Eve B

Welcome, Sandpiper! I think therapy harm is deliberately hushed to better convince people of the supposed benefits. The profession doesn't deny that therapy can cause harm, but they don't want it to be too noticeable either. Kind of like the small fine print of harmful side effects with prescription meds.

Welcome, MoonFrog! This is the first I've heard of PeopleClaim, but kudos to you for standing up for yourself against that awful, self-serving therapist! I'm sorry you were put through such a harmful ordeal. From how she overreacted, she doesn't seem qualified to be handling your issues. Recovering from betrayal will take some time, so please try to be patient and kind to yourself because it wasn't your fault. Did your psychiatrist not believe your side of story?

It's nice to know about the ideal world of therapy, but how many therapists really and consistently practice that way in the privacy of the session room? Clients carry most of the risk and burden when giving therapists the benefit of the doubt.

Wouldn't this make it impossible for clients to win any complaint then?

I trusted my first therapist a lot due to being gullible and ignorant. After I researched how therapists are trained, it became much more difficult for me to fully believe in their "caring" even though I sometimes wanted to. When therapists overreact defensively to client criticism, though, that's for real!

I've suffered through a similar experience more than once. Being around others who could relate helped blunt the pain, but it never goes away completely. It's that therapy relationship that messes with your head. I think it's easy for therapists to dump their clients when things don't go the way they like because clients are replaceable. Feel free to post your link, no worries!

Welcome Sapphire Blue and hoping you find this forum to be helpful!

How long did you have your site up before this pressure to remove it? Stating facts isn't harassment unless that therapist has some documentation of his own invalidating your side of the story?

Welcome and thanks for sharing your experience, Old Man. That therapist definitely crossed the lines and deserved harder disciplinary actions. I'm sorry you had to suffer through such an ordeal. I applaud your strength in fighting back by filing the complaint and publicizing the facts of your case to help others avoid similar situations.

Looks like the VBT website's home page has changed, and one of them is no longer a trainee? Episode 65 also mentions that "about 50-60% of the time, therapy works really well, and then, there's 5-10% of the time, where it actually harms clients..." (00:52:47). I think the real harm percentage is higher because it's probably under-reported.

I thought the suggestions of "What To Do" were too simplistic and should've tried to further explore why clients may not be able to easily stop the harmful therapy, tell someone, complain, or choose the right therapist.

Glad to have you here, April! Getting over bad therapy can take a long time, but we're here to offer support if you need it.

Maybe the AI program can just be a library of therapy information that can adapt to an input of client questions? I still believe an intuitive therapy app is possible, but there should be a clear disclaimer to use at one's own risk, like what should be included in any therapist's consent forms.

Considering all the realistic video games out there now, I don't think it would be too hard creating an AI virtual therapist program (similar to those dating apps) that try to match compatible personality and treatment styles. The technology is available, but designing "good fit" metrics would be tricky. The odds couldn't be worse than clients randomly picking therapists on their own without much clue what they're getting themselves into.

How about a program where clients could create their "perfect" virtual therapist by inputting certain preferences?

I think artificial intelligence video game programs could be the future of therapy. Isn't it the human emotional flaws of therapists that often cause client harm? Why couldn't virtual therapists be created that's specific to the needs of a client's issues?

How can near misses be caught in therapy at all when the sessions are private? Even if a therapist reviews a problematic case with a supervisor, it's still the therapist's version which can be different from the client's side of what actually occurred.

I think therapists do acknowledge that harm can happen in therapy when clients are given inappropriate treatment, but it seems like they, more often than not, point fingers at the faults of other therapists instead of looking at themselves and what they could be doing better. I agree with the following quote from Mary's link to be common among therapists who react defensively to client criticism: "the reporting of errors — including the "near misses" — is key to improving the system, but she says that shame and guilt prevent medical personnel from admitting their mistakes." How can therapists know when they're making mistakes with their clients before it's too late? Shouldn't strong client resistance be an obvious warning sign that therapy could be heading in a harmful direction?

I agree with the "buyer beware" caution for anyone willing to give therapy a chance. If nothing else, therapists do try to be helpful, but if things don't work out well, that's when clients will see the truth of their therapist. There is at least more acknowledgment of the real harm that can be caused by bad therapy nowadays, so maybe there's still some hope that the system can and must change if there's enough public outcry against the status quo? What if, some day, there are mass protests against therapist abuse?

So it's the responsibility of the client to find the right therapist?

I think therapists don't really know how therapy works if/when it does, and because there are so many different approaches, they can say that therapy does work if the particular method or therapist style is compatible with the patient's issues. Their claims of success or failure basically comes down to good or bad fit between client and therapist, not any kind of clear cut evidence. Two different therapists can apply the same technique, and both can have different outcomes.

Episodes 56 and 57 discuss the cultural biases of therapists. Should it be unsurprising that therapists are predominantly white?

Probably because the failures can be blamed on non-compliant clients? I think most therapists will admit that therapy won't work for everyone for various reasons.

How would it be possible to collect more accurate data regarding true positive and negative outcomes, then?

https://jonathanshedler.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Shedler-2018-Where-is-the-evidence-for-evidence-based-therapy.pdf From the above link, "evidence-based" is supposed to apply the following 3 criteria: 1) “Relevant scientific evidence - no longer counts, because proponents of 'evidence-based' therapies ignore evidence for therapies that are not manualized and scripted. 'Evidence-based' does not actually mean supported by evidence; it means manualized, scripted, and not psychodynamic. 2) Patients’ values and preferences - also do not count because patients are not adequately informed or offered meaningful choices. 3) Clinical judgment - also no longer matters, because clinicians are often expected to follow treatment manuals rather than exercise independent judgment." The way I see it, "evidence-based" needs to have supportive data or it's not evidence! If therapists respected patients' values/preferences and used common sense clinical judgment, maybe there would be more successful outcomes or, at least, less harm caused.