This circular advises local authorities of the
outcome of the Home Office's review of the Hypnotism Act 1952 and
sets out revised model conditions which authorities are encouraged
to attach to licences for public performances of stage hypnotism.
Background
2.On 12 December 1994 the House of Commons held an adjournment debate
to discuss public and parliamentary concern about alleged harm suffered
by some participants in public performances of stage hypnotism. This
followed a period when several cases of alleged harm had received
considerable media attention. The cases concerned both physical and
psychological effects. At the end of the debate the then Home Office
Minister, Mr Michael Forsyth, announced that a review was to be undertaken
into the workings of the Hypnotism Act 1952.The review would examine
evidence of possible harm to people taking part in public entertainments
involving hypnotism and consider the appropriateness of the present
regime of control that the Act provides, including existing arrangements
for enforcement.
3.The review of medical evidence and available research literature
was carried out by a panel of experts who were nominated by the British
Psychological Society and the Royal College of Psychiatrists. The
panel members were not experts in hypnosis but were appointed on the
strength of their professional expertise in the evaluation of clinical
evidence and research literature.
4.The Home Office issued a questionnaire to all local authorities
in England and Wales in March 1995 which sought information about
current licensing practice (eg, whether separate authority is required
for each performance and whether conditions are imposed), the numbers
of performances taking place and the extent to which problems have
been encountered. Almost 300 (over 70%)of the authorities replied.
The Scottish Office conducted a similar exercise and received a further
51 replies.
5.Publication of the expert panel's report was announced in Parliament
on 7 November 1995.The panel concluded that there was no evidence
of serious risk to participants in stage hypnosis,and that any risk
which does exist is much less significant than that involved in many
other activities.They considered that the small potential risk which
does exist could be alleviated through applying clearer conditions
to the regulation of performances and providing more information to
audiences to enable them to make an informed choice before deciding
whether to participate.
6.On 18 December 1995 the Home Office issued a consultation paper
which proposed how the recommendations of the expert panel and the
issues raised by local authorities might best be addressed,and included
draft revised model conditions.
7.We received 39 responses direct from stage hypnotists,local authorities
and other interested parties.In addition,the Association of District
Councils and the Association of Metropolitan Authorities provided
summaries of responses received from their members.
Changes which would require legislation
8.Some of the issues arising from the review could only be addressed
through primary legislation. These are set out at paragraphs 9 -13
below. There is no immediate prospect of legislation to amend the
1952 Act,but we have indicated those changes which we consider potential
candidates for legislation when an opportunity arises.In that event,any
additional burden or cost thereby imposed would have to be justified
under a formal process of compliance cost and risk assessment.
Local authority charges
9.There was general agreement in the responses to the consultation
paper that local authorities outside London should be able to charge
a fee for granting approval for stage hypnotism performances under
the 1952 Act (such provision already exists for London authorities).It
was regarded as inequitable that where applicants do not hold a public
entertainments licence (PEL)the local authority has to meet the administrative
and enforcement costs of licensing a commercial event from resources
which might otherwise have been spent on local services.
10.Any future legislation would need to incorporate safeguards to
prevent excessive charging.This might mean prohibiting further charges
where the venue already held an annual PEL and limiting the charge
for other approvals to no more than the cost of an occasional licence.
Powers of entry
11.The 1952 Act provides a power of entry for police constables where
it is believed that a performance is taking place,or may be taking
place,in contravention of the Act. There was strong support in the
responses to the consultation paper for extending such a power to
local authority officers. Whilst the Home Office would be willing
to consider such a legislative amendment,we are content that a power
of entry can effectively be provided for now by attaching a condition
to that effect when approval is granted.Such a provision is included
at Section 4(o)in the attached revised model conditions.
Private performances
12.There was some support for extending regulatory powers to cover
private performances,but the vast majority of respondents thought
the current legislation sufficient.Any attempt to regulate private
performances would run into difficulties of definition as well as
enforcement and,given the low level of risk identified by the review,we
can see no justification for it.
Appeals procedures
13.There was also some support for incorporating a formal appeals
procedure into the legislation,but most respondents supported development
of local appeals procedures.The way in which local authorities process
applications varies enormously,some being dealt with by officers under
delegated powers whilst others are considered by councillors at committee
meetings.For an appeals mechanism to be effective it needs to reflect
these local procedures.One particular difficulty with an appeals mechanism
is that unless the appeal can be heard and a judgement made relatively
quickly it will often be too late to hold the performance whatever
the outcome. Local authorities are encouraged to develop their own
appeals procedures,taking due account of issues such as speed,the
independence of the appeals body and cost.
Improvements to the present licensing arrangements
14.One particular criticism made in the consultation was that local
authorities often have little information or understanding about the
activity they are licensing. The organisations representing stage
hypnotists have argued that hypnotists should be able to apply to
a central licensing body for an annual performance licence.
15.Local authorities are responsible for all other public entertainments
licensing and were opposed to losing control of stage hypnotism licensing.
However,there was strong support for establishing a central information
point to which local authorities could refer for information on performers
whose acts had caused concern.This would save them time and resources
when considering applications. Any such information point would
need to incorporate adequate safeguards to ensure that information
held was accurately and fairly recorded.
16.It has been suggested that either the Local Authority Co-ordinating
Body on Food and Trading Standards (LACOTS)or The Local Government
Licensing Forum might be able to provide this information.The Home
Office is consulting those organisations and the local authority associations
about the feasibility of such a scheme.If a central information point
is established details will be passed to authorities through the local,authority
associations.
Revised model conditions
17.The model conditions annexed to this circular incorporate a number
of revisions to those included with the consultation paper issued
on 18 December 1995.Our aim has been to keep administrative requirements
to a minimum and to include only those conditions which are justified
by the level of risk found by the review.It would be for individual
local authorities to include additional conditions if they thought
this necessary to meet local circumstances.
18.The main changes to the model conditions are as follows (the references
to previous sections relate to the draft model conditions attached
to the December 1995 consultation paper):
Sections 1 &2:there is no reason why a local authority should
require hypnotists to seek specific authority for all their stage
performances,even where the venue holds a public entertainments licence
(PEL).Local authorities are encouraged to allow stage hypnotism to
take place under the PEL as long as the model conditions are adhered
to and the authority is given adequate notice to enable it to amend
the conditions or refuse authority for a particular performance within
a specified period after notification is received.In such situations,where
the local authority may merely wish to check the hypnotist's previous
experience,the required notice period should be kept to a minimum.
The strict requirement for 28 days' notice of performances can seriously
constrain stage hypnotists' ability to accept work,by preventing them
from taking bookings at short notice. Local authorities are therefore
encouraged, even where the venue does not hold a PEL,to accept shorter
notice where possible,for example,if the hypnotist has previously
performed at the venue without problems. Advertising,ticket sales
etc,cannot reasonably go ahead until approval is granted and local
authorities are encouraged to set targets for reaching decisions quickly.
Some local authorities saw no reason for most applications to be
copied to fire authorities.We have therefore left this to local authorities'
discretion.
Section 3fa):as there are no officially recognised qualifications
or organisations,we have removed the request for details of previous
experience,relevant qualifications and membership of any relevant
organisation.This has been replaced with a request for details of
the hypnotist's last three performances,to give an indication of the
hypnotist's experience and allow the authority to make any necessary
checks.
Previous section 2fb):we have removed the request for a description
of the content of the proposed performance.On reflection we consider
that as long as the hypnotist abides by the model conditions it is
not necessary to have details of the exact content.It would be difficult
to provide if the hypnotist is to have some discretion to tailor the
performance to the nature of the audience.
Section 3(b):we have added a final sentence in brackets. Previous
refusal of a permission may have nothing to do with the acceptability
or otherwise of the individual hypnotist.
Previous sections 3(a)&(b):these have been deleted because they
related to the prior notification of the proposed content of the performance.
Section 4(b):the statement to be included on posters and programmes
has been revised.The purpose of the statement is to help ensure that
the audience are aware that participation remains entirely voluntary
and do not feel forced to participate against their will.
Section 4(c):we have amended the insurance cover requirement to allow
for it to be met by either the venue or the hypnotist.We have also
removed the minimum level.The relatively low level of risk identified
by the review does not necessarily justify a requirement for £1,000,000
insurance cover;local authorities will wish to make a judgement in
relation to other relevant factors, such as the type and size of venue.We
have added a requirement for proof of insurance cover to be available
for inspection.
Section 4(e):this now makes it clear that the requirement for a line
across the stage is only necessary when the stage is raised above the
level of the auditorium.The condition also allows an exception to the
prohibition on volunteers crossing the line,where they are told to do
so as part of the performance (many performances include a participant
being sent back to their seat only to keep returning to the stage having
supposedly forgotten something),
Section 4(f):the final sentence before the suggested statement now
indicates that the statement may be amended as necessary so long as
the overall message remains the same.
Section 4(q):we have removed the prohibition on the use of inducements
because this can be interpreted very widely and is not thought to
add anything to the risks involved.The condition is now aimed exclusively
at preventing use of any form of coercion to force participation.
Section 4fh):this now relates to any requirement for attendants to
be present specifically in relation to the hypnotism performance.Any
wider requirement for attendants should have been considered when
the PEL was issued or,if there is no PEL,can be separately considered
by the local authority and added to this condition.
Section 4(i)(i):a hypnotist may often ask volunteers to behave as
if they were a child;this is not age regression,which seeks to take
the subject back to their own childhood.
Section 4(i)(iv):we have limited the prohibition to the consumption
of harmful or noxious substances.In terms of risk to participants,there
is no reason to prevent hypnotists from using normal edible items
(onions,lemons,etc).
Previous section 3(l)(vi):this prohibited any suggestion which,if
it occurred in reality,would cause anxiety or distress.Such a condition
would prohibit many of the fanciful suggestions which hypnotists use
as a part of their act. In practice volunteers do not react as if
they truly believe that there is,for example,a giant spider behind
them or a bomb under their chair.The opening sentence of section 4(j)prohibits
any action which would be likely to cause harm,anxiety or distress.
Section 4(n):the additional sentence in brackets makes it clear that
the hypnotist should not treat any problems beyond offering general
reassurance and confirmation that all suggestions have been removed.
Section 4(o):as mentioned at paragraph 11 above,this provides a right
of entry for local authority officers. Refusal would amount to a breach
of the conditions and therefore an offence under the 1952 Act. Any
future legislation to include a general power of entry for local authority
officers could extend this power to cases where a performance is taking
place in contravention of the Act,whether or not approval had been
sought.
Enquiries
19.Please address any comments or questions arising from this circular
to:
David Dlpple
Liquor,Gambling &Data Protection Unit
Home Office
Room 1183
50 Queen Anne's Gate
LONDON SW1P 9AT
Tel:0171 273 3158
20. The Annex to Home Office Circular No 42/1989 is hereby superseded.
MRS J M FLASCHNER
Annex to Home Office Circular No 39/1996
MODEL CONDITIONS TO BE ATTACHED TO LICENCES FOR THE PERFORMANCE
OF STAGE HYPNOTISM
Consents
1.Any exhibition,demonstration or performance (hereafter referred
to as a "performance")of hypnotism (as defined in the Hypnotism
Act 1952)on any person requires the express written consent of the
licensing authority and must comply with any attached conditions.The
authority may consent either under the terms of a public entertainments
licence or under the provisions of the Hypnotism Act 1952.
Applications
2.An application for consent under condition 1 shall be in writing
and signed by the applicant or his agent and shall normally be made
not less than 28 days in advance of the performance concerned.This
period may be reduced in the case of a hypnotist who has performed
at the same venue within the last three years without any problems
occurring.The authority will normally respond within 7-14 days;less
where the hypnotist has previously performed at the same venue.The
applicant must at the same time forward a copy of the application
to the chief officer of police;and the authority may also copy it
to the local fire authority if it considers this necessary.
3.The application shall contain the following;
(a)the name (both real and stage,if different)and address of the
person who will give the performance (hereafter referred to as the
"hypnotist"), along with details of their last three performances
(where and when); and
(b)a statement as to whether,and if so giving full details thereof,the
hypnotist has been previously refused,or had withdrawn,a consent by
any licensing authority or been convicted of an offence under the
Hypnotism Act 1952 or of an offence involving the breach of a condition
regulating or prohibiting the giving of a performance of hypnotism
on any person at a place licensed for public entertainment. (Refusal
of consent by another authority does not necessarily indicate that
the particular hypnotist is unacceptable and will not of itself prejudice
the application.)
Conditions
4.The following conditions shall apply to any consent given:
Publicity
(a)no poster,advertisement or programme for the performance which
is likely to cause public offence shall be displayed,sold or supplied,by
or on behalf of the licensee either at the premises or elsewhere;
(b)every poster,advertisement or programme for the performance which
is displayed,sold or supplied shall include,clearly and legibly,the
following statement: "Volunteers,who must be aged 18 or over,can
refuse at any point to continue taking part in the performance."
Insurance
(c)the performance shall be covered to a reasonable level by public
liability insurance.The hypnotist must provide evidence of this to
the local authority if requested;and it must be available for inspection
at the performance;
Physical arrangements
(d)the means of access between the auditorium and the stage for participants
shall be properly lit and free from obstruction;
(e)a continuous white or yellow line shall be provided on the floor
of any raised stage at a safe distance from the edge.This line shall
run parallel with the edge of the stage for its whole width.The hypnotist
shall inform all subjects that they must not cross the line while
under hypnosis,unless specifically told to do so as a part of the
performance;
Treatment of audience and subjects
(f)before starting the performance the hypnotist shall make a statement
to the audience,in a serious manner,identifying those groups of people
who should not volunteer to participate in it;explaining what volunteers
might be asked to perform;informing the audience of the possible risks
from embarrassment or anxiety;and emphasising that subjects may cease
to participate at any time they wish.The following is a suggested
statement,which might be amended as necessary to suit individual styles
so long as the overall message remains the same:
"I shall be looking for volunteers aged over 18 who are willing
to be hypnotised and participate in the show. Anyone who comes forward
should be prepared to take part in a range of entertaining hypnotic
suggestions but can be assured that they will not be asked to do anything
which is indecent,offensive or harmful. Volunteers need to be in normal
physical and mental health and I must ask that no-one volunteers if
they have a history of mental illness,are under the influence of alcohol
or other drugs or are pregnant."
(g)no form of coercion shall be used to persuade members of the audience
to participate in the performance.In particular,hypnotists shall not
use selection techniques which seek to identify and coerce onto the
stage the most suggestible members of the audience without their prior
knowledge of what is intended.Any use of such selection techniques
(eg,asking members of the audience to clasp their hands together and
asking those who cannot free them again to come onto the stage)should
only be used when the audience is fully aware of what is intended
and that participation is entirely voluntary at every stage;
(h)if volunteers are to remain hypnotised during an interval in the
performance,a reasonable number of attendants as agreed with the licensing
authority shall be in attendance throughout to ensure their safety;
Prohibited actions
(i)the performance shall be so conducted as not to be likely to cause
offence to any person in the audience or any hypnotised subject;
(j)the performance shall be so conducted as not to be likely to cause
harm,anxiety or distress to any person in the audience or any hypnotised
subject.In particular,the performance shall not include:-
(i) any suggestion involving the age regression of a subject (ie,
asking the subject to revert to an earlier age in their life;this
does not prohibit the hypnotist from asking subjects to act as if
they were a child etc);
(ii) any suggestion that the subject has lost something (eg,a body
part)which,if it really occurred,could cause considerable distress;
(iii) any demonstration in which the subject is suspended between
supports (so-called "catalepsy");
(iv) the consumption of any harmful or noxious substance;
(v) any demonstration of the power of hypnosis to block pain (eg,
pushing a needle through the skin);
(k)the performance shall not include giving hypnotherapy or any other
form of treatment;
Completion
(I)all hypnotised subjects shall remain in the presence of the hypnotist
and in the room where the performance takes place until all hypnotic
suggestions have been removed;
(m)all hypnotic or post-hypnotic suggestions shall be completely
removed from the minds of the subjects and the audience before the
performance ends.All hypnotised subjects shall have the suggestions
removed both individually and collectively and the hypnotist shall
confirm with each of them that they feel well and relaxed (the restriction
on post-hypnotic suggestions does not prevent the hypnotist telling
subjects that they will feel well and relaxed after the suggestions
are removed);
(M)the hypnotist shall remain available for at least 30 minutes after
the show to help deal with any problems which might arise. (Such help
might take the form of reassurance in the event of headaches or giddiness
but this condition does not imply that the hypnotist is an appropriate
person to treat anyone who is otherwise unwell.)
Authorised access
(o)where-
i. a constable;or
ii. an authorised officer of the licensing authority;or
iii. an authorised officer of the fire authority
has reason to believe that a performance is being,or is about to
be, given he may enter the venue with a view to seeing whether the
conditions on which approval for the performance was granted are being
complied with.
|