Council Chair Little Denies Conflicts, Takes no Responsibility

In a four page letter, the Council on Chiropractic Education (CCE) responded, in part, to a letter from the Movement for Chiropractic Quality & Integrity (MCQI).

In all, the CCE provided responses to 11 questions regarding their role and responsibility in regards to accreditation. The CCE refused to answer one question regarding its condemnation of the actions of the International Chiropractors Association stating the question mischaracterized facts and did not warrant a response.

In response to questions regarding conflicts of interest, especially regarding Dr. Craig Little and his role as a member of the West Hartford Group and an avowed subluxation denier, the CCE remained adament that there are no conflicts of interest and that their Conflict of Interest Policy is enforced. Humorously, the letter from the CCE was written by Dr. Craig Little himself.

In response to a question about why the CCE refuses to allow recordings of the Stakeholders meetings Dr. Little admits it is up to the Council but states such recordings “would be counterproductive.”

When asked why students have not been invited to Stakeholder meetings by the CCE, Little responds that student input is handled at the college or programmatic level and, its assumed, the schools and site teams are then responsible for bringing the concerns of the students to the CCE. This was an interesting response considering that the over 12,000 students currently enrolled in chiropractic programs worldwide have not been asked to participate in any Stakeholder meetings with the CCE during the current accreditation crisis.

One of the more curious responses to questions posed by MCQI dealt with oversight of the “drug and surgery curriculum” at Western States Chiropractic College. MCQI shared that at one of the Stakeholder meetings the CCE stated that they do not accredit this aspect of Western States program. MCQI asked who was monitoring that aspect of the curriculum if not the CCE?

While Dr. Little’s response goes on for four lengthy paragraphs he never answers the question regarding oversight of training in drugs and surgery at Western States.

In his closing remarks Little emphasizes that the CCE values educational freedom and institutional autonomy. That the CCE does not support any particular philosophy regarding the principles and practice of chiropractic. Little asserts an oft repeated claim that the CCE Standards do not establish the scope of chiropractic practice.

While this assertion is the obvious politically correct response, these issues lay at the heart of the current and ongoing controversy. Whether or not this is true is belied by the reality that state boards, regulatory agencies, state associations and individual chiropractors do look to and enforce a standard of care based on the training provided by CCE accredited schools. The CCE would no doubt assert that they have no control over this despite the evidence and concerns, even at the Federal level, that there is a Cartel operating within the chiropractic profession that does exactly that.