A client whom I had been seeing in couples therapy recently contacted me with an urgent question. She anxiously asked, “Could my husband be cheating?” Catching her breath for the briefest of moments, she explained that she follows various “other” therapists on TikTok and Instagram, so she sent me an email with videos she had viewed from one of their sites. The video was quite concerning to me because the “therapist” did not provide any citations for the material she used and made authoritative, expert-sounding statements about which types of people engage in infidelity.
This particular therapist went on, without clear context, to intertwine various concepts from different popular theoretical models. These concepts, which included attachment styles, triangulation, the unconscious, and enmeshment, were drawn from the corresponding theoretical models of Emotionally Focused Therapy, Bowenian Family Systems Theory, Psychoanalytic Theory, and Structural Family Therapy. The resulting statements describing the “typical” unfaithful partner were a discordant patchwork quilt, which from a distance seemed to be an integrated whole, or the blanket prediction a fortune teller might offer—something like “there will be change in your life,” or “you are seeking answers to important questions.”
This particular experience, along with other recent similar ones with other clients who have asked follow-up questions about information that they obtained from therapists they follow on social media platforms, has prompted reflection upon some questions related to how social media is the “new self help.” These include:
Despite the above concerns, I do believe that there are certain benefits to therapists offering online information and general guidance to their audience, although disclaimers, risks and benefits, and the sources of this information and guidance are important to include. Additionally and once vetted, therapists can offer these sites, their information and videos as they might utilize bibliotherapy or cinematherapy. But in the final analysis, we should both practice and teach our clients the therapeutic version of caveat emptor.
File under: Law & Ethics, Musings and Reflections, Therapy & Technology
Like what you are reading? For more stimulating stories, thought-provoking articles and new video announcements, sign up for our monthly newsletter.
This particular therapist went on, without clear context, to intertwine various concepts from different popular theoretical models. These concepts, which included attachment styles, triangulation, the unconscious, and enmeshment, were drawn from the corresponding theoretical models of Emotionally Focused Therapy, Bowenian Family Systems Theory, Psychoanalytic Theory, and Structural Family Therapy. The resulting statements describing the “typical” unfaithful partner were a discordant patchwork quilt, which from a distance seemed to be an integrated whole, or the blanket prediction a fortune teller might offer—something like “there will be change in your life,” or “you are seeking answers to important questions.”
This particular experience, along with other recent similar ones with other clients who have asked follow-up questions about information that they obtained from therapists they follow on social media platforms, has prompted reflection upon some questions related to how social media is the “new self help.” These include:
- How are our clients to evaluate the credentials of therapists, life coaches, trainees, and even graduate students who post on these social media forums? And, relatedly, what is our ethical/professional obligation (or not) to “educate” our clients in doing so?
- How can our clients verify whether the content they are reading, and perhaps integrating into their lives, is accurate? And relatedly, what is our role and obligation to help them in doing so, especially if what they are reading is at cross-purposes to the clinical work we are doing with them?
- What are the clinical implications of having an uninvited co-therapist on our treatment team?
- When might it be our ethical/legal obligation to report one of these “well-intentioned” clinicians who want to democratize the therapeutic process?
- How can we explore the influence of these other voices on our clients’ experiences and perceptions? And relatedly, should we? Must we?
- What is the legal responsibility and ethical obligation of therapists who have followers on these platforms if a person who is not their client follows their “advice” and has an adverse outcome? I have not seen disclaimers on most sites that these sound bites are not a substitute for therapeutic services.
Despite the above concerns, I do believe that there are certain benefits to therapists offering online information and general guidance to their audience, although disclaimers, risks and benefits, and the sources of this information and guidance are important to include. Additionally and once vetted, therapists can offer these sites, their information and videos as they might utilize bibliotherapy or cinematherapy. But in the final analysis, we should both practice and teach our clients the therapeutic version of caveat emptor.
File under: Law & Ethics, Musings and Reflections, Therapy & Technology