We're Going The Distance? A Conversation with Kris Maul on Licensure.
For those of you following the topic of licensure in the yoga space, this is for you.
Should we be a licensed profession?
Should we leave it all up to self-regulation within the industry?
What would that even mean for us?
I ask a literal licensing expert, Kris Maul, and he provides us with all the details.
KEY TAKEAWAYS
Gatekeeping with integrity
Not all gatekeeping is bad. We need clear professional standards to differentiate yoga therapists from yoga teachers offering “therapeutic yoga.” At the same time, licensure must remain accessible to neurodivergent practitioners and those who struggle with standardized testing, as well as those who might need financial access. Professionalization should include equity and inclusivity.
Public protection matters
Licensure creates accountability. Right now, a yoga professional could abuse a client, move towns, and start over with no consequences. If we truly care about student welfare, we must create systems that reflect that responsibility.
Licensure ≠ Insurance
Being able to bill insurance could expand access, but it should be addressed separately from licensure. First, we need clear definitions of our scope of practice and how yoga therapy fits into healthcare systems.
Financial sustainability
Currently, yoga professionals are split between “high-ticket clients only” and “self-sacrifice for service.” Both models are unsustainable. We need a third path that honors our education, ensures fair pay, and expands accessibility without burning us out.
De-centering organizations
Professional growth should center on practitioners, not gatekeeping organizations. Recent leadership choices (like hiring non-yoga professionals to lead major orgs) show how disconnected these bodies are from our lived reality. Just as farmers need farmers to lead co-ops, yoga professionals need leaders who understand our industry firsthand. If orgs don’t reflect that, it’s time to build structures that do.
RESOURCES