Search

Background The main focus of the Traditional Health Practitioners Act No 22 (2007) is the regulation of traditional healing in South Africa. The role player who has to deliver this traditional health service to the public is the statutorily recognized traditional health practitioner. However, thus far the precise health practice offered, training and the practitioner’s role as a healer in the society, have not been clearly defined. The various definitions and descriptions in the literature of the identity of the traditional healer are contradictory, making the formulation of a single definition and meaning impossible. Aims The study aimed to determine a definition for traditional health practitioner. Methods This is an exploratory and descriptive study in line with the modern historical approach of the investigation and review of the available research. The emphasis is on using documentation like articles, books and newspapers as primary resources to reflect on everyday thinking and opinions around the identity of the traditional healer. The findings are represented in narrative format. Results The Traditional Health Practitioners Act’s regulations, as embedded in its 52 Sections, create a legal framework of definitions. One specific definition outlines what is meant by the traditional health practitioner. This definition includes four sub-types of healers, namely the diviner, herbalist, traditional birth attendant and traditional surgeon. Various other names for and types of traditional healers seem to exists outside the Act’s statutory definitions. It also seems as if the practice scopes, training and methods of diagnosis and treatments of these different healers are not uniform. Conclusion It seems that the legal definition of a traditional health practitioner, as offered by the Traditional Health Practitioners Act No 22, is vague and insufficiently formulated. This shortcoming frustrates the intention of the Act to make the traditional health practitioner the exclusive role player who has to deliver a traditional health service to the public

Background In 2007, a practice directive was issued for the new legal entity traditional health practitioner with the promulgation of the Traditional Health Practitioners Act (No 22 of 2007) in the Republic of South Africa. Although the Act describes this new pathway in terms of various definitions, the future practice rights and impact on healthcare were left undefined and unwritten. To date the negative legal implications and career consequences that the Act has for the regulated health practitioners, have gone unnoticed. The derogation and degrading of their work domains and rights, seem of no concern.1 Aims The aim of the present study is to determine and describe the unwritten new practice rights of the traditional health practitioner. Methods This is an exploratory and descriptive study in line with the modern historical approach of investigation by means of a literature review. The emphasis is on using documentation such as articles, books and newspapers as primary resources to reflect on the traditional health practitioner’s new unsaid and unwritten future practice rights. Results The future practice and services of traditional health practitioners seem to incorporate many new unwritten practice rights and activities, which is contrary to the Act’s written intentions. Conclusion The new traditional health practitioner‘s future practice rights are legally comprehensive and masked. It holds serious consequences for the practices of the established healthcare professions.

Background Before the promulgation of the Traditional Health Practitioners Act No 22 (2007), there was no formal guideline or training culture to steer traditional healing in South Africa. Training was and is still mostly informal. Sometimes a new healer is trained by other traditional healers. In many cases, the traditional healer is self-taught without any learning whatsoever. Aims The present study aims to describe the various resolutions of the Act to plan, develop and manage traditional healthcare training in the future. Methods This is an exploratory and descriptive study in line with the modern historical approach of investigation and review. The emphasis is on using contemporary documentation, like articles, books and newspapers, as primary resources to reflect on the development and promulgation of the Traditional Health Practitioners Act No 22 (2007). The findings are offered in a narrative format. Results It seems that Act No 22 (2007) was promulgated without comprehensive research and in-depth discussion on training with all the role players who have a vested interest. Conclusion It is clear that training ideals such as formal study programmes, qualified staff and institutional bodies to train and to educate future traditional healers are not immediately attainable. The nearly ten years of minimal activity to enact Act No 22 since its promulgation confirms this failure. Inexpensive and uncomplicated training paths are needed until a system can be developed. One such path is the continuation of informal in-house training with another traditional healer