsellors who follow a particular course may differ enormously in how they actually work with clients. There is plenty of room for creativity and individuality. What there isn't room for is unethical work, lack of integrity etc. So, a similar course for Tarot could allow for a hundred different ways of working - but would not allow tarotists to exploit clients, or meet their own power needs through clients, etc. I don't think it is practical though. And I would hate to see Tarot readers put through all the hoops we have to jump through to be a counsellor.

Macavity	20 Sep 2003
I personally have little concern over Tarot itself, but I do admit to a concern over some of the associated, additional services offered e.g. over the internet. These are indeed sometimes restricted by (voluntary?) disclaimers: "I do not practice medicine (does one include counselling?), I do not give advice on matters financial, legal... etc." Yet, sometimes there is the implication of duress and a: "Meet me around the back of the building in an hour and I will!" And indeed there's many folk that (presumably) genuinely believe they CAN provide such services... Yet, with no guidelines, and despite personal beliefs re. competence, diagnostic skills, being "above the law" etc. there must still be a good case for submission to precisely the same requirements of any professional in THAT field? Sure, a lot of so-called "professionals" also provide lousy service, but that proves little. Their job requirement usually includes some (commonly) recognised training, some recognised qualifications, but above all, the possibility of redress against bad or dangerous malpractices. Such a service might even require (shock horror!) a permanent traceable address too? If my GP prescribes the wrong treatment (and I don't die) I can sue him for malpractice or, failing that, go bang on his door... or (as I am often tempted!) HIM maybe? }) Caveat emptor indeed, but I think many folk simply are not "at their best" when seeking life-changing advice. Common sense, but above all, an aknowledgement of one's own limitations should still prevail? Macavity

Moongold	20 Sep 2003
Somehow, I doubt this is ever likely to happen here, unless there is ever legislation called theEsoteric Practices Act or something like that. Or there is overarching Act relating to Health Counselling and we are given a mention in the regulations. This would be a negative thing probably. We'll end up being regulated without much thought having gone into it. Tarot reading is too small a thing to warrant much attention from our legislators at the moment I reckon, and that's good.

truthsayer	20 Sep 2003
the only kind of licensing i've ever heard of is due to a law here outlawing divination/fortunetelling unless you are an ordained minister. you can get around this by contacting this church which for some reason i cannot recall it's name and you'll be given a legal license to practice with. to my knowledge it is only good in the usa. i am a trained counselor and registered minister with this church so i suppose that means i can read tarot legally and professionally. if anyone can remember the name of the church i'd appreciate being told. it seems that it has a variant of the word unity in it.

Minderwiz	20 Sep 2003
Moongold is right to point out that a regulatory body would need some legal basis and given the attitude of legislators to Tarot and other Esoteric practices, that just isn't going to happen in the UK (and the EU) or the USA. Indeed current legislation assumes that Tarot readers are either entertainers or otherwise, are fraudulently trying to obtain money, by telling clients things that they (the readers) couldn't possibly know and therefore must have fabricated. A number of Astrologers describe themselves as 'counsellors' (and I guess that some Tarot readers might do the same). I feel that if you are going to describe yourself as a counsellor then you should have some training in counselling. To be fair, I think that most of the Astrologers who use this title do indeed have counselling qualifications and I'm sure that this helps in their work. I do acknowledge that for many professionals the cost of training as a counsellor may well be high (in terms of time, money and self examination) - and may not be worth it. However I would hope that they do not use the title.

Dark Inquisitor	21 Sep 2003
The subject of this thread really makes me think that it is an ideal way for people who are against tarot to legislate professional reading out of existence. Since they have been unable to do it any other way so far. There are plenty of licensed counselors, therapists , & psychiatrists who are real jerks . But they are able to pass tests. Tarotphelia

Moongold	21 Sep 2003
Hello Tarotphelia, It's nice to see your name again. I don't think Tarot readers are at risk of being legislated out of existence - not here anyway. There are not enough of us and people are not really interested I think. Maybe the US, with the strong fundamentalist thread throughout the culture, is more at risk of this happening. I'm not sure. Blessings

wavebreaker	21 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by Tarotphelia There are plenty of licensed counselors, therapists , & psychiatrists who are real jerks . But they are able to pass tests. Exactly. I've seen it happen in other areas. People can learn the tricks to pass a test and get a certificate, but as soon as they have the certificate, they will do whatever they like. Which is why I don't place much value on certificates myself, but prefer to look at someone's intentions, integrity etc. That is something that cannot be properly tested (yes, you can test people on, for example, ethics, but during the test they will simply give the answer that they are supposed to give, and then put all ethics aside once they have their piece of paper that is supposed to be proof of their ethical standards).

jmd	21 Sep 2003
Oh dear... in my previous post, I said that someone could pay me $800 (+GST) - making a local total of $880 - to do a course. I have just found that matfav, the thread-starter, has a course with such a price. I meant mine in jest, and as a weekend or such short course. A $800 year-long course, given that we are talking about the diminutive Australian dollar, is quite reasonable - though it depends, as a matter of course, on the course, of course! Just thought I should mention that I in no way implied nor referred to matfav's course when previously posting. We may have differing views on many matters related to Tarot, but this makes conversations all the richer.:)

Dark Inquisitor	21 Sep 2003
Quote: Originally posted by Moongold Hello Tarotphelia, It's nice to see your name again. Maybe the US, with the strong fundamentalist thread throughout the culture, is more at risk of this happening. I'm not sure. Blessings Thank you Moongold ! You are right about the US- there are strong fundamentalist leanings still here that would make legislation more likely. It usually starts off small with some very logical sounding arguments . Protect the public, etc. Then one thing predicates another and if enough of the public doens't care, it will get passed into law. Probably a lot of the public doesn't really care about tarot readers & thinks we are a bunch of fools & public menaces anyway. For example, Chicago has a problem with gang graffiti being spray painted on buildings. It costs too much to remove it. Therefore, spray paint is banned- you can't buy or sell it . Ridiculous. Tarotphelia

jmd	21 Sep 2003
Moongold, I am very sad to inform you that Victoria has quite repressive laws currently in existence. Check this one out, and search for the word 'fortune' (as part of 'fortune telling'): http://www.dms.dpc.vic.gov.au/l2d/V/ACT01245/4_3.html This particular act, though unused in many situations, can still be acted on by certain individuals if they so wished. A few years ago, it was hoped by the Pagan Network and numerous others that this section of the act, and similar ones in Qld, Tas. and SA would be repealed - but the modifications were, to say the least, virtually worthless - despite quite serious recommendations from legal bodies. It all hinges, of course, on the meaning and definition of 'fortune telling'...

Moongold	21 Sep 2003
Ouch, JMD!! :D I actually got a librarian at Melbourne University Law School to do a search for me six months ago and she came up with nothing, so there you go. I notice the legislation is 1966, but acknowledge that this does not stop it from being used. Victoria is looking at some of that very old legislation and abandoning it (cf Alcohol and Drug Dependent Persons Act 1960 something........) but they have obviously not got to vagrancy yet. But the thought occurs - you could be a fortune teller and not a Vagrant :D. Would that exempt you? Must check it out more.

jmd	21 Sep 2003
The Act was last updated in December 2000. For those who have not read the actual Act, many parts of which are actually worrying, the relevant section (section 13 (!)) reads: '13. Fortune telling and pretending to exercise witchcraft etc. Any person who pretends or professes to tell fortunes or uses any subtle craft means or device by palmistry or otherwise to defraud or impose on any other person or pretends to exercise or use any kind of witchcraft sorcery enchantment or conjuration or pretends from his skill or knowledge in any occult or crafty science to discover where or in what manner any goods or chattels stolen or lost may be found shall be guilty of an offence.' Unfortunately, other laws also apply (so-called 'fraud' legislation, and a number of others). But to return to the main thrust of the thread, to regulate Tarot reading and investigation would have, may I suggest, possible disastrous consequences. In contra-distinction, recently in France, Pinot (the artist of the Tarot de la Félicité) was the equivalent of artist-in-residence at a State school, under the Minister for Education's auspice, to design a Tarot deck with the children of the school - it was deemed a quite legitimate part of history and culture! ... now if only we could legitimise Tarot to that extent in other places, rather than talk of legislation or regulation...

mondk	22 Sep 2003
This has been a most interesting thread to for me to read. I do believe in a bit of "tarot ethics" when it comes to readings, but I also think the querent that fully believed he was going to be dead by age 30 was a bit off his own rocker to put that much faith in tarot cards! I'd question that man's competence as a querent! So, that said, just what is your all's definition of "competent"? Especially "psychologically competent"? Does that mean you want to label people suffering from a mental illness and prohibit them from reading when they may indeed have a gift of helping people? PRIME EXAMPLE: I am bipolar, manic-depressive, or however else you want to label it/me. I do not charge for readings and I do use them as a sort of counseling tool. I am not bothered at all by my beliefs in the tarot. I personally feel the tarot is misused by several to make "dire" predictions or to try to shape another's life. I feel that is plain stupid. Both on the part of the reader and on the part of the querent(s). I question all those querents' competence that base their life on a tarot reading. I feel those types of people are very codependent and needy and probably shouldn't even have their tarot read because they cannot think for themselves or shape their own futures. Do I feel tarot readings should be regulated? Yes, for those that charge for them. For those that don't charge and strictly provide services as a "party quirk" or whatever, no biggie. We all know there have been tarot readers out there that charged an arm and a leg and have been sued. I feel that yes, those readers should have a master's in psychology or enough sense to be able to follow a strict set of guidelines for themselves and/or a written form to be signed by querents detailing exactly what they are getting themselves into and to let them know that tarot isn't a definitive answer to problems etc. We know there are unfortunately, bad readers out there who take your money and run. It is a type of swindling and I do think in those instances a law should be imposed with consequences enforced. But, if you are going to try to take away my rights as a free reader just because I am bipolar, then I suppose you'd want my nursing license too? Blessings, Michelle

The Should Tarot professionals be psychologically pronounced competent ? thread was originally posted on 19 Sep 2003 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.