I thought about that for a good while. If responsibility without any authority is a losing game, doesn't that make authority without any responsibility the optimal situation? What would that look like?
With the advancement of research and technology, we learn more about our horses and how they see the world around them, and how they experience our interactions. This is a Good Thing and we should all seek to further our learning. There has also been a big decline in the number of local, available veterinarians and an increase in other practitioners seeking to give advice for a fee, but who are not veterinarians. Where do we fit ourselves between the two extremes of "I say this horse is in pain, but I am not qualified to diagnose or treat anything." and "I say this horse is out of shape and needs training, but I am not qualified to diagnose or treat anything."?
I don't have a concrete answer, my feelings have evolved over the course of my life and will continue to do so. I do think that we can evaluate a difficult situation we find ourselves in by asking "Who has the responsibility? Who has the authority? What are their motives?". Veterinarians, officials, property owners, holders of insurance policies, contracts and, I think, certified trainers have a lot of the responsibility. They have entities to answer to. They must produce plans with measurable results. It's up to them if they wish to execute their authority, or not. Watch out for those who wish to execute authority, but who don't wish to fulfill their responsibilities. The term "All hat, no cattle" comes to mind. There will be a lot of talk but no measurable results to follow up on, an avoidance of accountability if there's a poor outcome, unwillingness to welcome an objective second opinion, and probably a lack of entities to escalate to should the customer be dissatisfied.
We're all adults with the authority to make our own decisions, and the responsibility to evaluate those decisions. May this help someone to choose more wisely.