I’ve been creating online social media content, including posts and videos, for a long time. Because I share the same kind of information online that I do in the in-person seminars I present at conferences, I consider myself an educator and the content I share to be psychoeducation. That is, I share Mental health research, general stories about the different kinds of cases with which I have worked, and psychotherapeutic insights to give viewers and attendees the opportunity to learn about the sorts of things that we therapists address every day in our work. As in any book I have published, I disguise any clients with whom I have worked and share only generalities and composites of the types of cases that are most common in the people who come to see me.
The digital world has become a significant part of nearly everyone’s life. Many therapists now post videos online. Some have been criticized by other therapists, who argue that the content is not nuanced enough, too nuanced for the general public, dangerous because a one-minute video doesn’t do justice to the complexities of the issue being presented in the video—the list of judgments goes on and on.
Foremost, many people don’t have access to therapeutic resources. They may not know others who have entered therapy and thus don’t understand its value. Many who read and listen to my content outside the therapy room say they cannot afford therapy, and this content helps them. I make sure in all my resources to remind people that it is not actual therapy they are receiving; rather, it is psychoeducation, which has its own value. The internet provides an introduction to those resources, as do books, articles, and anything else therapists provide outside the therapy room.
Therapists have posted online the dangers of talking about clients online. I agree if the information is unique and descriptive of who the client is. This goes for any platform a therapist uses to discuss the issues they deal with. However, with this mindset, therapists should not write books with case examples in any form. Currently, when this is done, the “clients” discussed are composites and highly disguised. Those reading Mental health books are grateful for the case examples to help them see themselves in what is written and how this particular “client” worked through the same issue they have. If some therapists who criticize other online therapists had it their way, books would have to stop using case examples altogether. That makes no sense.
Some therapists do cross boundaries and engage in unethical behavior that can manifest online. I agree there need to be some rules and guidelines in social media about where those lines are, but to say that these therapists’ errors should dictate how the rest of us work in ethical ways that help clients and the general public is not the right answer.
Online, our clients and potential clients also get to know us more as people and see and hear about our personal lives. Many therapists believe that this, too, is a violation and that clients should not be privy to that information. But this is complicated. Many therapists live in small towns or specialize in small communities where clients would know many things about them, as they might share contacts and be in places such as church or synagogue, or participate in a sport of some kind, and the client is right there alongside them. It sometimes cannot be helped. Many therapists wear their wedding rings and have pictures of their families on their desk. Their Facebook accounts are not locked, and clients could look them up and get a glimpse into their personal life even if the therapist never shares.
To me, this is part of the therapeutic relationship. We are humans with active personal lives, and we are told to keep that separate and judged harshly by our peers when we do not. In therapy, if a client learns something about me, I use it as part of the therapy regarding what that brings up for them. It is transference, and this can be of great value to work through in the therapy room.
Occasionally, I see discussion and criticism about the appropriateness of therapists posting certain content—whether, for instance, they post something controversial simply because it is likely to go viral, serves their marketing purposes, earns them more viewers, etc. I don’t doubt that this happens, but it is not universally true. Sometimes these criticisms outnumber the appreciative comments supporting the poster’s genuine desire to raise awareness about psychological issues. As therapists, we believe ourselves to be important members of the healing professions. Therefore, why not provide opportunities and encouragement for those who may need therapeutic help to find it in whatever medium is easiest for them to access?
Some of the harshest criticisms come from other therapists, especially if the therapist in question is using themselves or their personal experiences as an example. But this is a humanistic approach to therapy. The therapist reveals themselves to be human and having dealt with the kind of issues that someone else may be facing. By doing this, we normalize the issue, diminishing the shame or guilt someone may be carrying around it. It’s like saying, “Look, I lived with this, and it’s OK. It is part of being human.”
Social Media Essential Reads
Posting in this way is not dispensing therapy on TikTok or Instagram. It is inviting viewers to participate in the sort of self-recognition that therapists have trained to see in themselves and learned ways to deal with it. Self-disclosure in the therapy room is based on the style and the type of modality the therapist uses. It is true that therapists should not bring their active problems to the therapy room and burden our clients with our own material. But where is that line? Can a therapist talk about something they dealt with in the past that the client is dealing with, if this worked or didn’t work, to give the client some perspective on what they can do about their issue?
I actually think that when licensed and trained therapists put out content, they can help to drown out the voices of untrained content creators who say things about Mental health to the general public that are not true.
As nonjudgmental as therapists can be, they can also be highly judgmental of one another and may use shame to professionally bully other therapists. Unfortunately, some spend far too much time on social media and have taken the “mean girl” role of condemning other therapists for anything they find disturbing. They are proponents of “cancel culture,” finding pleasure and perhaps meaning in trashing other therapists for their views. It is hostile and invites competition and defensiveness rather than positive discourse with one another on how to handle all of this.
Most certainly, there are others who may be gaining life-saving information by continuing to tune in.
