Voices ResourcesA website for the worldwide community around the journal Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy

Japanese Music Therapy Association (JMTA, former Japanese Federation of Music Therapy) started to certify music therapists since 1997 on the association base, and presently there are more than 700 certified music therapists in Japan. On the other hand realizing the state approved music therapist's has been one of the most critical issues for JMTA, because it is expected to raise our position in society. However, it is not an easy subject considering the diverse levels in practices throughout the nation and the short history it has been handled as an academic field in this country.

As Bruscia has described, the three different facets of music therapy - music, science and interpersonal process - can be too contradictory for general society to accept music therapist as a serious career (Bruscia, 1998). So most of us were not expecting its realization in near future.

However, there was a new movement in the Japanese assembly this spring-summer. With some political reason, the assemblymen union was formed all of a sudden to promote the legislation for the state certification of music therapist at the instance of House members. And they instructed JMTA to present the explanatory materials on music therapy and the training curriculum as soon as possible. The board of JMTA tried to respond to this requirement urgently having not enough time to hear the diverse opinions among the association members. The process was even chaotic because of the complexity of politics and the differences in interests among music therapists.

The controversy reached the summit when the fact revealed that this state certification's title will not be "ongaku-ryohoshi (music therapist)" but "ongaku-hoken-fukushishi (worker for health and welfare with music), and the training curriculum is open to junior colleges and special schools (usually two-year education). As we are all aware, music therapist is not just a care staff who can play some instruments, but a true musician who knows about human-music relationship from various aspects. Also we are all aware that music therapists' training is said to be not enough even in four-year university education, and for example in USA there have been discussed to establish a higher level certification for those who received the advanced level training.

To this Japanese assembly's proposal which was rather lower level certification than most of us had in our mind, there were mainly three reactions:

1. It is welcoming anyway that the state is willing to certify us whatever the title/education is, because it will result more budget flowing into our profession suffering from very low or even no income.
2. It is not an ideal certification in terms of title and the training system, but we should accept it as one big chance for the time being. We could create the higher-level certification on the association base later.
3. This certification is a too easy compromise, and it will spoil the trust and understanding we have been building through our every day work. Unless the title is "music therapist" and the training standard is set reasonably high, we should reject the proposal itself.

I myself was on the side of 3, because I have been feeling Japanese music therapy position in society had developed too rapidly while the substance of the profession is still too immature. I think we should not hurry to make just the exterior of the profession, but enrich the content first (Ikuno, 2001, 2003).

In the midst of this controversy, the Third Congress of JMTA was held on October 19, 2003 (at Seitoku University, Congress Chair: Dr. Yasuji Murai). In this Congress, the process of the state-certification possibility so far was explained by Dr. Murai to the JMTA general members, and the issue was taken up by other speakers as well. According to the explanation of Dr. Murai, through the negotiation with the assemblymen's union, JMTA after all insisted the title "music therapist", and also suggested the 95-credit curriculum which is even a higher standard compared to the present four-year university program. I was personally glad to hear this result, and expected the discussions afterwards which should focus on the professional identity issue: What makes music therapy unique from other forms of therapies/interventions; How we should communicate the role of music to other professions; How we can convince society with this high standard of music therapist certification, etc. However I felt somewhat disappointed, hearing the questions asked from the participants which were mainly on different subjects: When the new curriculum will come into effect; How the present school systems can digest that many numbers of credits; If the state certification is realized, what happens to the people who already have the present association-certification; If they failed the state examination, what their destinies would be, etc.. In summery the questions and the discussion were on the realistic procedure in order to get (or protect) the benefit out of the music therapy certification. In fact, most of these questions were from teachers of schools already had the students of music therapy. To my impression, they seemed to be more interested in survival of their schools than survival of music therapy.

In this critical moment of Japanese music therapy, I think we should discuss and deepen more about what the music therapist essentially is, than how to manage its political climate. If we did not think about our own identity for ourselves, who in the society would think/develop/protect it? It is so easy for music therapy to be used and deformed by commercialism/politics in this economic society. Of course we must live in and develop music therapy in this economic society, but my opinion is that in order to swim in reality, we need the philosophy first. Only by doing so, we can make this big chance of state certification a true turning point for us.

However, to me Japanese music therapists' (or Japanese society itself) are hurrying to swim in reality first vaguely expecting the philosophy to follow someday in the form of adjusting to the faits accomplis. A statement made by Juro Saito, the assemblyman who was the guest speaker of the JMTA Congress lingers in my ears: "In my experiences of witnessing other state-certifications establishment processes in past, those who had studied the field abroad and become the pioneer in Japan tend to insist the ideal level of the profession which is too high to begin with. I think it is very important for them to adjust to the realistic situation of Japanese society in order to realize the state certification anyway."

I wonder if we really need the state certification of that kind, only because our work can be authorized by the government. Or, what I am feeling is just an Americanized music therapists' self-righteousness? I am experiencing a dilemma within my own culture.

References:

Bruscia, Kennth (1998). Defining Music Therapy. Barcelona Publishers.

Ikuno, Rika (2003). The Age of Human-related Professions and the Personnel Cost: Is it Too Expensive? Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy. Retrieved October 21, 2003

Ikuno, Rika (2001). Music Therapy Growth in Japan - The Richness and the Confusion of Transition. Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy. Retrieved April 20, 2001

How to cite this page

Ikuno, Rika (2003) A True Turning Point: Report on the Process of State Approved Certification of Music Therapist in Japan. Voices Resources. Retrieved January 14, 2015, from http://testvoices.uib.no/community/?q=fortnightly-columns/2003-true-turning-point-report-process-state-approved-certification-music-therap