Download pdf version
Download pdf copy


The International Council of PsychoCorporal (Bodymind) Integration Trainers (ICPIT) recognizes that clients (individual clients, group participants, students, assistants) or colleagues may lodge complaints against Postural Integrators. And also that Postural Integrators (individual practitioners, group leaders, teachers or colleagues) may lodge complaints against clients.

These disputes may be clarified by consulting the Code of Ethics (ICPIT Guidelines for Interactions Between Postural Integrators, Group Leaders, Teachers and Their Clients). ICPIT offers a procedure by which these complaints can be acknowledged and recommendations made to the parties involved.

1. Complaint Received
Parties involved try to communicate with each other without involving other individuals or groups. If this fails, only then, if both agree, do they go to the second step.

2. Initial Mediation
Parties look for a third party to mediate. Friends, or other practitioners may recornmend a neutral mediator. If this fails, only then, if both agree, go to the next step.

3. Complaint Goes to Local Association or Trainer
Local association is asked (or if there is no association, a local trainer, who is a member of ICPIT or if there is no trainer, proceed to next step), if both parties agree, to review the complaint and make recommendations about how to proceed without impugning either party. If this fails, only then, if both parties agree, go to the next step.

4. Complaint Goes to ICPIT
If ICPIT receives a complaint from either or both parties, it recommends the previous steps. If these steps have been exhausted, only then, with the agreement of both parties, ICPIT gives recommendations on further mediation.
ICPIT will not, itself, mediate or furnish a mediator, but will make recommendations to both parties about how to go about mediation. As long as both parties wish, ICPIT will give advice on establishing, maintaining and concluding the process of mediation.

If there is a complaint against a practitioner which is not resolved by the previous steps, these are possibilities:

  1. Practitioner's Denial: In case the practitioner denies the allegations, it is important the Council respect both complainant and practitioner. It is important that the Council communicate to the complainant that the charge has been taken seriously and that the practitioner has been informed and has denied the accusations. The Council makes clear to both complainant and practitioner that it remains to assist in any further communication between both.

  2. Practitioner Accepts Responsibility: The practitioner is invited to appear at an ICPIT meeting to share what is happening. Complainant is informed, but not invited. The Council facilitates a discussion with the practitioner of the appropriateness of continued, suspended or temporarily suspended bodywork by the practitioner. Council may also recommend individual sessions with a supervisor to practitioner.

  3. Practitioner's Denial Under Questionable Circumstances: There might be repeated unresolved complaints or a legal judgment against the practitioner, even when there is a denial by the practitioner. The Council's role would be the same as in the case where the practitioner accepts responsibility, without the Council making judgments about what occurred or who is responsible. Again the Council may recommend sessions of supervision to the practitioner

5. Complainant is Informed
In 4b and 4c the complainant is sent a letter explaining the activities of the Council and it’s agreements with the practitioner about his or her future activity.