Litz, since that SML programme, I have been so disgusted with the BBC and a large proportion of society. I think your suggestion is very valid and should be followed up because I just know there are fakes as well as the genuine and able psychics out there and the service does indeed need a bona fide recognition. I sincerely hope the BBC get lots of complaints about the appalling "debate" - it was dreadful.

I agree Litz. I fear we are still a long way from getting statutory vetting because mediumship is not yet accepted as "real", but until we get there mediums need to get together to provide their own, ( with non mediums on the vetting panels as well).I think there needs to be average accuracy of minimum 80% (over several readings to allow for off days which everyone is entitled to). This should then be re-done every two to three years or so to make sure the standard is being maintained, because many of us "lose" it through complacency or other reasons we cannot help. If there was a published list of people who passed this vetting it would be a way for people to find the best mediums. I am aware that this has been done by individual better calibre mediums for their own psychic lines, but in my opinion it would be better if it was done on a wider scale with professional mediums of high integrity coming together to sort this out collectively. This would be the route to eventual statutory acceptance of their profession, leading to far more protection of the vulnerable from the "I went on a course and now I'm a medium" brigade. I myself would not pass the test which I'm advocating, and this is why I have stepped back from mediumship (as you know Litz). My accuracy would fluctuate quite wildly between 100% and nil. I know all mediums blank out sometimes and get nothing but it happened to me too often to feel OK with it.It is my opinion that a consistently high standard is essential and although I never charged for an unsatisfactory reading I was unable to enjoy my work because I couldn't maintain a consistancy in standard that satisfied ME. If I can come to terms with this then others can too. If you want to be the best you have to be committed to your development and passionate about your high standards, and it has to be the most important thing in your life (with the exception of your kids only). If you cannot be that dedicated (as I couldn't) leave it to the ones who can. Stop getting drunk on your own ego, move aside and leave it to the ones with the stamina to settle for being nothing but the best....not just poor imitations. Above all, sleep well at night because you are not trying to live up to an image of yourself that you have contructed in your own mind but have not yet done the work to attain. Sorry about this folks, but it's time for so many mediums and psychics to have a reality check.

Completely agree Litz. It was interesting to see that no mediums were invited into the studio, and your only contact was via webcam. The panel were hysterical and really quite offensive. I am 100% behind a code of conduct, as is Inspiral Mediums. Once this was in place it would be far harder for the sceptics to carry out this type of hatchet job. Well said !

Asking for a governing body to regulate the authentic abilities of psychics & mediums would once again bring in a political atmosphere. IMO, the evolutionary process can not be stopped and people WILL learn about their own abilities by observing the examples of others who have developed skill sets outside of acknowledged sciences. Personally, I can only continue to encourage EVERYONE to learn about themselves, to discover who they truly are and to become the best that they can be through love.

I watched on iplayer after hearing about it on Facebook. I could not believe the way you were treated by these witchhunters who were unbelievably rude and such a biased piece of BBC tv. I myself have sent a complaint to the BBC regarding this and hope many other people incensed by the "debate" will as well