My client Jane was right, I had just missed the therapy session we had booked. It had not happened to me before, and I felt guilty.
Online therapists know how the virtual and body-less nature of the encounter makes it easier to fail each other, be it for the client, or for the therapist. The precious relational tissue seems even more fragile. I always attend to mending these ruptures as well as I can, but with Jane I had struggled. She had that particular quality which made her slip away from me as soon as our sessions were over.
Winnicott often came to my mind when I thought about Jane: “It is a joy to be hidden but disaster not to be found.” We all play hide-and-seek with others, and the therapeutic relationship we develop with our clients is no exception. A therapy room easily turns into a perfect place for hiding, with its couch, so inviting to hole up behind.
Jane was skilled in hiding.
The day we connected for our first session, her camera was off. All I could see was her profile picture, with her face concealed behind a pair of fancy sunglasses. It took me some time to convince her that seeing each other was essential for her therapy.
She finally switched on her webcam. She actually looked younger than her picture, her body language transmitting bubbles of anxiety.
Further on, Jane would typically connect from a poorly lit room, with a window behind her, darkening her traits against the light.
Or she would choose a place with a poor Internet connection to call me, her face blurred into a pixelated image.
Reflecting with Jane on her choice of having a therapy online, we ended-up realizing how much this was an integral part of her unconscious hiding strategy: the distance between us preventing me from getting too close, close enough to eventually find her.
She had come to see me about her binge eating and compulsive dating, but her main complain was about the shallowness of her relationships, her inability to get truly engaged with others.
When she finally trusted me enough to share her early history, I could discern its emptiness, a lack of emotional closeness with her depressed mother and alcoholic father. She never expressed anger or resentment towards her parents. She seemed indifferent, empty herself.
She was unconsciously inducing me to forget her, but what she craved for was to make an impact on me, to be remembered, and cared about. Emotionally, she was that child kept hidden behind a couch. Torn between the desire of closeness and the fear to be discovered, she felt consecutively manic or depressed.
Did she really want me to find her? Or was she comfortable and feeling safe in her dark hiding place? She would steadily turn up for our weekly sessions, and that made me hope.
Eeny, meeny, miny, moe… was I counting, every week, looking for her on my screen.
The more she pushed me away, the more I made it clear that she would always find me there for her, counting, seeking her out.
You are really stubborn. She once said, and I thought she would send me away with a simple mouse-click. But she did not, and we kept playing the old game.
My stubbornness responded to her need for consistency.
Eventually, Jane became convinced that I would not abandon the game. She had learnt to count on me. She did not completely give up her ‘behind-the-couch’ corner, but she allowed me in sometimes. Then we would sit there together, in the darkness and dust. Sharing that space with her, I often felt suffocating and anxious to get out, but at the same time terrified to be left there forever. Those moments were the hardest in the sessions with her, but they also helped me to understand how it really felt to be forgotten.
Jane’s therapy is finished for the time being. She went out of my screen, with her usual grin, and I wonder: was I able to make up for those who had abandoned her, hidden and forgotten?
I can only hope that our virtual hide-and-seek practice will have helped Jane to be finally found for real, by somebody in flesh and blood.
As I was working on my doctorate I became interested in home stereo amplifiers. Armed with a fellow doctorate student who possessed infinite knowledge in this area I began the search for the perfect amplifier.
My interest rapidly escalated into what could arguably have been diagnosed as a full-blown obsession. I visited stereo stores near and far. I read an endless stream of articles in the stereo magazines. I spoke with salesmen, saleswomen, and manufacturer's representatives. I attended stereo conventions. But most of all, I kept my eyes on the specifications of the various units. Ah yes, the statistics. Show me the evidence! My fellow grad student warned me not to put very much stock in specifications claiming that good numbers don't always translate to superb sound, but I knew better.
Statistics told the whole story. Finally, after nearly three years of nonstop research and spending at least as much time picking out a stereo amplifier as I did on my studies (okay, maybe a hairline more), I purchased a unit with "seriously good specs." A unit with triple digit distortion of .005—so low your dog couldn't hear it.
I hooked the unit up and to my chagrin, it sounded tinny! Convinced it was my speakers, I replaced them. It still sounded thin. (Stereo talk for tinny.) I bought speaker wire that cost more than my wardrobe and cables with a thickness rivaling my wrist measurement. No improvement was noted.
On a whim I purchased a used bargain basement priced amplifier for less than a twenty dollar bill at a pawn shop. To me it sounded much better than my expensive model. I could blame it on my hearing at the time except that everybody who auditioned the two amplifiers like the old cheapie with the "crummy specs" better.
While struggling with my stereo amplifier addiction I was able to secure my doctorate and a few years later I landed a job as a program coordinator at a major metropolitan suicide prevention center.
Because suicide was the one of the top three killers of teens (it still is) and one of the top ten causes of death for all age brackets (here again, it still is) I gave lots and lots of suicide prevention speeches. I often responded to crisis situations at schools, churches, and even major corporations, and helped run a suicide survivor's group for those who lost a friend or loved one. This continued even after I left the center. I stopped counting when I had lectured to approximately 100,000 people on this life and death topic including quite a few seasoned psychotherapists.
My point is merely that my lectures and professional activities allowed me to meet literally thousands of people who in some way, shape, or form, had been touched by the act of suicide or a suicide attempt.
Now one of the key points in my lectures was to tout the benefits of a suicide prevention contract or what experts and ethical bodies would later dub a "no suicide contract."
But, enter statistics or evidence-based practice (EBP) also known as evidence-based treatment (EBT). According to the purveyors of these numerical meta-analyses, suicide prevention contracts don't work. Even some major suicide prevention organizations and top experts in the world have adopted this stance.
What? Really? You're kidding, right? Tell that to the over-the-road truck driver who approached me after a public speech to share that he was only alive today because his eighth grade shop teacher made him sign a suicide prevention contract. Tell that to the woman in one of my college classes who volunteered that she would not be in my class if it had not been for a caring high school guidance counselor who insisted she sign a no-suicide contract in her sophomore year. "I'm a woman of my word," she told me. And what about the woman in group therapy with me who pulled a no-suicide contract out of her purse to show me. The white paper was yellow inasmuch as the document was now over 25 years old. "This saved my life," she said with tears in her eyes.
These are just three of the many cases I heard over the years. I could go on, but I think the point is obvious. Even if you can show me 100 more cases, or even 1000 where contracts didn't work, I will show you the ones where these simple contracts clearly did. Science is often what works and if a contract saves a single life then it was worth it.
Now in defense of the EBT crowd who renounces these contracts, many experts do recommend a beefed up version of the document called a safety plan. Others in this camp prefer a commitment-to-treatment document. Yes, safety plans and their second cousins, commitment-to-treatment plans, are possibly superior. But in the real world there are often times when a clinician does not have the luxury of drafting a long, drawn out, document.
In such instances, a therapist or hotline worker should do his or her best to get a short verbal, or better still written, no-suicide contract. I personally think it is downright unethical not to use the old tried and true contract. And my fear is that if we teach upcoming professionals this information they may well do nothing if they don't have the time or information to draft a full-fledged safety plan when a life is on the line.
If the average shoe size is statistically an 8M and you wear a 6W would you buy the 8M? Well, would you?
Statistics don't lie . . . well, except when they do. And a life, unlike a shoe size or a brand of stereo amplifier, is too valuable to base on a few research studies that could easily be refuted in the coming years.
The British Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli once quipped, "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damn lies, and statistics."
I think the Prime Minister might have been on to something.
Rachel Zoffness: Lynn Grodzki, you are a business consultant, therapist, and author, and you recently put out a second edition of your book, Building Your Ideal Private Practice. I’m really looking forward to learning from you today.
Lynn Grodzki: Thank you.
RZ: It’s an interesting challenge that therapists face when we finish grad school because we have so much training, and yet we know so little about the business side of things. Starting a private practice can be really overwhelming. When I passed my licensing exams, I was shocked by how hard it was to find even basic guidelines for how to start a private practice. I ended up meeting with mentors and friends in the field to try to find my way. What are your suggestions for therapists to shift into more of a business mindset when first beginning their practice?
LG: Well, first of all, I just want to validate your situation. When I was getting my graduate degree as a social worker, I also was surprised that they didn't include any information about practice development, and I found that that was pretty true of a lot of graduate programs.
A lot of therapists have never been trained in developing business plans, and so they end up just making do with whatever comes their way instead of planning and working toward pre-meditated goals.
I had been in small business prior to being a psychotherapist, so there was a lot about business that was familiar to me. I started out teaching classes and courses to therapists because I wanted to see them succeed, and as I worked with them over time, I saw that there were a few fundamental issues therapists faced right out of graduate school.
One is that they don’t seem to have an understanding of the difference between a vocation and an occupation. With an occupation, you really want to do things in a business-like way, but a lot of therapists see that as an affront to their idea of a vocation. It’s almost as if they’ll run their private practice as a hobby instead of a business.
An additional challenge is that a lot of therapists have never been trained in developing business plans, and so they end up just making do with whatever comes their way instead of planning and working toward pre-meditated goals.
RZ: What’s the best way to write a business plan, if you’ve never done it before, and you’ve never been to business school? Does every new therapist in private practice needs to hire a consultant?
LG: There’s lots of information out there, including my books and other books, so that you don’t have to hire anybody—you can read and get informed. But to have a business plan means that you have an idea of the kind of path that you want your practice to take. A really quick way to assess things is to think about your business strengths and limitations. In other words, what do you think you’re good at and what do you feel like might be limiting for you? You came out of a graduate program—what did you feel were business strengths that you might’ve just naturally had, and what were limitations you were aware of?
RZ: When I came out of grad school, I didn't even know what a business strength was. I wouldn’t even know how to put that into words for you.
LG: I often have a list of attributes that I feel are entrepreneurial skill sets. I’m going to talk you through a few of these, and I bet some of these really fit for you. Okay?
RZ: That would be so helpful.
LG: Entrepreneurial people who are successful, when they look at a situation, they often see opportunity. Therapists are very good at this, too—somebody comes into your office and tells you about their situation, and a lot of times, from your perspective, you see what’s possible. Would you say that that was a skill that you might have?
RZ: Absolutely.
LG: Here’s another one. Entrepreneurs have an equal measure of optimism and pragmatism, so they can see what might happen, and they can also be very concrete about the steps that they need to take. How would you do on that one?
RZ: I think I’m temperamentally pretty optimistic, but I don’t know that optimism would’ve been the best word to describe me when I was first starting my practice. I felt kind of bumbling, like I didn't really know what I was doing.
LG: So that would be one where you might think, “that’s one that I need a little bit of help with or I need more information about.” Here’s another one. Entrepreneurs are extremely persistent, and that means that if something doesn’t work, they don’t mind trying it, oh, another 100 times or so.
RZ: I think this is really a wonderful line of thinking because when I think about my strengths, having gone through two master’s degrees and a PhD program, that certainly took a lot of persistence. And here I am in private practice, and I do have my own business, and yet I’ve never even used the word “entrepreneur” to describe myself. I love that you’re using that word.
LG: It’s just a word that means that you own and operate a business. Here’s another one that’s very clear with people who succeed in business. They’re profit driven, and they enjoy making money. How would you say you feel about that one?
Money Issues
RZ: I think you’ve hit on something because I really struggle with the money aspect of my business, in part because I went into this field because I love helping kids. I’m a child psychologist, and I really struggle to set a fee that reflects my value, and part of that is because I worry that families won’t be able to afford my services if I charge more. I don’t want to be the kind of therapist who is thinking about money over people, but that is not a good business strategy. How do you help therapists establish that balance between being a therapist who’s really focused on people and relationships and being a business-minded person who’s focused on establishing a rate that’s fair but will still allow me to earn a decent income?
LG: One of the things that I do when I’m working with therapists is talk about the importance of understanding the negative belief systems they’ve developed about money. It’s very common and it’s not just therapists that have negative belief systems about money. It’s many people. It usually doesn't matter that much if you have these kinds of emotional issues about money, except when you own and operate a business because then it tends to get projected into the business.
I’ll give you an example. Let’s say you grew up in a family where there was a lot of financial deprivation, and you grew up hearing things like, “money doesn't grow on trees.” Or you grew up in a family where frugality was really prized, and that’s the way you live, and that’s the way you are, and it’s really not an issue for you until you start a business. In business, the mantra often is, “you have to spend money to make money,” and it’s really true. You cannot run a business on total frugality and be able to expand or take advantage of opportunities, and it even affects your relationships with colleagues if you're too frugal. They will find you cheap but not understand that it’s not a reflection of your skill set or the way you might be working with clients.
It’s just something about the way you grew up financially that says that you don’t have thank you cards that you send when you get a referral, or that you don’t believe in going to conferences, or something like that. One of the first steps I like therapists to do is to at least get some awareness about any of these negative money issues that might be playing into who they are and how they operate so that they can clear those up and start to look at this as a business.
The definition of a business is an entity that makes a profit, which takes us to another really key issue, which is that therapists need to reconcile profit versus service.
RZ: What do you mean by that?
LG:
Profit means financial gain, taking advantage of and moneymaking, and service means being of assistance, helping others, and benefiting the public. When you are in private practice, you’re doing both.
Profit means financial gain, taking advantage of and moneymaking, and service means being of assistance, helping others, and benefiting the public. When you are in private practice, you’re doing both. Because it’s a business, you need to make a profit, and because it’s your service that you’re offering, you have to hold true to the integrity, and the ethics, and the values of service, and you have to have a way to reconcile this inside yourself and in your practice.
Having a Niche
RZ: When I was first starting out, people kept telling me to have a niche. I am a cognitive behavioral therapist who works with kids and teens, and I thought that that was pretty specific, but I was also afraid of missing out on opportunities or potential clients. Now my practice focuses primarily on kids and teens who have chronic pain, and I’m starting to see why it’s so important to be able to be identified as a person who sees a specific population. In your eyes, what do you think are the pros and cons of establishing a niche?
LG: Well, from a marketing perspective, it’s really helpful to have a niche because there’s so much information that’s flooding everybody that if somebody can associate your practice with something specific, it makes your practice more memorable. So for marketing purposes, it’s a good strategy. In my book I talk about the therapy services that sell versus those that don’t, and one of the services that continually sells well are services for children because most parents will prioritize whatever kind of help their children need. In terms of the kind of practice that you develop, apart from marketing, chances are you can have a practice that’s more generalized over time if that’s what you prefer clinically. But from a marketing perspective, it’s still very useful to have a niche.
RZ: Do you think you can be pigeonholed by your referral sources if you end up marketing yourself as a therapist who just does one thing? What ends up happening if a couple years down the line you want to start seeing clients who have different presenting problems?
LG:
One of the services that continually sells well are services for children because most parents will prioritize whatever kind of help their children need.
Another marketing mantra is to be a big fish in a small pond. So rather than trying to reach out to everybody, it’s good to develop expertise and a reputation within a target audience, but that doesn't mean that you can’t have more than one target market. You could be a specialist in some kind of service for children, like doing CBT for some specific area for children. And let’s say, over time, you also wanted to become a couples therapist. You could certainly target another market, and your work with children would help their parents, so it would be a smart marketing move to make.
There’s nothing wrong with having more than one specialty area or more than one diversification in your business, but you want to do it in a planned way so that you are marketing and making the best use of your marketing dollars rather than just doing things based on anxiety.
RZ: Does that mean that every time you want to expand your practice and see a different population you need to rebrand and remarket yourself?
LG: You might. It depends how you approach your marketing. It’s not a cookie-cutter approach, where one size fits for all for all private practices and all therapists. It’s really customized.
There are hundreds of strategies of marketing that all work for different therapists, so the question is, how can you customize a marketing plan so that it works for you, so that you are always in your comfort zone when you’re marketing, so that the way you speak to other people, the way you advertise, the way you use your website, the kinds of activities you do are really comfortable and feel a lot like who you are?
RZ: What are just some basic marketing tips you would give to someone who’s just starting a practice?
LG: The first thing that you want to do is to develop your business identity. You want to have a website. You probably want to have a “Psychology Today” listing or some directory listing. You want to have a business card. You may want to have white papers. You might want to have a brochure. You want some materials that you’ve developed, and the great thing about taking the time to do that with some care is that it also gives you talking points.
We know from the data that we have that
50% of referrals these days are coming online to therapists.
50% of referrals these days are coming online to therapists. So you want to have your online presence be indicative and reflective of you at your best and what you feel like you have to offer. But you also then need to start to build community around your practice. You can’t just do it online—you need to network, to show up in places where you can have some collegial referral building and sharing with others. You need to learn how to talk about your work in a way that generates some referrals back to you.
The Tall Poppies
RZ: Marketing does seem to be a particular challenge for therapists. I find that it’s very hard for me to say nice things about myself, even though I know I’m supposed to highlight my strengths to attract clients. I’m even wary about telling about my extensive training, despite the fact that it’s relevant to potential clients, and they often want to hear about my training because it gives them faith about my skills and abilities. What would you say is a good way for therapists to talk about their strengths and their positive qualities without sounding arrogant?
LG: It’s interesting, I was giving presentations in Australia one year on practice building and talking about how to talk about your practice, and somebody raised their hand and said, “Well, we can’t do that over here, Lynn, because of the tall poppies.” I had never heard about the tall poppies in Australia.
RZ: Nor have I.
LG: The idea was that the tallest poppies in a field get cut down first, so you don’t want to stick your neck out or raise yourself above the others. You want to be modest. You want to be humble so that you don’t get cut down like a tall poppy. So in Australia, as well as with therapists, we have that same culture.
But it’s important to be able to share your enthusiasm and your passion for the work that you do. What’s most attractive when you’re talking with other people is the fact that you love your work, or find it interesting, or feel very good about what’s happening clinically. You want to have a way to talk about that normally and comfortably so that it sounds like you, in layperson’s language. If I was coaching you—and you’re a CBT therapist, right?
RZ: Yes.
LG: OK, let’s say you wanted to talk to people, maybe friends who have children, and it’s not that they or that their kids would be your clients but that they might become your referral sources once they understood what you did. So if somebody said to you, “Hey, Rachel, what’s new?” You might say one of the things that was new was that you were really enjoying your work these days or that you were seeing fascinating cases. That would be a great way to let somebody know the kind of work you do. And you’d want to be able to explain what CBT is in a phrase or two so that you don’t bog down the conversation.
RZ: So language is important. Word choice is important.
LG:
You want to have some talking points about who you are, what you do, and why you love what you do so that you could turn a normal conversation into a conversation about your work.
Language is important. One of the things I often say to people who are doing CBT is to use a phrase like, “These days, it’s the gold standard in talk therapy.” That’s something that a layperson or even somebody who might be an alternative healer, a massage therapist, a nutritionist, an occupational therapist might understand and remember. You want to have some talking points about who you are, what you do, and why you love what you do so that you could turn a normal conversation into a conversation about your work. That’s what business people do—they talk about their work. We want to be able to do that, too, when it’s appropriate as therapists.
RZ: I feel very lucky because I do love what I do, and I’m very passionate about it and energized by it, and I love the kids that I work with, but I’m wary of sounding like a walking advertisement. So what are some key components to having a good elevator pitch?
LG: I have a whole chapter on that in my book, and rather than an elevator pitch, I call it your “basic message.” It’s what’s true and basic about what you have to offer. You want to keep it short, you want to keep it filled with some enthusiasm or passion or interest so that you look good when you’re talking about it, and you just want to learn to love to say it, whatever it is. It can be what you specialize in and why you feel like it’s important. It could be some kind of a metaphor about the way that you work and how it works.
It’s not so much the words. It’s how you look and feel saying this that somebody’s going to remember. They’ll remember, “ahh, Dr. Zoffness was really passionate about her work. I bet she’s good at what she does.” You just want to find the right words that put a smile on your face or put a twinkle in your eye when you’re saying them.
RZ: That sounds very intuitive and very smart.
LG: And easier, right?
Your Ideal Client
RZ: I also noticed in your book that you talked a lot about finding your ideal client, which really resonated with me because, as I mentioned, I do a lot of chronic pain work with kids and teens, and at first it was really hard for me to find out how to find the kids that need me. I know they're out there, and I know I have the training to help them, but I wasn’t sure how to reach them. So I ended up walking into pediatricians’ offices with my CV and, more recently, I reached out to really smart doctors at UCSF and Stanford. Starting to build those relationships has helped me get in contact with those kids. What would you say is the best way of finding your ideal population, if you're just starting out?
LG: I like what you did a lot. You started to build a profile of who the children are that need your services and found a way to describe this child that really needs to see you so that a busy doctor in a hospital could remember this. One way to say that is, “Here’s the kind of child I’m best for,” and you describe it almost in bullet points. You know, a child who’s suffering from this kind of pain, a child who has this kind of capacity to use therapy, a child who is comfortable using their imagination or can write in a notebook. Whatever the things are that would help a doctor or another professional start to spot those kids that were right for you—that’s how you develop your ideal client.
You're doing the work for the referral source. You’ve already thought about this. You’re pulling together the words. You’re giving them the talking point so that they can take that message and say to a parent, “I have a psychologist that’s right for you because this psychologist is really good at working with kids just like your child.”
RZ: So finding the language that describes the kind of client you want to see and also finding the people who would know those kinds of clients.
LG: Yes. And this is what belongs on your website, and maybe in a brochure so that that after somebody meets you and talks to you, if they go back to your website, they see it repeated there, which gives people a sense of security and confidence.
RZ: It’s fairly easy for me, because of my personality, to reach out to people that I’ve never met before or to walk into a pediatrician’s office and introduce myself, but I know that that is not standard. What do you think is the best way to go about meeting other professionals, doctors, teachers, pediatricians, etc. for people who may have more difficulty networking with strangers?
LG: Well, these days, we know it’s hard to get past the front desk in doctors’ offices.
RZ: Yes, that’s true.
LG: So I have a couple different strategies that I like to recommend to therapists, and all of them are based on the idea of not doing a cold call. Even if you have a very small circle of acquaintances and friends, all of them know people that might be right for you to meet.
Even if you have a very small circle of acquaintances and friends, all of them know people that might be right for you to meet.
The challenge is writing the introductory letter or making the introductory phone call. You want to script it out if you're not comfortable just talking extemporaneously, so that you can say, “Hi, my name is Lynn Grodzki, and I’m a masters level clinical social worker in your area, and Joyce suggested that I talk to you because she knew that I had a certain skill set that she felt would be helpful for your patients. Can I set up a time to meet with you? Or I can also write to you if you prefer. What would be the best way for us to contact and connect with each other?”
RZ: So, the first step is communicating with your friends and colleagues, who you already have an established relationship with, and saying, “This is what I want to do. These are the people I’m looking for. I’m looking to grow my business.” And hopefully they connect you with other professionals who might be able to help you. And then, the next step is to email those professionals?
LG: Well, it depends. You have to find out. Sometimes you have to call a front desk or make an initial phone call to find out how would they like to get information from you, because everyone is different.
Another thing that I’ve had some therapists do who want more contact with doctors is, on their intake forms, have them get consent from patients and clients to connect with their health professional team so that they can start to set up an integrated healthcare process just by reaching out to those people who are treating their patients.
For example, let’s say there’s an internist, and you’re seeing their patient for depression. You get permission from the patient to contact the internist and then send a letter that goes into the file saying, “I wanted to introduce myself. I’m working with your patient. I’ve been given permission to contact you. I wanted you to know about the work that we’re doing together so that, if at any time in the future you have any concerns about this patient, you can connect with me and contact me, and we can speak.”
Imagine that this doctor is seeing the patient and all of the sudden feels uncomfortable at the level of anxiety or depression that this patient is showing. He’s already got a letter from the therapist in the file, with permission signed to contact them. That’s what happens in an integrated healthcare facility, except in this case you’ve initiated it on your own. At the same time, it’s giving you a great way to start to connect with other healthcare professionals who might remember you when they have a referral to make.
When Your Client Count is Down
RZ: Our business is unusual in that we can’t rely on having the same income from month to month because it depends on how many clients we have. In your book, you talk about living with that uncertainty. Can you talk a little bit about that?
LG: This is true in any small business. There is no guarantee, usually, about what your income is going to be month to month unless you have some kind of yearly contract that you're working under.
I strongly encourage therapists to be tracking their finances, to be tracking their client count, so that they can know what the ups and downs are in their business, and they can start to think about what they want to do to protect their income.
So for a private practice, you need to anticipate these ups and downs and have a way to both budget for them financially and also to deal with it emotionally so that when the business is down, you have a strategy for what to do. Then you kick into your marketing strategy when you start to notice that your client count is down. I strongly encourage therapists to be tracking their finances, to be tracking their client count, so that they can know what the ups and downs are in their business, and they can start to think about what they want to do to protect their income.
It’s not unusual, for example, for someone I’m coaching to say, “I’m down this month in my client count. Let’s talk about the things that I could do to reach out to people.” When this person is very full, they don’t have the time to do that kind of outreach, so we’ll have a plan ready for when they’ve got time on their schedule.
If you’re not tracking carefully, it’s really hard to do this, and it just lends itself to getting into a situation where you're really low with clients and then feeling really desperate.
RZ: What’s a good way to deal with the fact that there are going to be times where your business has a lull, and there are going to be times when your income isn’t what you want it to be or your client load isn’t what you want it to be?
LG: I think understanding the nature of private practice, that it just goes up and down, and having some self-care ways to calm your anxiety. Private practice really isn’t for everybody. There’s a 50% failure rate in small business, even now.
RZ: That’s significant.
LG: You have to have a thick skin and a strong inner core to ride out all the ups and downs, and that’s why some people decide “I don’t like this,” or “it’s too much work,” or “it requires business and marketing skills that I’m not comfortable with and I’d rather work for someone else.” That’s a fine decision to make, but if you are going to do this, you have to accept the whole package. There is a chance for a lot of autonomy and creativity and independence and profitability, but there is also uncertainty, some randomness, chaos, and you have to be able to structure yourself.
It’s Hard to Be Your Own Boss
RZ: I really like that you mentioned self-care, and I noticed that it’s really hard to be your own boss. I constantly find myself working when I should be resting or playing. How do you establish boundaries for yourself when you're in charge?
LG: Well, I live by my calendar. I really lean on the calendar. And if you were to look at my calendar, you would see self-care is in my calendar and my family time is in my calendar.
The recently released Hoffman Report, the independent investigation conducted by former Inspector General of Chicago David Hoffman into the American Psychological Association's (APA) collusion in the torture of prisoners at Guantanamo and other CIA "black sites," has sent shock waves through the psychology profession, whose members are not at all happy to be the public face of torture in America. Listservs around the country are erupting with consternation and outrage, with demands for accountability and justice and reform and cries of betrayal. Our profession is in a full-blown crisis and psychologists around the country are confused, embarrassed, unsure of how to respond in a meaningful way.
What shocks me is how shocked my professional community suddenly seems to be, since much of the information in the Hoffman report has been available to the public for many years, thanks to the ceaseless work of activist psychologists like Steven Reisner, Stephen Soldz, and Jean Maria Arrigo, who first blew the whistle on the APA's cover up back in 2006. Arrigo had participated in APA's bogus Presidential Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National Security, known as the PENS Task Force, which sought to investigate the ethics of "enhanced interrogation" (torture) by appointing a panel made up almost entirely of military personnel who had direct experience with torture at one or more of the various CIA black sites. They, and a small handful of other psychologists out on the frontlines of this battle have been intimidated, publicly maligned, and marginalized by the APA in their attempt to discredit their critics and deflect attention from their dirty secrets.
I was a doctoral student in clinical psychology when news first broke about psychologists' involvement in torture. I had entered my studies with such optimism and hope about my career, feeling that I had finally found my home in the world–a vocation, not just a job–where I might make good use of my deep love and empathy for people and my desire to do some good in the world. It was shocking, then, to hear in my second year of training that people in my new profession were torturing people. I couldn't fathom how those people could be psychologists. Weren't we healers? Weren't we Carl Rogers and Virginia Satir and Freud and Carol Gilligan and…torturers? I couldn't wrap my head around it at all, so I decided to write my dissertation about it in order to get to the bottom of this incongruous debacle.
As I began to research the events around the torture of prisoners at CIA black sites, I discovered that financial embeddedness and collusion between the APA, the CIA and the Department of Defense spanned half of the last century, beginning with mind-control research at the start of the Cold War, then onto the torture of Vietnamese prisoners of war, CIA-backed training of torturers throughout Central and South America (at venues like the School of the Americas), and in a natural progression to the war on terror. The degree of entanglement between the military and the psychology profession, it turned out, was so longstanding, broad and deep that it would have been shocking had psychologists not been enlisted to prop up our latest war. (For more information on this sordid history, read Alfred McCoy's A Question of Torture: CIA Interrogation from The Cold War to the War on Terror.)
Though people are utterly enraged at the actions of the American Psychological Association, let's remember the context in which these unscrupulous actions unfolded. Our President—no our entire government save one dissenter, Congressman Barbara Lee—decided that bombing, kidnapping, torturing and killing the civilian population of Afghanistan was an appropriate response to a terrorist attack on American soil. But much worse, our government decided that a "shock and awe" mass-murder approach to deposing Saddam Hussein, who had no connection to 9/11, was an appropriate sequel. Bush's legal counsel at the Department of Justice rewrote American law to circumvent constitutional and international law regarding treatment of prisoners of war. In short, this was a time of collective national insanity—not a diagnosis covered by insurance, mind you—and the APA was, for the first time, at the seat of absolute power.
Let's also remember that one of President Obama's first acts in office, besides not closing Guantanamo as he had promised, was to summarily reject the notion of investigating, much less prosecuting, the Bush Administration's crimes during the war on terror. This was a powerful signal to those at the APA that they could simply "look forward, not back," without fear of punishment. If our former President, and all of the president's men (and Condoleeza), could get away with lies, deception, torture and the murdering of civilians, why would these psychologists, this professional organization, bother to reckon with itself and its past?
What I struggle with today, as the "shocking" revelations finally seem to have penetrated the psychology profession and the public at large in a way they simply haven't over the last decade, is how to reckon with the intensity of our denial–as a nation, as a profession, as a collection of individuals struggling to make our way in the world. Even my socially progressive little graduate school in Berkeley, CA, received my research with indifference, with one administrator dismissing it as "totally insignificant," the concern of a couple of "ultra-lefties" with no relevance to our profession. This is Berkeley. We're supposed to be cultural revolutionaries in this town, and yet even here, the fact that the association that accredits and determines the curriculum for our training institutions was providing professional and legal cover for an illegal and deeply immoral torture program was deemed irrelevant. If that doesn't suggest a need for a radical overhaul of this profession, then this is not a profession I want to be a part of.
But I'm not turning in my shingle. What I know from this work is that crises of this nature open up the possibility of radical transformation. We psychologists–most of us at least–are loving people with big hearts and empathic natures and a desire to be instruments of healing and change. We are imaginative and inquisitive and have the capacity to hold many (sometimes too many) truths at once. But as we sort through the crisis in our midst, we must break free from thinking we are either confined or defined by this terribly dysfunctional professional organization. A change in leadership, changes to the ethics code, prosecution for those involved in illegalities, democratic checks and balances–these are essential acts of reparation. But to truly find our moral grounding again, nay to find our passion again, we must turn our sights beyond the APA and remember what it means to be healers, not just of individuals, but of society and the planet. If we put love of humanity at the center of our agenda, and reorganize our leadership, our ethics codes, our research and our training institutions around social, economic and ecological justice, putting aside once and for all the advancement of profession over people, we are sure to find our way.
When engaging in psychotherapy by Skype or other video conferencing system, clients will often keep their appointment even when they feel too sick or fragile to attend school or go to work. They reach out to their online therapist from the comfort of home, sometimes wrapped in blankets in a cozy chair, sometimes lying on a couch.
And sometimes, they will have their session from bed, cradling their on-screen therapist in their lap. As an occasional change of locale, it makes sense and is far better than missing the session.
Other clients actually prefer to hold their appointments in bed on a regular basis. Both authors have held continuing weekly sessions with men and women who connected with us from their bedrooms, usually clothed and lying on top of the bedspread, often leaning back against the headboard with pillows. The session venue a client chooses often makes a subtle statement, but our clients who take us to bed instantly get our attention.
Therapists in bed with their clients. It raises so many uncomfortable but fascinating issues. Does it mean we, as therapists, are failing to preserve good boundaries? Are we allowing our professional role to be trivialized? Is the erotic transference (or even more troubling, the erotic counter-transference) at work?
We believe that occasional sessions from bed can be useful, maintaining contact that might otherwise be interrupted by illness or some other factor. We have found that the choice of ongoing sessions from the bedroom provides important information, to be understood and made use of in therapy. Therapists need to pay ongoing attention to boundaries and transference issues, of course; but if we’re mindful, we can also focus on the purpose and meaning of this unusual choice—to take your therapist to bed.
Kyle and Lisa are two clients whose stories show how bed sessions can be both constructive and revealing.
Kyle and the Shame Spiral (Joseph Burgo)
Early in our work together, Kyle used to suffer from what we referred to as the "downward shame spiral." Fearing that he might humiliate himself at some upcoming event such as a job interview, Kyle would postpone that appointment at the last moment; but doing so only filled him with shame and made him dread the rescheduled interview even more, which he would subsequently reschedule once again with another feeble excuse, and so on, until the employer lost interest.
Eventually he would become so overcome with shame about his behavior, feeling himself to be a “total loser,” that he would retreat from the world and retire to his bed, often for days on end. Sometimes he would cancel one of our twice-weekly sessions at the last moment; on other days, he slept right through the hour and emailed me much later. Missing the appointments intensified his sense of shame and failure, which made it even more difficult for him to break out of the downward spiral. Overcome with shame, he couldn’t reach out to me for help.
I came to recognize when Kyle was on the verge of one of these retreats by reading his facial expression … or rather, his complete lack of expression when he appeared on screen. Kyle’s usual manner was quite lively and engaging; he had a good sense of humor and a compelling smile. In the grip of a downward shame spiral, however, his face looked deadened, as if it were numb. While he and I normally had a warm and friendly relationship, at these moments, he gave me an impression of complete indifference, as if he felt nothing about me. He seemed encapsulated and cut off from me. I could usually predict that he would miss the next two or three sessions.
Eventually, Kyle would emerge from his shame retreat, re-engaging with me and the world at large, though we never understood exactly why and how he recovered. It felt almost biological, as if he had to pass through a physiological cycle over which he had no control.
This state of affairs went on for six or seven months, with downward shame spirals kicking in every few weeks or so. As many times as I encouraged him to reach out to me, as warmly as I expressed my concern, nothing seemed to help him withstand the call of bed. I felt frustrated by the many missed appointments and wondered if I was really helping him. During one of our sessions at the end of this period, he came in with the “dead face,” as we referred to it, and I didn’t expect to see him for our second session later that week.
I nonetheless logged onto Skype at the appointed time to wait for him. A few minutes into the session, I received an email from Kyle. Running behind. With you in a few. I sat at my computer and waited. About five minutes later, Skype showed Kyle “online” and he soon initiated the call. My screen came to life. “Usually, Kyle would speak to me while seated at a table in his apartment, or sometimes in a small conference room at his workplace. Today, he was in bed, lying down so that his unshaven face appeared sideways in the screen.” His hair was rumpled. He still wore the dead face expression but at least he had shown up.
“Is this okay?” he asked. “I wasn’t sure if you’d mind my Skypeing you from bed but I couldn’t make myself get up.”
“You’re here,” I assured him. “That’s what matters.”
Kyle filled me in on the last couple of days. He had indeed fallen into a downward shame spiral after our last session and retreated to his bedroom. He’d cancelled some appointments and dropped the ball on some important commitments, but he didn’t want to remain in seclusion any longer. I could feel him searching my face for disapproval or judgment; I told him that I was very glad he had managed to keep our appointment.
Over the course of the session, Kyle shifted to a sitting position, his back against the headboard, with his computer positioned in his lap. Though not exactly lively, his expression no longer seemed completely immobile. By the end of the session, he had resolved to get out of bed after we signed off, and so he did. When he appeared on screen for his next session, he was fully clothed and in work mode.
The in-bed session was a transitional space for Kyle: allowing me into his place of seclusion helped him to bridge the gap and reconnect to his world. I considered it a sign of progress that he had reached out to me and indeed, over the next half-year, the downward shame spirals lessened in both frequency and duration. We conducted one or two more sessions from his bedroom, but eventually, the strength of our emotional connection allowed Kyle to keep his appointments no matter how badly he felt.
Eventually, the downward shame spiral became a thing of the past.
Lisa's Artist's Block (Anastasia Piatakhina Giré)
Lisa was an attractive woman in her late fifties whose marriage to a successful businessman allowed her to pursue her passion for art. The first time we met, Lisa was lying in bed, weak from a recent flu. A bright floral canvas appeared on the wall behind her. She told me she was a painter and proudly announced that she had her own “atelier” in her home. The painting on the wall was one of her own.
I enjoyed meeting with Lisa, even if the décor—the flowery bed linen and a bedside table with a pot of face cream on it—made me feel rather uncomfortable and aware of boundaries being crossed. “Lisa apologized for “receiving me in bed,” but didn’t look uneasy about it.”
At first glance, Lisa seemed to have everything a woman of her age could wish for: two grown children, a supportive husband, and a very exciting hobby. But she acknowledged a feeling of profound sadness and almost physical emptiness, which she could not explain or share with anyone else. In fact, for the past few months she had been unable able to paint and was actively avoiding her studio. Describing her artist’s block, unusual for her, made Lisa blush with shame.
As the weeks went by, she continued connecting for sessions from her bed. She looked perfectly healthy, with no signs of depression or any other debilitating condition. Unable to escape from that bedroom, my uneasiness kept growing and I gradually began to feel trapped.
What was Lisa trying to convey by “keeping me in her bed”?
When I finally shared with her my curiosity about her choice of place for our sessions, she at first seemed surprised. She had always thought that online therapy “was this thing you could do from anywhere.” Then we began to explore what “bed” represented to her. I asked whether it was a space she usually shared with her husband, Charles.
No, they had being living in separate rooms for the last decade as Charles’ sleeping problems kept him awake for most of the night. In the beginning, he used to make frequent visits to her bedroom; they would often stay in bed together, chatting and sometimes making love. Over time, his visits became increasingly rare; now, he would pass by her room with just a quick “hello,” moving on to his own bedroom. Sharing this for the first time, Lisa looked profoundly sad, her usual cheerfulness replaced by tears.
I understood that her bed had become a lonely place where she felt trapped, unwanted, and too old for sex. To express these feelings verbally, either to her husband or to me, her therapist, was far too difficult because she felt so ashamed of this “pathetic and needy” part of herself. Though Lisa couldn’t express her desire for sexual contact with her husband, was she unconsciously making me his replacement by taking me into bed?
I encouraged Lisa to take the risk and tell Charles how she felt. The confession took him by surprise: he had no idea that his wife still desired him and had assumed that she preferred him to keep his distance. Charles soon came back to visiting her bedroom regularly. Now that she had replaced me with a more appropriate “bed” companion, Lisa began connecting for sessions from her atelier, a far more suitable location for therapy.
For our last session, Lisa was dressed in her working outfit—clearly Charles’ old shirt, oversized for her. She was bubbling with a new energy, and announced to me that her artist’s block seemed dissolved, “gone by magic.” She was able to paint again.
Up Close and Personal
These two vignettes illustrate how online psychotherapy can facilitate progress and provide information that in-person sessions cannot, at least not as quickly. No doubt Kyle would eventually have made his way back to the consulting room after a shame attack, but the middle-ground of therapy-in-bed provided a helpful bridge. In all likelihood, Lisa would eventually have communicated her isolation and longing for intimacy to an in-person therapist, but without the visual setting that prompted her online therapist to probe deeper, it likely would have taken much longer.
In discussions of online psychotherapy, professionals and laypeople usually see it as second best to in-person therapy. After practicing in the online setting as well as in person for several years now, the authors have come to believe that it is neither better nor worse, but truly different. Experiences like being “taken to bed” by our online clients often provide a kind of insight that would never be available to a therapist seeing all of his clients in a physical therapy office.
We’ve also discovered a special intimacy that is idiosyncratic to online therapy. Even if both were sitting up, the in-person therapist would never see a client such as Kyle so intensely “up close and personal.” During an online session, the computer image often seems analogous to a movie screen filled up by an actor’s face, conveying high intensity anger or fear or shame to the audience. While in certain respects online sessions are less immediate than in-person psychotherapy, we have found them to be even more intimate, more emotionally evocative in this particular way.
Online sessions also allow a client like Lisa to show rather than to tell, and as any fiction writer will tell you, a vivid and visual scene more effectively engages the reader than straight narrative. Clients who connect from bed often show us something deeply personal and painful that would be much harder to narrate later during an in-person session. Consciously or not, they invite us to witness their personal world first-hand, to enter their story lines, so to speak, rather than hearing about them after the fact. This conveys to the online “here-and-now” a very distinct, moving quality.
Such moments of real intimacy and shared vulnerability are precious, helping us to forge a strong therapeutic relationship with our clients, even ones who may be thousands of miles away on another continent and who we may never actually meet in person.
This essay is condensed and adapted from the authors’ forthcoming book In Bed With Our Clients (and Other Adventures in Online Psychotherapy).
—I was born in a small Russian town, a very cold and dirty place.
This was one of the first things Anna shared about herself in a long introductory email reaching out to me for online psychotherapy.
In this description of her native town, I could sense her sad childhood: a lack of emotional warmth and possibly some neglect.
The way people describe their early surroundings usually tells something significant about their life story.
We developed early bonds with our caretakers, but also with a place. We end up internalizing the qualities of the landscape or family house where we grew up.
Can we ever detach ourselves from our original place? Does it not persist inside us, long after the physical building has been knocked down?
Anna had left her native town early, to study and work in Moscow, and then she had moved abroad. Her departure had been more of an escape: eager to leave, she had barely said her goodbyes. Since then she had changed countries several times, and finally landed in London. But the original “coldness” and “dirtiness” had followed her, as a malevolent shadow from her past.
It was only our second session, and I was experiencing Anna as frozen and difficult to reach out to. She complained that no town ever felt good enough to her: “too cold” or “too dirty.” Through the videoconferencing, I could have a glimpse of her current London interior, which looked unsurprisingly impersonal and rather messy.
Anna’s restlessness was partly due to her conscious desire to find a more nourishing environment, but this was conflicting with a deeper sense of hopelessness and despair: she believed that such a place did not exist for her.
Even in a warmer and more welcoming country, she would always feel alienated by a feeling of guilt—as if betraying her birthplace, her motherland. That felt deeply wrong.
But at the same time, she could not feel belonging to this new and “better” place, she felt painfully “different.”
Deep inside she kept being “a girl from a dirty and cold place,” her life stained by it forever.
As often happens with expatriates, something shifted when Anna went back home for a holiday. We had an online session whilst she was there. As her face appeared on my screen, I was struck by how different she now looked: instead of her usual impeccable jacket, she was wearing a loose t-shirt; her hair was messy; and without make-up she looked younger.
This was a unique opportunity to accelerate the process.
She was staying at her parents’ flat—the very one where she had grown up, and was certainly getting in touch with some early emotional experiences of her childhood.
Internet connection is always bad here, so maybe we will need to switch-off the video at some point. She warned me, preparing a retreat in case the session triggered too much shame. She was also reminding me how “imperfect” her childhood place was.
Shame was indeed around for the whole hour, but Anna was brave enough to stay with it, and we managed to navigate through this experience together.
Using her laptop’s webcam, Anna finally showed me around. This was a real risk-taking, and I could appreciate how exposed and vulnerable she felt. The place was indeed muddled, and was a testimony of an un-nourishing childhood environment.
Anna’s mother, born just after the war, had been stockpiling all sorts of things, an aversion to discarding possessions which qualified her as a “hoarder.” Understanding her mother’s struggle helped Anna make sense of the level of messiness she grew up with, and the shame she was feeling about it.
That “back home” session actually was a turning point in my work with Anna.
She realized how much she was actually attached to her birthplace, with a painful loyalty that did not let her leave it completely behind.
Making a better sense of her mother’s mental condition, Anna was now able to re-evaluate her own relationship with her family home and her native town. This place was not her. It did not define her; it was rather a sum of her experiences, which had started in that town, but did not have to end there. And the latter was her choice—such an empowering realization.
Maybe a warmer place existed somewhere for her after all…?
This couple therapy session was the last chance before Anna and Guy’s upcoming wedding in Paris. They had reached out to me for a premarital counselling session via Skype, knowing that I was working with mixed couples.
Their situation, as Anna exposed it to me in her short email, needed to be addressed with some urgency: they were due to get married in the town hall of Guy’s native Paris within two weeks, and Anna still had serious doubts about her final “yes.”
Their two faces appeared on my screen, one next to each other, cramped into the frame of the Skype window. From the start, I mentioned one of our challenges: neither of us was using our native language here. Anna is Polish, Guy is French, and I am Russian. From my experience, this multilingual field would be played out at some point during this session, but how?
Their respective English was fluent, even though Guy had a strong French accent, which made him sound like an odd TV-series character. In the first minutes, I learnt that they had started dating online, and now Anna had finally moved in with Guy in Paris. Since then, their respective lifestyles had been drastically altered: Anna had an 8-years old daughter from her first marriage, and Guy had an autistic sister who lived in the same building. Those two were constantly challenging their shared existence. They were their respective “burdens,” as Guy shared.
When he pronounced this word, Anna’s face hardened with pain. She was clearly hurt by the reference to her daughter as a “burden,” and was getting defensive. Their typical argument then started to unfold. These fights happened on a daily basis, leading inevitably to door- slamming and painful silences.
Now their faces were flushing with all kinds of emotions.
“You are so slow and uninterested!” she stated, bitterly.
“You always sound so aggressive and impatient!” he responded, defensively.
I could clearly see what both of them meant. Anna did sound irritated; her aggressive facade seemed to hide a deep insecurity. Guy did come out as a bit slow and detached. He was carefully looking for his words, avoiding eye contact, and every time, before speaking, he would make a pause, recollecting and revaluating his thoughts. This habit of his could be easily taken for a lack of interest or passion. In Anna’s view he simply did not feel enough love for her, or enough acceptance for her daughter, to become a good husband and father.
And yet, they were really willing to look at their relationship, ready to fight for its survival, avoid its ending. I was starting to wonder how I could be of any use, when I heard the sound of a distant doorbell. They both jumped on their chairs. Anna smiled badly; Guy shivered and disappeared from my sight.
“See?! This is what happens. She comes in and out when she wants, uninvited.”
I understood that Anna was talking about Guy’s sister, and I invited her to pause and wait for Guy’s return.
Such interruptions of the sessions are frequent in my online practice. They are somehow an unexpected gift of this particular setting. I always endeavour to make the most of them. In this virtual space, silences are tougher to tolerate, even for the psychotherapist.
Anna and I were staring at each other, hearing their voices at a distance, and I could sense her disappointment and growing anger. She looked lonely and lost, with the other half of my screen left empty by Guy’s absence.
When he finally came back, she had that look of resignation. They are not going to make it, I thought.
Guy, clearly shaken by this sudden illustration of “his side of the problem,” muttered some excuses in French (he knew I understand it well). In his native language, he sounded surprisingly fast and emotional.
We had only half an hour left in the session, and a few days until the big day, so I decided to risk something, and suggested an experiment: would Guy be willing to repeat what he had said earlier about their “respective burdens” in French? I knew Anna could understand most of it.
“Je t’aime…”—this is how Guy started his difficult speech. He talked about sharing their respective pains and responsibilities: his sister but also her daughter. He talked passionately. His body animated (at least the upper part which I could see). He seemed to almost forget about me.
Anna was listening, and this time she did not seem impatient.
That was the midpoint of the session, and such a precious opening! I felt blessed.
We then explored how using his native French had changed their common experience. Guy was finding it difficult to understand all the details when Anna spoke English quickly (which she did naturally). So his mind wandered, he looked uninterested. It reminded Anna of her first husband, who was distant and absorbed by his own activities.
As for Guy, he would see his role as a protector of his autistic sister. In his speech in French he said something valuable, which became an anchor for the rest of our session:
"Elles vont être maintenant notre fille et notre sœur."
I made sure Anna understood this: “they will now be our daughter and our sister.”
That felt manageable for both, and Guy was here to protect them all. It switched the whole perspective.
I cannot know for sure whether Anna and Guy will stay together, but I know that they did try hard to understand each other better…
I clearly remember my very first visit to my British psychotherapist. She used to receive her patients in her conservatory. Her dogs sometimes got impatient and produced considerable clatter, which I could clearly hear from inside the house. The front door would be unlocked. Clients just had to push the gate to get through an unkempt garden into the peculiar therapy room. She would be already comfortably sitting there in the same old chair, and a flowery cup of tea would be ready; weak for her, and strong for me. When I was late, my tea was cold. Maybe it was her subtle way of punishing me…
I actually loved this place. Years later I can still recall its particular smell of wet dogs and a damp garden. That therapy room had become an anchor for me, which safely attached me to the Island that was then my temporary home; I was in the midst of yet another international move.
Now that I use the online setting for my psychotherapy practice, I sometimes wonder what my clients will remember of our encounters. No particular smell of madeleines will ever be attached to a virtual space.
Any therapist, myself included, hopes that his therapy room can become some sort of “sacred place” to his clients, a place for individual growth. We all work towards this goal, creating small rituals and paying careful attention to the boundaries of the therapeutic relationship.
With the current expansion of online counseling, therapists and their clients are seeing this sacred element of therapy being taken away. Our cherished therapy rooms are disappearing, replaced by a simple desk and a computer.
I have kept a traditional face-to-face practice in Madrid, on top of my online work, so when I connect with a client on Skype, he can always spot behind me the background of a traditional therapy room decorum: two large armchairs, a box of Kleenex, a smiling Buddha statue… a pale reminder of the physical space where our encounter would have had to take place just a few years ago.
A couch, a bookshelf, and a coffee table… we have been familiar with these traditional attributes of a therapy room for ages. Anybody coming to a therapist for the first time knew what to expect, and rarely got surprised. In a space, tightly bound by walls, boundaries tended to be clear: the therapist had his own chair, the client might have a choice between two chairs and a couch. In this place both the therapist and the client felt safe. This space seemed eternal… until the online option emerged, bringing confusion.
Now online therapy is practiced within a no-place space. The couch is gone. And each of us therapists responds to this loss in different ways, which vary as in any grief—from denial and anger to acceptance.
During an online session, two people stare at their respective computer screens, without sharing a common place. This becomes an opportunity to build their own space together. It is very much like coming to a new empty area, and building from a green field a house here or there, then eventually a village.
In my experience, this lack of a physical place actually fosters creativity.
Many people I meet in my practice live very mobile lives, geographically unsettled; so the perceived neutrality of the no-place becomes a real asset in addressing the displacement-related issues.
Amélie’s story is one such case. She was back to Paris after 10 years in Korea for her husband’s career. There, Amélie had felt isolated and disoriented in her vast house, while her husband was travelling extensively. She had had to leave behind her music teacher job, and after several years of this expatriate life, she was feeling lost. Now back to her native Paris, she was feeling depressed. Her first panic attack happened in a shopping mall. She did not know where she was and was not able to get out of this unfamiliar place crowded with strangers. She was struck by an acute sense of derealisation. She reached out to me, in addition to her local psychiatrist.
“How is it for you to tell me your story here, online?” I asked.
Actually, Amélie felt safe, her anxiety was stepping back. She was relieved, as she could meet with me from the only place that still felt familiar—her parents’ Parisian flat. Driving to a therapist’s office would have been too much for her at that point. The online space we shared became in this case a way of dealing with her confusion without re-introduction of another different place.
Every time I connect with a client, especially for the first time, I am ready to get surprised. Those who seek therapy online generally use and abuse the flexibility allowed by the technology, so I “meet” them (virtually) in their holiday house, hotel room, office, kitchen, or lounge.
Without moving from my desk, I am then able to spot small samples of their physical realm. I always feel touched by the trust involved in this “letting me in.”
The whole situation has now been reversed: it is not the therapist who lets his client in, but the client who is choosing which of his sceneries to share with his therapist.
These “unexpected gifts” somehow make up for the lost couch.
In any successful therapy there is a time when the client ends up internalising the reparative relationship with his therapist, creating the “safe place” within, that anchoring gift I received from my first therapist. When this happens, the concrete place does not matter as much as the “virtual” place discovered. And the person is able to go anywhere, feeling safe enough to further explore the world.
As in the case of Amélie, the placeless reality of the online setting accelerates this natural shift from place towards relationship.
I enjoy both my online and my face-to-face practices. When connecting with a client, I always attempt to recreate the ever-important “sacred place” of a therapy room, together with my client, in this ethereal space offered to us by technology.
According to Ray Kurzweil, futurist extraordinaire, the singularity is approaching at the speed of Jimmy John's delivery. The technological notion of the singularity asserts that computers, robots, and related super-intelligent machines will reach a stage when they match and then exceed the capabilities of human beings.
When will the singularity occur? Ray has his calendar marked for 2045, so I should have the majority of my credit card bills polished off by then. Now, of course, we could dismiss Kurzweil's predictions as ludicrous, except for the fact that he possess 20 honorary doctorate degrees, has received honors from three U.S. presidents, and enough inventions to make Benjamin Franklin green with envy.
Make no mistake about it: If the singularity casts its shadow it will be a major game-changer for the field of psychotherapy, and I am not the only pundit sounding the alarm. University of Missouri at St. Louis graduate professor and book author R. Rocco Cottone recently penned an article in the 2015 April issue of Counseling Today titled, "The End of Counseling as we Know it."
So let's get a tad self-centered here and see where we as helpers fit into this movement.
At first the future looks bright, as therapists will be needed to program these electronic psychotherapists. Those therapists who obtain double degrees such as psychology or counseling and computer science, or perhaps social work and computer programming, will likely have their pick of jobs. (By the way, that wouldn't be yours truly. I'm still struggling to learn the features on my semi-prehistoric flip phone and I am dreading the day—which will surely arrive prior to the singularity—when I can no longer secure a battery for this dinosaur.)
The next phase. Well, that's where the proverbial bottom drops out. First these techno-wonders will surely be able to surpass our human scores on exams like the EPPP, the NCE, or the CPCE. "And the job goes to the bright silver nanobot in the corner with the terrahertz processor." Of course that will end therapists' interview anxiety when it comes to those "tell me about your weaknesses" questions.
For those who are skeptical, please recall that on February 10, 1996, an IBM supercomputer dubbed Deep Blue beat Garry Kasparov, the world chess champion, in a match.
On the positive side, Kurzweil makes it clear that we will indeed have the technology to load all the world's information to our brains. Hence, I would imagine that after that any red-blooded therapist could ace their licensing or certification exam with a perfect score. But what's a therapist to do if insurance refuses to pay for the procedure? Good question, isn't it?
The final phase will take place when every cell phone, flat screen television, tablet, Google Glasses, and only God knows what, will sport an app with an Albert Ellis clone right down to the New York vocal inflections. And if you don't like Ellis, no problem. Just tell the app you would like a humanist, and a virtual Carl Rogers appears. But is that what we really want for our clients? Wouldn't it be better to learn to have a relationship with another human being rather than a computer program with artificial intelligence (AI), governed by Moore's Law, that has passed the Turing test? Just asking. I don't know about you, but a computerized Rogers doesn't sound very humanistic to me.
And say the client develops a positive transference toward a virtual Freud. Do we applaud that sort of behavior or shall we advocate for a new DSM category?
It is only fair to mention that not everybody is buying the Kurzweil version of the future. Dr. John Grohol of the PsychCentral website is adamant that since we actually don't know how the human brain functions, it is futile to worry about us creating artificial intelligence systems which will occupy our seats in the therapy room.
As for me. I just want some assurance that the techno-human counseling my client isn't hacked or isn't a hacker. But then again, I would imagine that would be a user support issue.
I woke a woman named Ophelia for morning group, and she was not pleased. “You woke me from my sunder,” she kept repeating in an angry voice. She followed me into the dayroom anyway. A man named Juan was dancing in the hallways, and I corralled him, too. There was a third patient, a woman, she looked a little slow. And Mr. Rumbert again. I asked them to speak about why they were in CPEP [Comprehensive Psychiatric Emergency Program].
“I came for a bed, but I was double-crossed,” said Ophelia.
“My fiancée called 911 after Shabbos dinner,” Juan said, which sounded funny because he was clearly Mexican.
“Why did she call?” I inquired.
“You’d have to ask her,” he replied.
The woman who looked slow said she’d done crack for the first time and was full of regret.
She began to cry.
Rhoda [a nurse] walked in to get Ophelia. She needed her help with some paperwork.
“You can come back when you’re finished,” I told the patient as she left. She turned and gave me the finger. Juan told those of us who remained that he wanted to read to us from a book called Recreating Your Self. As we listened, Ophelia returned, and she was worked up. She marched up right close to me.
“You double-crossed me,” she yelled. Her body looked tense, poised for a fight. For the first time in the ER, my fear of being physically threatened was being realized. I made my way toward the door, encouraging Ophelia to come with me, not wanting to leave her alone with the other patients. She was taller than I was, and wiry. I imagined her rage would give her fists great force. I had never learned how to protect myself from a punch, and cowering seemed like my best defense. I remembered what T. [a supervisor] had told me weeks earlier about being soothing.
“It’s okay. Come with me. We’ll find you some juice, something to eat,” I said. She followed me as I walked backward into the hallway, which for once was deserted, the guard having abandoned her post. Ophelia remained too close, still menacing, insisting on my alleged crime, taunting me. I continued walking slowly, my body facing toward her as I backed away sideways. “Hello, hello,” I said loudly, turning my head toward the adjacent halls, trying to get the staff ’s attention without alarming anyone, but someone was always yelling, if not screaming, in the ER, and no one was likely to heed my cautious cries. Calling for help seemed overly dramatic, and I thought it might set Ophelia off besides. Shit.
But Rhoda came out of her office and saw us. She rushed over, inserting her solid body between Ophelia’s and mine. She managed to calm her down while also explaining to me that Ophelia had slammed out of her office two minutes before. “I’ll take care of you,” Rhoda said firmly to Ophelia, shepherding her off to another hallway. I went back to the group room, concerned that the patients might have gotten spooked. Juan and the other woman were now seated side by side. She was choosing passages from his book, and he was reading these aloud. Mr. Rumbert sat across the room, silent but calm. I entered and closed the door and sat to listen and get myself back together. Ophelia was back soon, standing outside the windows of the group room looking in. I saw the guard was back at her post, and I opened the door. “Would you like to rejoin us?” I asked Ophelia, because wasn’t that my job?
““Don’t talk to me,” she said. “You look like a canker sore.””
Afterward, I did not have much left in me, but still I brought Juan into T.’s office for an interview. His chart said he had a long history of bipolar disorder. He told me he was an attorney and a converted Jew and there was no reason for him to be in a psychiatric emergency room.
“Have you been hearing voices?” I asked.
“Yes,” pause, “Guided by Voices,” pause. “Get it? The band?” Guffaw.
“Are you worried that someone is watching you?”
“Yes,” pause, “the Police,” pause. “Every breath I take, every step I make.”
He kept insisting there was no reason for him to be there, and when T. came in, she’d quickly had enough and told him we were done. He got up and walked out, turning off the light as he made his exit.
“That’s so symbolic,” T. said. “Lights out.” I told her about what happened with Ophelia because I thought the staff might want to assign her an assault level. T. asked if I was okay. I was still shaken, but I said yes. Then it was time to go, and as I left, I saw Juan the converted Jew lying on his stomach on one of the reclining chairs. I waved, and he thrust his hands back to catch his ankles in a resplendent yoga bow pose.
All the way to work the next morning I debated whether to bring Ophelia to group. I hadn’t thought to ask T. about that. With a higher-functioning patient—someone who was not psychotic—I thought it would have been important to bring her in, to demonstrate implicitly that her aggressive impulses were not as destructive as she likely feared. I was not sure that the same thinking applied to a psychotic patient, especially a paranoid one, since paranoia reflects a projection of aggression—that is, Ophelia experienced the hostility not as her own but as directed toward her by those around her (in this case, me). I decided I would invite her if she was up but that I would not wake her from her “sunder” if she was still asleep. It turned out not to matter, because when I got the census she was no longer on it—moved to the list of people waiting for a bed upstairs. I was relieved. I found Juan and Mr. Rumbert—who was continuing to speak—and a new woman who was attractive and looked with-it. But then she told me she did “sortation” for a living, which made me suspect she had a thought disorder because I knew, thanks to my month in the psych ER, that use of neologisms was often a symptom of schizophrenia or mania. T. called in sick, and Dr. Brink was my official supervisor for the day.
I spoke to the sortater, who had a long history of psychiatric hospitalizations, for some time and then went to report to Dr. Brink. She seemed distracted, and I felt as if I was bothering her; EOB patients were not her problem, after all, and I didn’t imagine her relationship with T. made her inclined to fill in with her caseload. The hospital police were called to the ER while I sat in Brink’s office, but I paid that little mind. When I got up to go back across the hall, she put her hand out to stop me. ““Didn’t you hear that page? You never leave after hearing the hospital police called. You need to pay attention.”” It had been a month, and there were many things I had learned there, but others that I had not. I sat to wait while the police broke up a fight in the hallway.
The next day was a Friday, and my last in the psychiatric emergency room; on Monday, I would report to inpatient unit G-51. I gathered the EOB patients for my final group with ease. A moment of interpersonal conflict between two group members got me engaged. The drug addict told another patient he didn’t like being asked about his methadone in the hallway in front of everyone the previous day. The offender replied he’d noticed the drug addict had not eaten breakfast and was testing a theory that methadone users in general didn’t like to eat. I tried to facilitate further discussion, which would have been the meat of an outpatient group, but neither man was as interested as I was.
After group Rhoda told me there was an EOB patient pending. A psychiatrist I recognized by face but not by name told me I should see him to try to make something of his story. Darren looked like a handful of the others I’d seen that month: early twenties and handsome and robust, nicely dressed in jeans and a sweater. His presence in the G-ER didn’t bode well, but I was still maintaining my manic hope that somehow nothing was seriously wrong this time. T. came in as I was beginning my interview with Darren and quietly sat down to observe. I felt my usual self-consciousness and also a determination to do better this time, to prove to us both that my four weeks of immersion in her EOB had taught me something. Darren made eye contact and answered my questions in the right amount of detail, without hesitation or mistrust. To make matters murkier, his reason for admission puzzled me, and I didn’t know where to go with it. “A week of really bad headaches,” he said. If there was one thing I’d learned, it was that you didn’t get brought to a psychiatric emergency room for a headache.
“Did the headaches start because you’d been drinking too much or using drugs?” I asked.
“No, I’m not into any of that,” he said.
“Did your headache come from voices you were hearing that no one else could hear?”
He shook his head.
“Was it because someone was stealing your thoughts or trying to put ideas into your head?”
He gave me a wry smile. Still no.
“Did the headache make you agitated? Did you get very angry at anyone, maybe yell at them on the street or shove them?”
Negative. We sat there together, equally perplexed.
“Where was the pain?” I asked, grasping at straws. If he told me it was in his face, maybe I could diagnose him with a sinus infection. He said that it was in his entire head. I turned to T., defeated. “Do you have any questions?” I half mumbled.
She took over with her usual omniscience. It was not grandiosity, she just really was all knowing. I tried to calculate the difference between my four weeks and her twenty years. Even allowing for fifteen vacation days annually, it was considerable. “Your thoughts were all jumbled up last week, and it really made your head hurt,” she said to Darren. He nodded, and it was as if a light had turned on in his brain.
“They were mad bundled!” he said.
“And that happened in school, too, right? It got hard to pay attention, hard not to get confused?” Darren had told us that he’d flunked out of college four months earlier.
He nodded, starting to look upset. T. had his chart open in front of her and was looking at the doctor’s orders. “Has the medicine we’ve been giving you helped with the headache?” she asked.
“Yes,” he replied. “It’s gone now.”
“You’re lucky,” she told him. “Years ago we didn’t have these pills, and people who got headaches and confusion like yours had much more trouble going about their lives.”
After Darren had left us for the hallway, T. said, “Most likely schizophreniform, though it could be a psychotic depression.” She explained that schizophreniform disorder was diagnosed in patients with less than six months of symptoms of schizophrenia; only some of them would go on to exhibit the full-blown disorder. “His prognosis is good. He relates pretty normally, and his affect isn’t flat. If he stays on the medication, he can probably go back to school, next semester even. He should see a therapist, too, of course, to monitor how he’s doing over time, to help him understand his preoccupations better. He’s far from a hopeless case.”
“How about me?” I asked, aware that my minutes there were dwindling, wanting to remind T. that today it was me who was timing out.
“Not hopeless,” she said. “Frankly, I was surprised by how little you knew when you got here. But you’ve been doing a good job trying to take everything in. It’s a lot of information, and it’s a difficult environment. I wasn’t sure you’d come back after what happened the other day with Ophelia.”
This floored me. It never crossed my mind not to return. What kind of wimp did she take me for? “No. I mean, I was shaken, but this is my internship. I signed up for this,” I reminded her. She pulled out the same evaluation sheet that Dr. Young had filled out the month before. T. had not given me high marks, but at least they were scores that actually reflected her own ideas about my work. As she reviewed them with me, I thought again about what Dr. Wolfe had said the month before, and how after so long in the carpeted classrooms of my graduate school it was actually quite hard to pull off, this task of becoming a better psychologist. But also I felt on my way.