ABSTRACT
This chapter traces the development of naturopathy in Britain in the interwar years, a period associated with increased involvement by the central state in the funding of services through National Health Insurance (NHI) and planning for the National Health Service (NHS). The failure of efforts by osteopaths to gain state recognition in the 1930s has been seen as evidence of further consolidation of the relationship between the state and the orthodox medical profession with a concomitant weakening of the position of unorthodox healers (Cooter, 1988; Larkin, 1992; Saks, 1992). Research findings presented here demonstrate that, despite these far-reaching changes to the market for health services, naturopaths achieved significant improvements in their profile and established viable practices offering distinctive therapies in this period. Despite low numbers – only a few hundred practitioners in the 1930s – British naturopaths were able to take steps to forge an identity separate from other unqualified healers and differentiate themselves from the orthodox profession. One of the methods they used to achieve this was the publication of books and periodicals aimed at the general public which explained the philosophy of nature cure and its basic therapeutic practices. A number of associations were established to strengthen links between individual practitioners and particular consideration was given to the need to improve and standardise training. Naturopaths endorsed the principle of self-regulation and opposed the attempts of osteopaths to secure a system of state registration on the basis that this might restrict their own practice. They were also active in the British Health Freedom Society (BHFS), which lobbied to safeguard the right of patients to freedom of choice of practitioner and sought to ensure that unorthodox healers were not disadvantaged by the expansion of a state-funded system of health care. Although this campaign was only partially successful, the crucial principle of freedom to choose and receive treatment from unqualified healers was safeguarded under legislation introducing the NHS. This principle was fundamental in shaping the market conditions that allowed naturopaths to continue to practice their distinctive approach. The gains made by naturopaths in the interwar period demonstrate that the growth of state-funded health services did not necessarily lead to a decline in unorthodox practice.
