At the start of 2025, Hamilton Fraser released its trends report and predictions for what would be shaping the market in the coming months. One of the key shifts we have seen is towards the medicalisation of the market.
Our founder and CEO, Eddie Hooker, has long been an advocate for improving standards in aesthetics, and we have had a long-standing working relationship with the Joint Council for Cosmetic Practitioners (JCCP). As such, we try to keep our finger on the pulse of what’s happening in the sector, and recent conversations have got us thinking about the language we use in aesthetics and why it matters as we hopefully move towards regulation.
The field of aesthetic medicine has evolved outside of the parameters of traditional medicine, and as such, the terminology used to describe professionals and treatments has, at times, been a contentious issue. Misleading job titles and ambiguous language can impact patient trust, regulation, and even legal claims. With professional bodies, legal experts, and insurers weighing in, there is growing recognition of the need for clarity in how practitioners describe themselves and their work.
This article explores the implications of terminology for patient safety, regulation, and professional integrity.
As we anticipate the introduction of licensing of cosmetic procedures to improve safety, we have seen a push towards legitimising the medical nature of aesthetic treatments, something that both The British Association of Medical Aesthetic Nurses (BAMAN) and British College of Aesthetic Medicine (BCAM) have championed. Language is a key part of this.
The recognition of the sector by the Royal Society of Medicine (RSM) as a speciality was a significant move towards the medicalisation of aesthetics in 2024.
The creation of the RSM Section of Aesthetic Medicine and Surgery (SAMAS) significantly enhanced the credibility and medical standing of the field, signalling a growing acceptance of aesthetics within the wider medical community, often seen to have not considered it “real medicine”.
The British Association of Cosmetic Nurses (BACN) recently changed its name to the British Association of Medical Aesthetic Nurses (BAMAN) to reflect this. The move came following a decisive vote by the members in July 2024, with an overwhelming 96% of those voting in favour.
Gareth Lewis, head of operations at BAMAN, said, “The transition to the British Association of Medical Aesthetic Nurses reflects the evolving, specialised nature of this clinical field, which aligns closely with disciplines such as plastic surgery and dermatology. This change emphasises the medical foundation of what our members do.
“BAMAN members are not simply providing cosmetic enhancements; they deliver comprehensive medical services, including consultation and assessment, diagnosis, prescription, and treatment and management of complex clinical pathways with a focus on patient safety and care. The new name honours the advanced clinical skills, responsibilities, and duty of care that define our members’ practice, further positioning medical aesthetic nursing as a credible and highly specialised sector within healthcare.”
The debate over whether aesthetic medicine should be classified as an industry, market, sector, or speciality remains ongoing. Traditionally, “industry” suggests a profit-driven enterprise, whereas “sector” implies a broader professional field, and “speciality” denotes a medical discipline.
Gareth Lewis from BAMAN strongly advocates against using the term “industry” when referring to medical aesthetics. “We see it as a specialism or sector, not an industry because our focus is on patient care, professionalism, and medical responsibility rather than a profit-driven model”, he says. “Referring to medical aesthetics as a sector supports these principles by emphasising the elevation of standards and the protection of the public. Using the term industry undervalues the specialism and suggests profit-driven care over prioritising patient care, which contrasts with BAMAN’s values of integrity, professionalism, and patient safety.”
Independent nurse prescriber Cheryl Barton adds, “Industry is defined as economic activity concerned with the processing of raw materials and the manufacture of goods. We have transport, pharmaceutical, manufacturing and fashion industries. Sectors relate to people. We don’t have a private health industry. It is a sector. Until we start challenging and changing these words and phrases, people, politicians especially, will continue to consider us as ‘fill and freeze factories’.”
While aesthetic medicine is not currently a GMC-recognised speciality, medical practitioners argue that its increasing legitimacy within institutions like the RSM strengthens its claim to being more than just a commercial industry.
Dr Catherine Fairris, president of the British College of Aesthetic Medicine (BCAM), reinforces this view: “We need to refer to aesthetic medicine as a speciality, especially as medical professionals practise it. The Royal Society of Medicine’s recognition of aesthetics as a medical speciality underlines the importance of accurate terminology and correct titles.”
The patient versus client debate resurfaced following a discussion led by the Joint Council for Cosmetic Practitioners (JCCP) regarding the terminology used for individuals seeking non-surgical treatments. The JCCP initially suggested using the term client, prompting a response from professional bodies such as BCAM and BAMAN, who advocated for maintaining the term patient when referring to individuals treated by regulated healthcare professionals.
Professor David Sines, executive chair and registrar of the JCCP, later provided clarification, stating, “Whenever regulated healthcare practitioners provide non-surgical procedures, the term ‘patient’ should be used.” The JCCP emphasised that its position aligns with maintaining patient safety and guaranteeing clarity in professional responsibility.
Professor Sines added: “We recognise that the title ‘healthcare professional’ is restricted to those persons associated with either a speciality or a discipline and who are qualified and registered by one of the designated Government Professional Statutory Regulatory Bodies to provide healthcare service to a patient.
“Conversely, the JCCP is of the opinion that non-healthcare practitioners whose scope of practice is related to the sole provision of ‘cosmetic procedures’ should not be permitted to refer to their clients as ‘patients’.
“The JCCP will seek to clarify these matters further when we revise our policy and competency framework over the next year in association with the demands of the Government’s anticipated licensing scheme.”
Dr Fairris supports this perspective: “The word ‘patient’ refers to someone who is receiving medical care and ultimately implies an ethical and legal responsibility in the relationship to this person. Aesthetic procedures carry medical risk, and this must be reflected in our language.”
Gareth Lewis at BAMAN adds, “Using ‘client’ diminishes the medical responsibility practitioners have. The public must understand that aesthetics is not purely cosmetic — it involves medical treatments that require appropriate training and accountability.”
The use of unregulated job titles in aesthetics is a growing concern. Terms like “advanced aesthetic practitioner”, “cosmetic surgeon”, and “aesthetic specialist” often lack standardised qualifications.
If you are describing yourself as an “aesthetic practitioner”, best practice is to also be clear about what your background and training are. Are you a doctor, a nurse prescriber, a dentist, a pharmacist, or a beauty therapist? If you are a registered healthcare professional, make it easy for patients to view you on your professional register by including your GMC, GDC, NMC or GPhC number. If you are a therapist, share what level you are trained to and with whom. For example, do you hold a VTCT (ITEC) Level 5 Certificate in Laser Tattoo Removal (this is the most advanced and recognised OFQUAL-regulated non-medical aesthetic training available)?
Gareth provides insights from BAMAN when it comes to nurses and midwives: “BAMAN’s members are all registered nurses or midwives, with many also holding qualifications as Independent Nurse Prescribers”, he says. “Beyond registration, the work of these professionals is highly complex, requiring advanced skills and clinical judgement.
“Our newly updated competency framework, which is about to be published, provides structured levels of competency for our nurses to map their skills against. This framework defines medical aesthetic nurses under the categories of:
“However, the titles practitioners use are often self-defined, leading to public confusion. BAMAN’s Code of Conduct requires members to present themselves truthfully to maintain transparency and trust with patients.”
In February 2025, Dawn Butler MP introduced a Ten Minute Rule Bill in Parliament that sets out to legally protect the title "nurse". The proposal states that only those registered with the Nursing and Midwifery Council as registered nurses can use the title “nurse” when working in health and social care. [SOURCE: RCN]
There are also challenges when it comes to the use of the title ‘doctor’. As the word 'doctor' can also be an academic title, it is not a protected title in the strictest sense of the term; however, misrepresenting yourself as a medical doctor when you do not hold a medical qualification is a criminal offence under Section 49 (1) of the Medical Act 1983.
Misrepresentation in advertising and social media can also cause you to come under the scrutiny of the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) and Committees of Advertising Practice (CAP).
“Advertisers wanting to refer to themselves as ‘Dr’, ‘a doctor’ or similar, should take care not to imply that they hold a general medical qualification if they do not. The need for clarity is greatest when marketers are making health-related claims, and the ASA has taken the tough line on marketers calling themselves ‘Dr’ in the context of health. The safest and simplest way to avoid confusing consumers is that if they do not possess a general medical qualification, advertisers should not call themselves ‘Dr’.”
You should also be careful when using the term ‘specialist’ if you are not on a specialist register. Dr Fairris stresses, “The GMC is clear: misrepresenting qualifications is a matter of probity. Doctor’s should not call themselves a specialist, unless they are on a specialist register. However, aesthetics is not yet a recognised GMC specialty, which creates a grey area.”
Similarly, BAMAN highlights concerns over terms like “advanced aesthetic practitioner,” often used by lay injectors. “There are no universal standards for what qualifies as ‘advanced.’ Without regulation, these titles can be misleading,” Gareth Lewis notes.
The British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (BAAPS) also warns against the misuse of the term “cosmetic surgeon.” BAAPS advises the public to check whether a practitioner is on the GMC Specialist Register in Plastic Surgery before undergoing surgery.
Nora Nugent, president of the BAAPS, says, “The public need to be aware that many doctors call themselves ‘cosmetic surgeons’. They may be plastic surgeons but often are not – they may be surgeons from another speciality who do some cosmetic surgery or doctors without full surgical training. A plastic surgeon in the UK (UK-trained – other countries have different qualifications) should hold the FRCS (Plast) qualification and specialist registration in plastic surgery with the GMC. Specialist registration can be checked online. It is not enough to just be specialist registered – it needs to be in the right speciality, so you should check the speciality as well as the specialist registration. The Intercollegiate Cosmetic Surgery Board (ICSB) can also issue certification in cosmetic surgery, which is an additional reassurance to adequately qualified and experienced plastic surgeons. This is the only UK Board certification. Only plastic surgeons can achieve certification in all areas of cosmetic surgery. Surgeons from other specialties e.g. ENT, ophthalmology, breast surgery, and maxillofacial, can achieve certification in their scope of practice but not all areas. Finally, membership in plastic surgery professional organisations such as BAAPS or the British Association of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS) can also be checked online – plastic surgeons are further vetted to be members.”
Another area of contention is the use of the title ‘Dr’ by dentists. In the UK, many dentists refer to themselves as ‘Dr’, though they do not hold a medical degree. The General Dental Council (GDC) allows its use but mandates clarity to avoid misleading the public.
The GDC stresses that practitioners should accurately represent their qualifications, especially in a field where trust is paramount.
It says: “You are able to use the title ‘Dr’ as a courtesy title. However, you must make clear the services you are offering and must not imply that you are a medical doctor, unless you are registered with the GMC. It is a good idea to make clear that you are a dentist and not a medical doctor, for example, “Dr A Smith, Dentist” or “Dr B Patel, Dental Surgeon”.
Dr Fairris warns of potential confusion: “If a dentist refers to themselves as ‘Dr’ without explicitly stating they are a dentist, it can mislead patients into thinking they have a general medical qualification. Transparency is crucial, although it is important to stress that dentists are very highly trained and regulated, the importance is around transparency and recognition of skill set”.
The CAP Executive has issued guidance on this topic, too. It says:
“The ASA and CAP understand that since 1995, the General Dental Council (GDC) had permitted its members to use the title ‘Dr’, provided it is clear that it is a courtesy title only and it is not otherwise implied that they are qualified to carry out medical procedures.
“The safest and simplest way to avoid confusing consumers is to avoid the ‘Dr’ title unless a general medical qualification is held.
“CAP recommends that if marketers do decide to use the ‘Dr’ title in advertising, they make sure they are on the GDC register and should clearly and prominently qualify the use of that title with a statement that makes clear it is a courtesy title and that a general medical qualification is not held.”
You can read the General Dental Council’s research report on patient and public attitudes to standards for dental professionals, ethical guidance and use of the term doctor here.
Terminologies such as medic, non-medic, layperson, and healthcare professional are frequently used, yet these terms can also be ambiguous for the public. Understanding the precise definitions of these categories is essential for clarity, maintaining professional standards, and safeguarding patients.
Gareth Lewis comments, “We (BAMAN) recommend using ‘non-healthcare professionals’ instead of ‘non-medics'. It provides greater clarity by differentiating those without a healthcare background while avoiding stigma and offering patients a more transparent understanding of practitioner roles, promoting informed decision-making. However, we do not have current guidance that we provide to members.”
From an insurance and legal standpoint, misleading job titles can have serious consequences.
Emma Bracchi, Hamilton Fraser's Senior Client Services Technician, clarifies, “A claim will be affected if a policy is cancelled due to false material facts — such as someone falsely posing as a medical doctor. This could have serious legal repercussions.”
Ella Vranjkovic, Cosmetic Lead at Hamilton Fraser, adds, “Practitioners must provide their registration details when making a claim. While not all are required at the quote stage, they are necessary for verification.”
Legal firm Clyde & Co. warns that misrepresentation can lead to litigation. If a patient undergoes treatment under false pretences — believing their practitioner to be more qualified than they are — it could strengthen legal claims against the practitioner.
With regulation on the horizon, there is a growing push to standardise terminology within aesthetic medicine.
Hamilton Fraser CEO Eddie Hooker remains optimistic: “We are hopeful that 2025 will bring much-needed regulatory progress, enhancing safety standards and patient trust.”
BAMAN’s Gareth Lewis suggests a cross-sector agreement on terminology: “We need a memorandum of understanding between associations and insurers to set a best-practice standard for language. Clarity benefits everyone — patients, practitioners, and insurers alike.”
With continued discussions between professional bodies, insurers, and regulators, the future of aesthetic medicine may finally see clear, standardised terminology — fostering transparency, protecting patients, and upholding professional integrity in the field.
As aesthetic medicine continues to grow, providing clarity in language and professional titles will be crucial in protecting both practitioners and patients alike.
