Healing Conversations: Giving Life to the Life of a Person Who Died by Suicide*

If you or someone you know is struggling or in crisis, help is available. Call or text 988 or chat 988lifeline.org 

Rushing to work for an early start at the Shriners Hospitals for Children–Canada, I decided to listen to my messages in the event an important call had come in. I often have young people consulting me at 7 am, either because of an operation that day and a child needing help facing ‘fears’, or because a conscientious young person does not want to miss school. I knew I had one such conscientious person that morning. There was a call from the mother of a young woman I was to meet that morning. She had called late the night before.

Linda, can you call me back as soon as possible; this is an emergency.”  “Oh, no,” I thought to myself. I only gave the number to Shriners patients who talk of suicidal ideas because other calls could be screened by the hospital.

This young woman had expressed such ideas but had felt certain she would not act on them. As she was 21 years of age, and had assured me they were only ideas, not to be put into action, I had not informed her parents. We had worked out a list of people she could call if she felt unsafe, and she had said she would go to emergency if uncertain she could control such ideas. We had discussed vulnerabilities, as well as reasons to stay alive. “What could this emergency be?” I tried calling back, but there was no answer.


When I arrived at work, feeling extremely worried, I saw the young woman. She asked to speak to me immediately. “Linda, I want to give up my appointment this morning for Trevor’s parents”. She then hesitated before adding: “Trevor took his life early Sunday morning, and they really need your help”.

Trevor – Prologue

My thoughts flew back to the few consultations I had had with Trevor, a lovely and talented young man who had been so sad and disturbed about falling away from the Christian beliefs of his parents. He had just gone through an extremely complex and quite perilous chest surgery for a deformity. He had assumed such risks in order to live a better life. He was booked to see me the next day.

I was in shock and soon realized that I would have to immediately pull myself together for his parents. I urged myself on with deep breaths; “Be strong, be brave,” I instructed myself. Although I did not know Trevor’s parents, I could only imagine what they had been through these past weeks with Trevor so very despondent while not understanding what led to such despair in their son.

“They must be wondering why he had chosen to have this surgery if he had not wanted to improve his life and to live,” I thought to myself. I reminded myself to be curious about what they were thinking and feeling, to ask them how they were living through this experience and not assume that my thoughts were their thoughts.

The young woman introduced his parents to me in the waiting room. I told them how very sad and sorry I was. I asked myself, “What does one say in such a situation?” I made sure not to say that I was sorry for their loss. 

That was said to me when my sister had died, and at the time it felt very wrong, “Does that mean I can soon find her?” I had thought at the time. Little did I know that, yes, I could find her in a new re-membered way(1). I reminded myself to keep that in mind. 

I have accompanied parents through the death of a child in my work in palliative care(2,3) and also in oncology with unexpected deaths(4) but I had never accompanied parents through a death of a child by suicide. This had never happened to me.

My thoughts immediately went back to Trevor. I had helped so many other children make legacies when they knew they were dying, and I knew they were dying(2)  but I really had come to believe that Trevor was planning to live. I did not think from our conversations that he was planning to die. Yes, he had told me about feeling suicidal and even about those two weeks of desperation a month or so ago during which he made some attempts, but more recently in our sessions, he spoke so fervently about living.

He explained to me that when he tried to suicide, first by pills and alcohol, that combination made him feel terribly sick. His next attempt a week later by carbon monoxide poisoning involved driving into a garage on a cold Montreal night thinking he would just fall asleep. However, he began feeling so sick and dizzy that he abandoned his car. It was then, he informed me that he decided this was a message from God. He was fated to live!

He told his parents of his attempts and assured them that he had work to do in this world and must live. He was going to help other young people. His parents told the young woman, who had generously given up her session for them, about the suicide attempts and that was when she suggested he meet me for help.


Reading the medical notes in his file, I felt extremely sad since it was clear that he had had a very strong psychological reaction to his deformity, that had been expressed to the surgeon. This contact and discussion about his negative psychological reactions had occurred eight months prior and no one had made a referral for psychological support.

I regretted that we could not have met earlier. “If so, might he have found a way to keep on with his life?” I wondered. “Did I miss something? Did I do something wrong?” We had spent some of the first session talking about warning signs that a crisis might be developing. He talked of memories of his ex-girlfriend, who had said that she was Christian but was behaving in ways that he found immoral. He said certain smells, senses, and even songs might bring up the memory of her which could lead to suicidal thoughts.

This young woman was finding worrisome ways, according to Trevor, to secure money. Trevor was trying so hard to assist her to find another way to resolve her financial needs. He prayed at length as well as read the Bible. He told me that under these circumstances he was reluctant to consult his pastor as he might have for other matters to protect her confidentiality.


When God did not answer his prayers for a way to assist this woman, he began to doubt his God. The more he lost his faith, the sadder and more desperate he had become.

We also talked about what he had been doing to manage the thoughts recently. He mentioned running, playing video games with his best friend, watching movies, drawing and playing his guitar. I referred him to art therapy because of his interest in drawing.

At the end of that last conversation, he had stated categorically, “However, I will not try. Period! This is over”. When I asked what was over, he replied, “This trying to take my life is over.” 


He stated that he had felt very sad and hopeless after trying to bring this young woman, whom he felt in love with, to believe in Christianity in the way that he had been taught to believe in it. His decision for surgery had been because he had decided that he needed surgical correction to live and to help others, including his ex-girlfriend. 

Trevor did not know how to tell his parents that, although he still believed there was a God, he did not believe in the way they believed. “I am a theist,” he said. “There is a lot of good to follow in my previous learnings, being kind, forgiving, learning from mistakes.

Seeing the best in this world is something that I will not follow.” Trevor’s family belongs to a very close-knit religious community. He felt that leaving this faith would mean losing his family and friends. We discussed the subject of love and wondered together whether the love might be great enough to outlive a change in his beliefs. He decided it was a possibility.

Trevor did believe that he was loved. He related a story of another young man of his community who had left the faith and was still part of his family. However,
Trevor was still certain that he would disappoint his parents greatly with this loss of faith

He felt that his ‘deformity’ now with scars from the corrective surgery, (“deformity” was Trevor’s own word regarding his chest difference), would not be accepted by others. Thus, he felt with the loss of faith he also lost an accepting community regarding ‘deformities.’ We explored the possibilities that there are others in this world who accept ‘deformities’ even if they were not of his faith.

We wondered together what he might be able to do for Shriners Hospital for example, where every patient has a ‘deformity’ of some kind? We explored the implications of ‘deformity’ and how his negative feelings about having a different body from others might be culturally developed from our Canadian society and did not have to be taken for granted as true. That even the word ‘deformity’ is a culturally created word. He thought maybe he could be of help to other Shriners patients.


Regarding accepting deformity, I contemplated inviting a past colleague as an outsider witness(5) to speak with us. She is a young woman who is wheelchair bound, due to what is known colloquially as ‘brittle bone disease.’ She is currently studying to become a clinical psychologist.

As a prior Shriners’ patient and later part of our employee community, she had assisted me several times previously, telling her story of how she managed to escape from shame of deformity and fear of others’ judgements. Those consulting her had found these conversations helpful. She is such an inspiration and has many humorous stories. But now, he had died. Taking his own life. None of these ideas could be put into action. 


When Trevor and I had further conversations together we spoke at length about his plans for life and for living. We explored the idea that even with his altered faith, he was creating his own but slightly different moral code.

These discussions seemed to give him hope for finding a new life without his former religious beliefs. I had written in his notes that he had said, “I can take what I have learned and try my best to be a good person”.
When I asked how he thought he could use this new moral code he replied with, “I have to find new hopes.”

I learned that Trevor was a musician, an artist and a writer. He had planned to use his talents to promote his past faith and now he had lost his goal in life. I remembered in detail his creativity. “I was writing a book trying to get through my current life story troubles. My character had to redeem himself for mistakes he had made. That person is really me.”  “Are you thinking that you have made some mistakes for which you need redemption?” I asked. Trevor answered, “Maybe I could go and take fine arts at Concordia University.” I realize now that he did not answer the question of redemption and mistakes.

I now think that in a manner of speaking, I had been doing palliative care practices with him as might all narrative therapists in that we are always creating legacies. The book he was writing might now become a legacy that his parents could appreciate. Trevor had planned that his main character, really himself, who lived in a completely different Trevor-created world, would die. We talked of what the ending might be now that he planned to live.

He stated when he left this last session; “I have some ideas that I can use to write a new ending to this book. Do you want me to bring this to our next session?”  I replied with a hopeful, “Yes.”  Maybe I was too presumptuous. I truly expected to see him another time.


All these memories were going through my head in a whirlwind as I invited Trevor’s parents into the room. I felt that it was probably too soon to discuss legacies with his parents, even though Trevor and I had discovered resources, hopes and dreams, which could now allow him to leave legacies. He had written a book, he had his art, and he told me that he had recorded music with his guitar. There were the plans of finding a way to use these arts to help others.

However, in this beginning of our journey together with his parents, I needed to listen to their pain, listen to their story. We were challenged that morning, because at least three times there was a knock at my door. This was very unusual because when my door was closed, most of my colleagues knew I was with someone.

Finally, I answered the door since the knock was so insistent and persistent. I discovered my lovely supervisor standing just outside. She explained that she and my colleagues wanted me to know that they were there to support me at any time. This knowledge gave me strength to return to the room and have courage to start my uncharted journey with Trevor’s parents.


How does one start such a journey on the day after a child has died by suicide?

Linda and Brian – First Session

LINDA:
Again, I want you to know how sorry I am. How do you feel that I might be of help to you?

Trevor’s mother (MANDY): I need you to hear what happened. We were so sure he had decided to live. (I identified with that). He had made an appointment with you for tomorrow, and also made an appointment with the art therapist.

Trevor’s father (BRIAN), interjected: I asked him how strong the suicidal thoughts were, just Saturday morning, the day before he died. He died in the middle of the night sometime between three and four am. Trevor reassured me by saying, ‘Dad, you know I have decided to live’. And he went to the church youth group.

LINDA: It sounds like you were working really hard to be sure that he was safe. Is that so? (This felt like such a feeble response).  

However, Trevor’s dad’s answer seemed to suggest appreciation of this question:

I don’t know what else I could have done! He was sleeping in our room for the first few nights after he told us about his suicide attempts; then he asked to sleep back in his room. He had his computer set up there and he liked to play both games and his guitar late into the night, and we thought he was better. He seemed better. We had taken him to see a psychiatrist a few weeks ago and they kept him over night and then discharged him the next morning.

We figured if the psychiatrist thinks he can come home, he must be OK. Actually, two psychiatrists sent him home, first from our local hospital, they sent him home with medications, then we took him to the city psychiatric hospital, and they sent him home. We asked for a diagnosis and they said, ‘Well, here we are not big on diagnoses. They just suggested he keep seeing the psychologist.


LINDA: Would you say that you were trying your best to get professional help for him and thus thought you could relax a little and let him sleep in his own room?

BRIAN: He was almost 19 years old and had confided in us. We had to trust him at some point, though we would both wake up in the middle of the night and go down to his room and check on him. I asked him almost daily, ‘On a scale of 1 to 10…’ and every time Trevor answered with ‘Zero’. The local counseling center would call him every day and ask him how he was doing. His youth pastor contacted Trevor regularly and took him out to coffee to talk with him. I took him out a few times for coffee to talk to him outside of the home. We couldn’t keep him in our room forever.

MANDY: I woke up about three am that morning. I prayed and prayed to God to guide me in how to keep him safe. I prayed for nearly an hour. Then I got up. I thought of checking Trevor’s room and then I felt, no, he went to the church group last night, he said he was fine, so I decided not to check. In some ways I am so glad I did not check. I do not think I could have stood it, to find his room empty and know that he was dying while I was praying.

I thought it might be helpful for her to understand more about this.

LINDA: Mandy would you be willing to help me understand what it means to you that you prayed that whole time? 

MANDY paused as she considered my question, she seemed to want to think about this question: 

God was telling me that it was his time to go. Trevor had been suffering so. He could not stand it. That is what he said in his note. He told us not to blame ourselves, that we were good parents, but that he was suffering too much, so he had to go. The file where he wrote the note was called, ‘I am sorry’. I know that he is no longer in such pain, but I am in so much pain now. If only he had known how much I love him. 

I worry for my husband, Brian, who found him hanging in the garage and had to cut him down. He dropped Trevor because he was so heavy. I worry that my husband will not be alright.

BRIAN: I didn’t know how I would tell my wife. How will she stand this? She is not so strong physically and has many family members not so strong psychologically. I went to try to gently tell her and she insisted on seeing the body. She wanted to see him before we called the police. I didn’t want her to remember him like that.

MANDY: I had to see my son. I had to hold him one last time. 

LINDA: Does that mean you were showing him your motherly love or were you trying to figure out how your heart would not break, how to hold your heart together or something I totally could not even think of?

MANDY: I think it was a bit of it all. I didn’t want the police touching him and moving him but now I don’t know what to do because I cannot get that image out of my mind. That was not my son lying there on the floor. 

LINDA: Sooo that was not your son lying on the floor. What are your thoughts about what your son is like now, or where he is now?

MANDY: I know that he is with God. He is no longer in harm’s way; he is safe.

I tried to formulate my next question.

LINDA:  So, (so is a word I realized I use as I try to organize my thoughts and think of what I want to ask), if you wanted to replace the image of something that is not your son with another image that is your son, what image would you want to be thinking of?

Mandy paused and then she actually laughed. What a lovely sound for this moment. I truly felt it was not that the situation was in anyway lightened, but I could see her eyes go off to the side and she was for a moment somewhere else.

MANDY: He used to say, even sometimes recently, “Mum, look at me, see how fast I can run”. That is the image I want to hold on to. That was a bit of the Trevor that we lost when he was about 12 years old. He changed then. He withdrew from us, isolated himself in his room. Maybe something about his deformity at a time when boys care so much about their bodies. But sometimes he would come out of his room and say, “Mum watch me”. Just like that lovely little boy he used to be. That is my ‘true boy’. 

I do not know whether you know or not, but we have a lot of mental illness in my side of the family. I was especially concerned about his hatred of his brother. I thought he had experienced some trauma he was too afraid to share with us that kept him isolated and angry. He denied it when I asked him. I kept searching for anything else I could think of and asking everyone I could think of like doctors, counselors, social workers, other people who had sibling hatred in their family.

Yes, he had this deformity and I know that for teens that can be terrible. But it seemed to me to be something more. Then we found you, and I felt hope, he was coming for therapy; he was even going to start art therapy; he had seen a psychiatrist; he was going to get better. But then, it was too late.

LINDA:   If you could hold that image of that little boy, your ‘true boy’ and that young adult who is saying, “mummy watch me, see how I can run”, what difference might that make to this horrible pain that you are experiencing now, and that horrible image of something that is not your son? 

MANDY: Yes, it would make a big difference. That is what I need to remember.

LINDA: Would you be interested in having some more conversations so that we could re-member Trevor as Trevor used to be before he withdrew from you and to learn what you appreciate about him?

Mandy responded with a strong “yes.” Brian said that he felt that Mandy was the one who really needed the help.

BRIAN:  I think I will get the help that I need from my community and from my pastor.

I asked Mandy if she might want to bring some pictures, or other memories of Trevor to the next session, cautioning her to do so only if she wanted to and thought it might be helpful to her.

LINDA:    I don’t know that person who asks his mum to watch him run, your ‘true boy’, and maybe the pictures could introduce him to me.

After this session, I reviewed the chapter that Michael White(6) had written called ‘Engagements with Suicide’ to get some ideas regarding how best to work with this family. Michael stated that often the person who took his or her life could become invisible, and the suicide could be cloaked in shame. I did not want this to happen.

I thought about how I could discover from the parents the values or skills required of Trevor to both live and to take his life? What kind of decision would this have been to make? Was the suicide mindful of what Trevor gave value to throughout his life? And thereby, we could try to link his living life and the decision to take his life to what he stood for so these parents could still feel connected to Trevor.

I also remembered Michael saying that some cultures think differently than ours about death by suicide. I remember the old Japanese Samurai movies where suicide was considered an act of honour. And as Michael had suggested, perhaps it would be possible to investigate and honour the ‘insider meaning’ of suicide. 


I also wondered if a book I had co-authored with parents whose child had died of a medical condition, might provide helpful ideas for the family(7).


Trevor’s Created World

The next session, both parents arrived for our therapeutic conversation together. They wanted to know what Trevor had told me in our sessions together. Again, my thoughts went into a bit of a whirl. “Do I let them know that it was a change in faith that was troubling him? What about what he had told me about this girl who he was so worried about? They may know her.”

I decided to begin more generally and to refrain from discussing the information about the girl that Trevor did not want to tell the pastor about. I did not know whether they would have the right to read his file because we are a children’s hospital even though he had turned 18. I had given no such details. (I always work out with the adolescent I am consulting regarding what they agree can be placed in the medical file, after explaining the limits of confidentiality and the way we, at the Shriner’s Hospitals for Children, work as a team). I was conscious that this was all new to me.

I had never, even after many years of working with those who expressed suicidal ideas, experienced someone who had consulted with me end their life by suicide
. “How do I navigate this? What are Trevor’s rights? What difference does it make if I do not tell them about his change in faith? Could telling cause them potential harm?”  
 

However, I soon found out that they had read what was on Trevor’s computer. They knew about the young woman in Trevor’s life and how he felt so hurt because of decisions that she was making. They also knew that he questioned their faith. I decided to discuss the potential legacies that Trevor and I had discovered together. In particular, I thought of the book he told me he was writing. 

LINDA:   Did you find the book that he was writing, and the ‘Trevor-created new world’?

MANDY: No. We did not find that on his computer. I wonder where he put that book. I would love to read it. However, what I really want to know is what diagnosis you gave him. Did he have a mental illness?

It was evident that Mandy was interested in other things than legacies right now. In narrative therapy, we want to follow the lead of the person who is consulting us.

This question, however, produced another dilemma for me. I wondered what it meant to them to have a diagnosis.
Psychologists have the right to diagnose mental illness, but this is not my usual way of working and I had not been thinking in diagnostic terms but in therapy terms. When working with a young person I am aware of how diagnoses can make it hard to distinguish the young person from the problem(8). I wondered if a diagnosis could help these parents heal from their grief.

LINDA: What would it mean to you if there had been a mental illness? 

MANDY: Well, I have a sister who has been diagnosed with bipolar, an aunt and my grandmother had agoraphobia and my father may have had depression, so it runs in the family. Having a diagnosis would mean a lot to me because someone else who met with Trevor would have insight into his life and I so desperately want to know everything about my son, especially now that there are no new things to ever learn about him.

LINDA: Well Trevor and I named the problem ‘Trauma’. He felt that some of his experiences with his ex-girlfriend were very traumatic, and he felt that having a deformity was traumatic. When his ex-girlfriend did not want anything more to do with him after he tried so hard to help her, that felt like trauma for him. But he also told me in our last session, “It seems pretty amazing with all that ‘trauma,’ I still want to try to live”. Do you think, ‘trauma’ just got too strong for him? 

BRIAN: I think that trauma got stronger when he was playing his videogame with his best friend and the game died. His friend whom he was playing with said that the last thing Trevor said to him was that on his screen it said, ‘Fatal Error’. He then wrote a letter to the girl asking her if it was worth it not changing her life and doing wrong actions. He actually used much stronger language. That also was so unlike him.

We have another letter he wrote this girl that was just beautiful. Then he wrote us a most beautiful letter. He can write beautiful letters. In his goodbye letter he said he was only trying to survive so that he could join the military and die in battle. But he was too ‘tired of fighting’ and gave up and that is why he committed suicide. He had to have had the idea of hanging because we discovered that he had studied knots on his computer and he had a rope, so I don’t know if trauma was what it was or not?


LINDA: Might it help to think that ‘trauma’ had gotten too strong, and that the game ‘dying’, and ‘fatal error’ somehow gave trauma its hold on him and these ideas of suicide or something different?

Brian thought that this would be better than thinking he had planned suicide all along and was being devious to them all in making them believe he planned to live.

MANDY: The letter we have that he had written before is of grace and love and kindness and mercy. 

LINDA: Could it be a bit helpful to remember how he was able to write such beautiful letters? Could that be more helpful than trying to understand whether he was planning this or not? Or maybe, do you think Trevor was a ‘mindful’ young man? A ‘true boy’ of grace and love and kindness and mercy? It seems that ‘mindful’ might be a word to describe the beautiful letters and the having a rope and studying knots?

MANDY: I actually have his note here to his friend. He just said there was some sort of error. At 2:57, the game ‘died’ – I do not like that word anymore but that is what they use. At 3:08 he wrote to this girl. And at 3:21 he wrote to us. I think he was going through a spiritual battle. It was Trevor’s own will to go through with the decision of death. Yes, I think he was mindful all his life. But I think his death was really something like depression trapping much of him inside a sick mind. Maybe that was trauma caused.

LINDA: Might it be helpful to find your own term for this feeling of Trevor being trapped – trauma caused or something different?

MANDY: I woke up at three am that night and I prayed and prayed for Trevor. I prayed for angels to circle him wing to wing. Angels are ministers sent to help. I wanted them to help break the chains that bound him. I realize now that the angels were also for my benefit. The breaking of the chains I thought were to free him from pain. I just did not know that this freedom would be for him to die. I do need some help with the memory of his body and how it looked after the hanging. It haunts me.

LINDA:  Well might that be something that we can work on next session if that is something you would want? 

The Issue of Diagnosis

Mandy came to the next session with a photo book. She had created a photo book of her family every year and wanted to show me the year that Trevor changed. She also wanted me to see some of the pictures of the beginning of that year when he was the happy little, ‘watch me run mummy’ boy, her ‘true boy’.

There was a note to Mandy written by Trevor saying, ‘I love you the most in the hole world’. Written exactly like that. I discovered from Mandy that even his voice changed that year. He would speak, either in a robot voice or in a kind of baby voice when he was asking, ‘Mummy, come see me’. She discussed how she so much wanted to help her son. She had searched and searched for help. Mandy said that she and her husband had telephoned the psychiatrist from the psychiatric hospital which had kept Trevor overnight. The psychiatrist
stated that Trevor had been diagnosed with ‘major
depressive disorder’. Both Mandy and Brian seemed relieved to get such a diagnosis.  

(Trevor’s dad later explained the meaning of diagnosis for him:

Trevor’s suicide provoked not only trauma and grief, but an investigation. Suicide was not something we, in our wildest nightmares, would ever think our family would struggle with. Trevor was so talented, so full of life and self-confidence. He was the first to get a full-time job on his own, buy a car, buy his own cell phone, get a bank account.

When we got the diagnosis from the psychiatrist that he had a Major Depressive Disorder we felt that it explained so much to us. In his last weeks I saw his feelings of worthlessness and inappropriate guilt. He felt he was a failure. Suicide presents multiple layers of trauma and inquiry that are not present with a simple tragic death. 

During this session Mandy explained that she was feeling very upset having to live in this world where her son had hanged himself. She wished she had a chance to get help for him early enough. 

(Brian later recounted that he felt similarly: 

This has been hard for me too. Now that we have a diagnosis, every fatherly instinct in me craves the chance to go back in time to help him through this illness, and to explain it to him. He suffered all those years thinking he was just a jerk. He couldn’t help it. He was suffering and didn’t know it had a name. This had to play into his perception, somehow attaching to his deformity. He suffered alone, in my home, under my care, without any help. That destroys me inside. This is an added layer of severe grief in my heart, almost unbearable).

Mandy and I did some work around the image of seeing her son dead and how it made her feel that she failed because she could not save him. She also, in times of great distress, would feel that she was not loveable enough because it felt at times that Trevor did not love her. We discussed the possible relationship of this, ‘I am unlovable’ thought to her thoughts as a young child when her mother left the family for another man. 

Mandy wanted the little boy Trevor, who needed her to watch him run, to stay with her. She remembered again praying for her son during the time that he was organizing to take his life. She believed that praying was for God to protect him and to protect herself. She kept going over and over what Trevor must have done that night. But she came to the realization during our conversations, that she was praying him out of this life and into another life without pain and with God.

She stated that this realization was helping her feelings of panic reduce in intensity. She also explained that she believed it was Trevor’s responsibility to make his own decisions now that he was almost nineteen, and it was her responsibility to pray for him. 


When I arrived at work the next week, I had a telephone message from Brian. He was concerned that Mandy might have the same diagnosis as Trevor. She had been very upset that morning and wanted to climb on the roof to be closer to Trevor. Brian restrained her and asked her if she was feeling suicidal. She said that she was feeling sixty percent suicidal.

I phoned him back and suggested that Mandy might be feeling intense grief. I told him of other parents I had worked who had a child die explaining to me such very strong feelings, especially at first. It had only been a few weeks since Trevor died. I also stated after talking to Mandy, that
if either of them were worried about being suicidal they could go to the same psychiatric hospital where Trevor had been admitted. They did decide to go. 

God’s Peace

Mandy came to her next session saying that the psychiatrist told her that she was having a normal grief reaction. I was beginning to like the psychiatrists at this hospital who were not so ready to think of DSM diagnoses and medications. Mandy had been given Ativan by her family doctor after Trevor’s death and Mandy believed that maybe these medications were making her have suicidal ideas. She therefore had decided to take no medications for now and was feeling better. 


LINDA:  Mandy, are you worried for your life now?

MANDY:  No, I am not worried that I will actively do something, but I sometimes wish that I would get the Coronavirus and die. I have weak lungs and I could just die. I miss my boy so much.

LINDA:  Does that mean that you feel that you do not have reasons to live anymore?

MANDY:  That is exactly what my pastor said. He reminded me that it is not my time. That my work is not over here on earth. I have three other children and many other reasons to live. I am reminded that Mary, mother of Jesus, suffered too. She had to watch her son be tortured and to see him die tragically. I was watching my son in a different sort of torture. I just need peace. I just need God’s peace and I find that in scripture.

LINDA:  How can you live God’s peace?

MANDY:  Knowing that Trevor is in heaven with God, and I will be there with him some day, but he will be waiting so long, too long. I can read the Bible and it brings me peace. But that long time of waiting hurts me. However, I will see him again.

LINDA:  Do you believe that the time in heaven will be the same as the time on earth? Might it be that Trevor will only feel it as minutes when you feel it as years, or something at least differently than here?

MANDY:  Yesss. Time would be different. He is in heaven after all. And here I am and here I will stay, even if it will be hard to live in a world without Trevor. I know I tried. At least I do not feel guilty.

LINDA:  Do you see this as a gift, knowing that you did the best you could and tried so hard to help him?

MANDY: It IS a gift. I never thought of it that way. It is truly a gift; I tried so hard.

LINDA:  Mandy, what are some of the many ways that you think the pastor was thinking of when he told you that your work on earth is not over?

MANDY:  Well, we have decided to help others who might have problems like Trevor’s and use his life and him taking his life as an example and a message for others. We want to help parents to find help for their children. We are working on suicide prevention. Thank you for giving us that document that can be used in the youth group. We plan to have his funeral as both a homage to Trevor and as a message about youth problems and ideas for how to get help.

LINDA: Do you think this is showing some of your heart’s concern that you showed for Trevor now being used to help other young people in difficulty? Trevor wanted to help others as well.

MANDY:  Yes, I must not forget that this is my plan for life, and this was Trevor’s plan. I need to help other children to get the services that they need. 

Sun on Wood

Our fifth session started just after isolation for the coronavirus began. Mandy was having the telephone session in Trevor’s room where she could have privacy and thoughts of Trevor’s death felt very close to her heart. 


MANDY: I am having a lot of incorrect thinking. I wake up every night at the time he died. I am so sad. 

LINDA: Mandy, could you help me understand something? When ‘incorrect thinking’ tries to take over, what is it saying to you and how do you respond to it?

MANDY: It is that coronavirus idea thing. I could easily go into public and expose myself to the virus. ‘Incorrect thinking’ keeps saying, this could be good, this virus. I would probably die with my lung problems. 

LINDA: Might ‘incorrect thinking’ be kind of ‘missing Trevor’ thinking? You said last week, ‘I am here to stay’, but staying might still be pretty challenging? 

MANDY: Yes, I AM here to stay. I just don’t like a world that I have to stay in when my son died by suicide. We were looking for the book and for notes about it. We did find some little notes and a long letter. I printed them out. They are precious. That was my ‘true boy’- those notes and letters.

LINDA:    Mandy, I wonder if you would be so kind as to describe that precious ‘true boy’ for me?

MANDY:  I remember two-year-old Trevor with his red tennis shoes. He had a scooter, and he was so agile that even at that age, we put him on the scooter, and he rode in circles, his little shoes so eye catching. His bright blue eyes so sparkling. I always wanted a fair boy who looked like my side of the family, the others are dark haired. I began praying, asking God specifically if my next baby could please have blonde hair, and blue eyes, and if it weren’t too much to ask, curls on top of all that. God gave me it all!

He had a yellow and black coat. He was so happy and thoughtful then. He asked such hard questions about God. I am so blessed to have been his mum.

LINDA:  Is that one of Trevor’s legacies to you, to give you the opportunity to be so blessed to be his mum? Do you have some ideas how to get even closer to the reasons why you are so blessed to be his mum, while still living in this world that you have decided to stay in and find the precious ‘true boy’?

MANDY (very tearfully): I blogged daily, writing little stories about all my children. I was recording it for my family who were far away. They are invaluable now. I sleep with his two stuffies (soft toys) called Nache and Thunder that he always slept with. I kiss them on the nose and tell Trevor that I will take care of them for him. 

LINDA: Mandy what do the tears speak to?

MANDY:  That I forgive him. I am in his room and his smell is disappearing. That frightens me.

LINDA:   Do you have some ideas how you can keep his smell closer to your heart and soul?

MANDY:  I have no idea; it scares me. I am losing him.

LINDA:     Could you describe the Trevor smells?

MANDY:  The smell is a bit of outdoors, like sun on wood; it is warm skin, Trevor’s warm skin. Independence.

LINDA:  We are creatures of words. Would it be helpful if I write this down on a separate paper that I can give to you when we are out of this coronavirus isolation or mail to you now?

 (I always make notes during the session that usually those consulting me can take with them, but I am doing these sessions by telephone, and I wanted to write these beautiful ways of re-membering Trevor very carefully. I thought I might type or send all our re-membering in a written narrative letter 9-13 .

LINDA: Mandy, I am curious, what does independence smell like? 

MANDY:  It smells like sun on wood. That’s my ‘true boy’, independence. Oh yes, please write it all down.

LINDA: I am writing this, ‘sun on wood, a bit of outdoors, warm skin, Trevor’s skin, independence’. 

Do you think he can feel that forgiveness?

MANDY (very softly): Yes, he knows that I forgive him.

LINDA:   What do you think that would mean to Trevor to hear you saying that you will look after Nache and Thunder for him?

MANDY: He would know that there is nothing he could tell me that would make me love him any less. But it is a bit painful to think of bringing him back to hear what I am saying. I don’t want him to know that pain I feel of his loss. You know, a mother is only as happy as her saddest child.

LINDA:  You don’t want him suffering through knowing the pain that you feel. Do you believe that he is suffering now?

MANDY: No, he is at peace. His body and mind are healed, in the presence of God. HE NO LONGER IS SUFFERING. His place and his job is in heaven. But he left us with a job on earth.

LINDA: What is that job on earth?

MANDY:  My job now is, as is part of his job, to help others who suffer like him. I was reading Genesis 50:20. It is the story of Joseph. His brothers wanted to kill him, and he managed to escape and save Egypt. He said to his brothers when he saw them again, ‘You meant evil, but God meant it for good to bring this about’. 

LINDA:  Mandy, can you help me understand your meaning of Genesis 50:20?

MANDY:  Well, we are going to help others benefit from Trevor’s experience and his death. God meant it for good. I hope he knows now that what he did was not him but the illness, and we will help other young people who are suffering like he was. 

LINDA: If he were to hear you now, even though it is a bit painful as you told me, what might he think of your idea of carrying on his wish to help by helping other young people who might be suffering like he was?

MANDY: He would feel relief that he did not ruin our lives. If he could have stayed on this earth longer, he would have been able to turn around the voice of depression, he would have had more tools in the toolbox. If he only will know that his dying was not for nothing. That we are going to use his life and his way of dying to help others. He would know that he didn’t ruin our lives, and his life had meaning. He actually is going to help others live a better life than he was able to live.

LINDA:  Mandy, I can’t imagine a better legacy for Trevor than the one you plan to bring to us all. I am so curious about your ideas, how are you going to make Trevor’s life and death be helpful to other young people who are suffering. (I realized that in my role as a narrative therapist, I need to lead people to find their own legacies of their child. This was a much more powerful legacy than what I had first considered, which was the book Trevor was writing).

MANDY:  Well, we have developed this website. It is to help others find hope. We are discussing what tools he had and what tools we wish he had. We are going to give resources, where you might go. 

LINDA:  Yes, you told me about how you organized his service to be both a memorial to Trevor and a help to others. Would you be willing to describe this in a bit more detail?

MANDY:  Well, we had twelve counsellors come to be there for the young ones of our congregation. They are all so close we were concerned about them. The counsellors talked to the young ones on an individual basis and gave them ideas of where to go if they need help. We had moved here from another country and did not know what services existed.

The surgeon who did Trevor’s chest surgery asked if he could have Brian’s talk at the memorial service. Brian talked about what it was like to be a parent of someone with such problems that Trevor had suffered from. The surgeon hopes to use this in some way to help other children at the Shriners with deformities as a way to try to prevent such an outcome as happened to Trevor. 


LINDA:  Oh, I am very interested in how he might use this. I will talk to him, perhaps I can be of some assistance to your ideas and to his, in relationship to the Shriners Hospital for Children. 

What would you like to do about appointments?

MANDY: Well, I know you are so busy, Linda.

LINDA:   It is truly up to you.

MANDY:   I think I would be OK for two weeks. 

Keeping Her True Boy

Mandy called and cancelled her next session. I had planned to spend our last few sessions exploring ideas about how she and Brian could help other young people. We were still in isolation for coronavirus isolation when we began to co-write this article.

Mandy told me again about blogs when Trevor was so happy and living what she called a wonderful life. She was reading books to understand suicide and discussed them with me. She would still question the cause of Trevor’s challenges. She talked some more of all that she had done to try to find the cause when he was alive and to get help for him. With a few questions she came to the conclusion that Trevor died to protect his parents from more pain, pain that he lost his beliefs, pain that he couldn’t feel better.  

She also talked of her ‘true boy’ who could be around even later in life. For example, she mentioned how he wanted to be so independent, he wanted to pay for his own counselor. He even wrote in his ‘I’m sorry’ note that they could sell his car, perhaps to pay for his funeral.

She suggested this was his warmhearted way of showing that he did not want them to be in debt by his death. And most importantly she discussed how she believed Trevor had a healed mind and a healed body and that now he is free. She read to me his wonderful, kind letters. She told me beautiful stories of navigating the parenting journey as Trevor developed from childhood into adulthood and of walking alongside him even when he was making choices she would have preferred that he not make.

But mostly Mandy described her hopes and dreams for being of service to other youth, to follow Trevor’s hopes and dreams. She understood better what Trevor stood for. Mandy believed that God has a purpose for every life, and both her purpose and Trevor’s purpose was to call greater awareness to youth challenges and help youth with this calling. There was no more talk of catching the coronavirus and meeting Trevor sooner.

Mandy felt that she and Trevor now had a common, earthly goal that her husband and her complete congregation were getting involved with. She felt that this was keeping her ‘true boy’ in her heart and soul. Mandy requested that we do one last bit of work together when the isolation due to the Coronavirus was over.

This was to work to help her manage better some of what might be called day and night dreams of the last image of ‘her boy who was not her boy’. She planned to replace these images with her ‘true boy’ and with other young people who were living instead of dying. Finally, Mandy explained to me, that somehow, Trevor did not disappear but will live on in the helped lives of others.

Brian wrote to me when I asked him to edit this paper. In his letter he expressed words similar to those I have heard from others who have had a child die. They were so poignant and heartfelt that I wanted to honour his thoughts here. This is Brian’s perception of his particular experience of having a child die by suicide.

“I am not the man I was before February 8, 2020. When Trevor died my life changed. My wife changed. My family changed. I changed. And I’m trying to come to grips with the new me and my new world. Life has a different meaning. My faith has more gravity. My perspective on my life in this world has been elevated beyond the temporal in a way it has never been before.

When I walk beyond the curtains to grief and back into life where my heart and mind are released from the shadow of my son’s suicide, who will I see when I look in the mirror? My grief is not just grief. A transformation is occurring. A lot of people who lose children have a very difficult time getting past the loss, as if their legs have been cut off from under them, and they will never stand on their two feet again. I have been in the depths of these waters, but I will not stay there. I know that these ashes that cover me now will be redeemed by God.”

I feel so honoured to be a part of such conversations which could explore what Trevor gave value to and then to witness Mandy and Brian finding ways to use what Trevor gave value to help others. I was able to assist them to develop Trevor’s legacy and to carry it forward with their family and others who loved him. I feel that this journey that we took together was also a healing journey for me.

I got to know both parents so much more through our co-creation of this paper. I have co-written papers before with those who consult me and am always so appreciative of the experience. I am happy to add Mandy’s final remarks when she returned this final draft to me:

“I also just want to say thank you again. As I was reading through the paper as a whole, it helped to be ‘counseled’ again. In grief, your mind so quickly forgets what you've determined, or learned. Now I will have this paper to get a quick reminder of the progress and conclusions you've helped me with. Brian wants to say he really enjoyed working with you on this paper. Me too! Blessings.   

All names are changed at the request of the parents. The young man’s parents have read this version of the paper and feel comfortable for it to be published so others can learn how they managed to survive the almost unsurvivable and to carry on their son’s legacy wishes.

Reprinted with the consent and express wishes of the parents, Linda Moxley. and the editors of the Journal of Contemporary Narrative Therapy

[If you or someone you know is struggling or in crisis, help is available. Call or text 988 or chat 988lifeline.org]  

References 

(1) White, M (1988). Saying hullo again. The incorporation of the lost relationship in the   

            resolution of grief. Selected papers (pp. 37-46). Dulwich Centre Publications. 
 

(2) Moxley-Haegert, L. (2015a). Leaving a legacy. Using narrative practice in palliative care  

           with children. The International Journal of Narrative Therapy and Community Work, 2,  

           58-69. 
 

(3) Moxley-Haegert, L & Moxley Haegert, C. (2019). Little steps toward letting the legacy live: Fine traces of life to accompany families grieving the death of a child. Journal of Narrative Family Therapy, 28-53.  
 

(4) Moxley-Haegert, L. (2012), Hopework. Stories of survival from the COURAGE progamme: Families and children diagnosed with cancer. Retrieved from narrativetherapyonline.com/moodle/mod/ resource/view.php?id=577  
 

(5) White, M. (1995). ‘Reflecting teamwork as definitional ceremony.’ In M. White: Re-Authoring Lives: Interviews and essays (pp.172-198). Dulwich Centre Publications.  
 

(6) White, M. (2011). Narrative practices: Continuing the conversations. Engagements with suicide. (pp.135-148). Chapter 10. David Denborough (Ed). W.W. Norton  
 

(7) Moxley-Haegert, L. (2015b).  Petit Pas/Little Steps. www.hopitalpourenfants.com/patients-et-familles/information-pour-les-parents/petits-pas (French) and www.thechildren.com/patients-families/information-parents/little-steps (English)  
 

(8) Marsten, D; Epston, D., Markham, L. (2016). Weird science, Imagination lost. In Narrative Therapy in Wonderland; Connecting with children’s imaginative know-how. (Chapter 7, pp. 157-173). W.W. Norton & Company.  
 

(9) Bjoroy, A., Madigan, S., & Nylund, D. (2016). The practice of therapeutic letter writing in Narrative Therapy, In B. Douglas, R. Woolfe, S. Strawbridge, E. Kasket, & V. Galbraith (Eds.). Handbook of Counselling Psychology, 4th Edition. Sage Publications. 
 

(10) Epston, D., & White, M. (1992). ‘Consulting your consultants: The documentation of alternative knowledges.’ In D. Denborough (Ed.). Experience, Contradiction, Narrative and Imagination (pp. 11-26). Dulwich Centre Publications. 
 

(11) Ingamells, K., (2018) My romance with narrative letter: Counter stories through letter writing. Journal of Narrative Family Therapy, Special Release 4-19. www.journalcnt.com 
 

(12) Pilkington, S.M. (2018). Writing narrative therapeutic letters: Gathering, recording and performing lost stories. Journal of Narrative Family Therapy: Special Release 20-48.  
 

(13) Palijakka, S., (2018) A house of good words: A prologue to the practice of writing poems as therapeutic documents. Journal of Narrative Family Therapy, Special Release, 49-71. 


* Dedicated to the young man who chose to take his life and to his parents who chose to survive

his death.

 

Author Note: “Parents I worked with in palliative care co-wrote a resource document with me and the nurse practitioner in palliative care at the Montreal's Children's Hospital in Montreal. This might be a resource that could be added for reference if you thought it might be helpful to the readers.  


Questions for Reflection

How did this clinical narrative impact you?

What are your thoughts about the therapist’s approach?

Which techniques might you use in your own clinical work?

What about the way the therapists worked with Linda and Brian would you change? How?

What are your own strengths and challenges when working in the shadow of suicide?  

Victor Yalom on Psychotherapy and the Pursuit of Mastery

Keeping Current

Lawrence Rubin: Dr. Yalom, you are the founder of Psychotherapy.net so by definition, an entrepreneur. But as your Editor, I also know you to be a self-taught tinkerer, craftsman, and artist, as well as a practicing psychotherapist. While I’d like to touch on each of these facets in our conversation, please tell us first what are you working on now?
Victor Yalom: Well, I am always working on many things at the same time. I don't know if that's due to an inability to focus on one thing or just that I have multiple interests and duties running this small enterprise of Psychotherapy.net. 

We're always thinking of ways to provide content in a form that is useful to therapists practicing in the field as well as adapting to current times
One of my focuses after 27 or so years of recording who I consider to be the greats in our field and making training videos, is finally stepping up to the plate and doing some recordings of my own work as a therapist. Just yesterday, I recorded a case consultation group that I led online. This should result in one or more online courses in which I will be teaching some core skills in therapy that I have learned from my mentors as well as from my clients. So, that's very exciting. 
 

In addition, we at Psychotherapy.net are always scouting out and finding experts to be featured in videos. We have a new video coming out on Emotionally Focused Therapy and another on online crisis counseling. We're always thinking of ways to provide content in a form that is useful to therapists practicing in the field as well as adapting to current times. We realize that while people have grown accustomed to receiving video content in shorter bursts, we haven't quite reduced ours to the 15-second clips of TikTok. However, we are producing, for example, a shorter series called Mastery in Minutes that are up to 30 minutes long where we're trying to present core ideas or skills to therapists.

LR: Now that you’ve made this transition from interviewing experts in the psychotherapy field to being videotaped while you personally do psychotherapy, do you see yourself at this stage in your therapeutic career as an expert?
VY:
doubt and uncertainty are inherent in our work
I do feel that after practicing for almost 40 years now, I've acquired some valuable skills that I think are important to pass on that are not commonly being taught by others. It's an evolution because I think like most therapists, even experienced ones, that there's so much ambiguity in our work that a lot of the time I feel like, gee, I'm not sure what I’m doing. Would X or Y expert think that I’ve studied enough to be doing this? What will other colleagues think? How will the establishment of experts, or those who are practicing evidence-based techniques or teaching them in universities view this?

So, those are some of my doubts. But then the other side is that doubt and uncertainty are inherent in our work. I don't think it's a realistic or even desirable idea that we should reach a state of certainty about our work, but perhaps more comfort with our doubts and our questioning, and our realization that therapy is an ambiguous and creative enterprise.  
LR: I hope that the younger therapists who read this interview will embrace this idea that certainty is elusive, and therapy works but sometimes for reasons that are simply outside of our understanding. I understand that you've also been doing work with foreign distributors so I'm wondering what that looks like and what are some of the challenges?
VY: To a great degree, we've been trying to take the valuable, rich library that we've created over the last 27 years and make it as widely available as possible. It started very slowly at first with VHS tapes and then DVDs, but once we got into streaming, it was a lot easier to get it out there widely and internationally.

a lot of businesses have pulled out from Russia, but it's not something I've struggled with too much because the therapists there want to learn
But obviously, not everyone speaks English, so we've partnered with some businesses and organizations overseas to translate our videos and make them available. We have distributors in China, Italy, Greece, Russia, and a couple other countries. Typically, they've simply translated our videos with subtitles, but the Russians have been dubbing them using voice actors as well and so it's pretty simple in that sense, but there are unique challenges.

Our Russian distributors, not surprisingly, are having incredible challenges given the war and the boycotts. We were speaking with them yesterday and they’re actually moving to Georgia, the country, not the state, and we're finding ways to advertise, get payments, have money transferred to Georgia, and then sent here. At least that's the plan.

And with that, there's the potential ethical concern. Obviously, a lot of businesses have pulled out from Russia, but it's not something I've struggled with too much because the therapists there want to learn. They’re certainly not responsible for Putin's madness and butchery. I feel pretty clear that if we can find a way to continue to offer our videos to Russian therapists, that's a good thing.  
LR: That's interesting. I was going to ask you about possible ethical concerns and conflicts, but when you couch it in the context of therapists, whether in Russia or China still want to learn, you are providing a needed service. The therapeutic skills that these therapists will learn because of our association with them will help the citizens of these countries who have access to therapy. I don't know how widely accessible therapy is, however.
VY: Right. It reminds me several years ago, we had an inquiry from some Iranian therapists who wanted to publish our videos there. Let's just be upfront, in smaller countries like that, it’s not really about making significant profit. They’re relatively small markets. But it’s more just wanting what we’ve done to be viewed and used in training therapists. It turns out they were on the list of nations that the US does not look favorably upon. We finally figured out how to apply to the US State Department to get permission to have our videos translated and sold in Iran. But, after about a year and a half, we got a one-page letter that said, “Sorry, no!”
LR: It’s interesting with regard to Russia and Ukraine and the Middle East, that some of the contributors to our websites, some of the folks who write blogs and articles are doing so from those places about some of the challenges of delivering therapeutic services to people who are directly impacted by the war and related political tensions. So, I can see the benefit of partnerships with some of these entities. I also see the ethical concerns. Are there any other challenges when translating therapy into different languages considering that much that occurs in the therapy space is non-verbal? 
VY:
in Russia, they're using voice actors to dub our videos, apparently because that's quite common there as well as in other countries
As I said, in Russia, they're using voice actors to dub our videos, apparently because that's quite common there as well as in other countries. I was concerned about that. It’s so important and that's one of the reasons I started producing videos in the first place—to capture the non-content information, like body language, facial expression, tone of voice, inflection, and all that. I was concerned that a lot might be lost or missed. However, they've assured me that their actors are capable to a remarkable degree of mirroring that of the recording. Since I don’t speak Russian, I’ve got to take their word for it that they’ve done a good job. But they typically offer both, the option to listen to the dubbed version and/or subtitles.

Well, if it's a good translation, then it should work and that's not my area of expertise but just a little example. I recall looking at one of the transcripts initially done in China many years ago be one of our distributors. They were translating some discussion with my former teacher and mentor, James Bugental, who was referring to growing up in the Great Depression and the ways that impacted him in terms of his attitude towards money. It was quite a traumatic thing for that generation.

I came across the transcript, and I don't recall how I did it, because I don't speak Chinese, but somehow I became aware that they referred to the Great Depression, the historical event, as major depression, the psychiatric diagnosis. So, you have to have good translators. Language is very nuanced.

With our Chinese distributor, they're used to presenting videos in more of a weekly webinar format, so they've taken our videos and chopped them up into 30-minute segments that they offer once a week. They’ve wanted to add some live Q&A to some of our videos. For example, we have a popular course with my father, Irvin Yalom, “The Art of Psychotherapy,” and I've done some live Q&A even though I’m not him. I know the content well, so I’ve been able to answer some questions from the Chinese students that hopefully helps make it more understandable to them.  

How I Built This

LR: All meaningful ventures such as creating Psychotherapy.net have an origin story, so I think our readers would be interested to know yours.
VY:
I had the chance to study in-depth with James Bugental, who was a real master psychologist, psychotherapist, and teacher
After I completed my doctorate in psychology, I had the chance to study in-depth with James Bugental, who was a real master psychologist, psychotherapist, and teacher. I felt in many ways that my education or training as a psychotherapist really commenced with him. There was a group of us who learned from him in yearly five-day retreats, after which I formed a monthly consultation group with a smaller group. I call him a master because of his skill and dedication to the work and his thoughtfulness in teaching others.

As part of his work, he often demonstrated various aspects of psychotherapy, including doing demonstrations with us, either through role plays or with those of us who wished to be able to explore our own personal issues, particularly as they impacted our work as psychotherapists, which it always does, of course.

For several years, we kept saying “We needed to get this guy on tape” for the benefit of those around the world who haven’t had a chance to work with him personally. And at some point, I had the great realization that he wasn’t getting any younger. He was 80 years old, so a buddy and I recruited a couple of volunteer clients and secured the services of a videographer to record him doing two sessions with two clients.

Like many ventures, we didn’t really have a goal in mind at that early point
So, we created a videotape, VHS, which was an initial venture in crowdfunding. We actually snail mailed his mailing list of about 200 folks saying, “Would you be willing to purchase a copy of this videotape to help us in our production?” We raised a few thousand dollars, which got us maybe halfway there to the costs, chipped in some of our own money, and ended up producing a videotape.

Like many ventures, we didn’t really have a goal in mind at that early point. It was not my plan to start a business. I just wanted to make a tape and ended up going to the Evolution of Psychotherapy conference, getting a booth there selling some of these and some other videotapes. One thing led to another after that. But that’s the short version.  
LR: If I were to magically transport myself to that Evolution of Psychotherapy conference and interview that guy in the corner with the booth and the VHS tapes and asked him, “Have any idea where this thing’s going?” or “Do you have your next master in mind?” what would he have said?
VY: It was very exciting because Jeff Zeig, who runs those conferences, was kind enough to send out a letter to other speakers telling them that Victor Yalom, the son of Irvin Yalom, was going to be selling some tapes, and if others had some to contact me. I ended up getting a small collection of videotapes, including some group tapes of my father, and pricing them much lower than they were otherwise available, at the price of a textbook or a professional book. Not some of the very high-cost textbooks that we see today. 
  

There was tremendous demand and excitement, so I realized I was onto something. Now recall this was 1995, right at the birth of the internet, so if you were a professor or a therapist wanting to get or see therapy in action, it was very hard to do. There was no YouTube. There were no online courses. And the few videos that were out there were hard to track down. 
 

I realized I had found an untapped need
At that point, I realized I had found an untapped need. I’m not a trained businessperson, but I did learn a bit over the years, like when folks are pitching business ideas now, one of the things they think about is what problem are they solving? In looking back, I was solving a problem that I had experienced in graduate school. Up to that time, I had hardly ever seen a therapist do therapy, and I thought, “This is crazy.” So, I clearly felt there was something there. 

LR: So, an unintended pioneer in a market that didn’t yet exist. A venturer without capital. Aside from the technological savvy that you had to acquire along the way, were there any major obstacles in accessing the masters or getting people to sign on to this “little engine that could?”
VY:
What was more surprising was that clients were and still are willing to be on camera and reveal personal things about themselves
I think I’ve been pretty fortunate. Perhaps my enthusiasm has carried me quite a long way, and honestly, sharing the last name of my father certainly opened some doors for me. I can’t say that was a great benefit in what I was doing at the time, which was doing private practice. Certainly, name recognition is nice—and has some downsides as well—but nobody refers patients to you just because you have a famous last name. But in terms of getting legendary clinicians to return a phone call or be willing to trust themselves with me to make a recording of them, I’m sure that helped.

What was more surprising was that clients were and still are willing to be on camera and reveal personal things about themselves for the benefit of having the opportunity to get some free treatment by famous therapists, as well as contribute to the training of our field. Of course, not all clients are willing to do so, but every time we’ve wanted to produce a video, we’ve been able to find clients who are willing to bare their souls to a wider audience. I’m always grateful for that, and also feel protective of them in terms of wanting to carefully screen them to make sure that they are comfortable with the types of things that might come up and be willing to edit out material that just felt too sensitive, even if they were willing to share.  
LR: That’s an interesting perspective because in Narrative Therapy, one of the goals is to help the client assert expertise over their own life, and one aspect of that expertise is giving clients the opportunity to teach other clients through written narratives or through videotaping. 

I hadn’t thought until you just mentioned it how much value, over and above whatever benefits accrue to the audience of these videos, the clients might reap in being with a master, and how putting themselves out there might give them an opportunity to share in some way beyond the isolated room of therapy, and even truly benefit others who might be reluctant. 

VY: I feel, although I don’t know this for a fact, that some of the clients with whom we’ve worked obtain a sense of advocacy from their participation, particularly when they are part of an underrepresented population, for example, a military veteran or an African American client. We recently published a video series on counseling African American men. You know because you were a part of that. 

I strongly suspect that part of the clients’ motivation in that series was, “I can help normalize this therapy process for African American men who have certain struggles often related to racism, and I want to encourage others who may have similar struggles as me to get therapy and to train therapists in how to better work with this population.” So, I suspect there’s some sense of advocacy and caring that therapists get the best training possible to treat folks that are similar to them in whatever characteristics. 

LR: Having well over 300 video titles, how has Psychotherapy.net kept pace with the expanding demographics that psychotherapists serve?
VY: Just to be clear, yes, we do have over 350 titles now, but we have not produced all of those ourselves—maybe a third of those. The rest we’ve found by going far and wide looking for videos that were out there but, in many cases, not widely available. 

I made a conscious effort starting several years ago to produce videos with both therapists and clients of more diversity
One case always stands to mind. I made a video with Natalie Rogers, art therapist and daughter of Carl Rogers. At the end of the production, we were filming in her house, and she brought out a shoebox full of old VHS tapes and DVDs for me to look through. She entrusted me to take them home, and I reviewed them. Some were home recordings with poor video or audio quality. But I came across one excellent interview of him, professional quality, and finally tracked down that this was produced in Ireland by RTE, I believe it stands for Radio Television of Ireland. Lo and behold, they had the original master in the vault and managed to work out a deal so we could distribute it, so I recorded a new introduction with Natalie. That’s a little aside just to state that we haven’t produced all the videos we offer. 
 

But we have a legacy of titles. And I realized some time ago that we were, not surprisingly, overrepresented with master therapists. Let’s take out the term master therapists, but with White male therapists and Caucasian clients. So I made a conscious effort starting several years ago to produce videos with both therapists and clients of more diversity. So, we’ve been doing that, but I have a lot of catch-up to do. 

LR: In this era of YouTube and TikTok, the consuming public seems to crave products that pack their punch in shorter bursts. Do you see that as an obstacle to your goal at Psychotherapy.net of portraying therapists doing the real and often laborious work of therapy?
VY: It’s a balancing act, indeed. Several years ago, we did a focus group with some of our customers to try to better understand their needs, and that was certainly one of them. Therapists told us they may have a 30-minute gap in their schedule, or they may have a cancellation, and your typical videos of one or two hours in length, often showing full sessions of therapy, didn’t fit that particular need. So, we launched a collection of videos called “Mastery in Minutes” that are 30 minutes or less. They are at times new productions, at other times excerpts of our longer videos with some additional introduction or discussion. 

So, we try to meet both needs. We do try to offer shorter videos, and our longer videos are broken up into chapters. We have some very long courses that might be 6 to 10 hours, but they’re broken up into shorter chapters. 
 

One of our productions I'm most proud of, Emotionally Focused Therapy Step by Step, is the most ambitious project we’ve ever done
One of our productions I'm most proud of, Emotionally Focused Therapy Step by Step, is the most ambitious project we’ve ever done and frankly, I think that anyone has done. We filmed over 100 hours of EFT sessions with six couples and four different therapists over a year and a half, edited that down to about eight hours of sessions and a few hours of discussion and commentary. I have to give my wife, Marie-Hélène Yalom, our Senior Director of Strategy and Product Development, a lot of credit. While she’s not a therapist, she’s learned a lot about EFT and painstakingly edited this down with Rebecca Jorgensen, the main therapist featured in this project. 
 

Obviously, we don’t expect someone to sit down and watch that all at once. So it’s broken down as the title implies, step by step, into many small skill sets, and EFT, for people who know, is broken down into steps and stages. So, you can watch our longer videos in shorter chunks and skip from chapter to chapter. 

LR: It sounds like a real challenge to balance the demand to satisfy the customer but remain faithful to the practice of psychotherapy. From an insider’s perspective, I think you’ve done a nice job of that balance, but I’m a bit biased. 
VY: Yeah, it’s a tension that exists in our field and in many aspects of society, people want short-term fixes, quick fixes. People want short-term therapy. Some therapists promise that. Some approaches promise that, but whether they’re able to fulfill that promise? That’s debatable. I think at times you can convey some powerful ideas in a short amount of time. But to master them, like anything, takes—
LR: Hours….
VY: Dedication. Practice. Maybe some luck, or the right circumstances with the right clients who are ready to make some changes. Other times it’s painstaking, and you may work with a client for years and not see a lot of changes but nonetheless, they may benefit greatly from having support.
LR: How have you evolved in your approach to interviewing the masters over the last several decades?
VY:
I’m able to be myself more and reveal more of myself in all aspects of my life. I believe that shows up in doing interviews
I think it parallels my development as a human being, which is not an unusual progression in that I feel more comfortable in my skin, have more confidence that I have something to offer, and have come to accept parts of myself that I felt uncomfortable with or ashamed of not as only part of who I am, but that I like and feel proud of. So, I’m able to be myself more and reveal more of myself in all aspects of my life. I believe that shows up in doing interviews. That hopefully shows up in how I do therapy, how I relate to my friends and loved ones.

Specifically, in interviews, I feel more confidence that I know a lot about therapy. I have to be a jack of all trades to know a little bit about different techniques and approaches as I’m producing videos of various types. I don’t have the academic background like you do, and don’t keep up as much with the research, but I feel I know enough to ask questions and engage in dialogues that I hope are informative to our viewers and entertaining to watch in the sense of seeing the discussions and the therapy sessions, which are typically featured in our videos as being alive and representing the best of humanity.  
LR: One of the qualities of your interviewing style, which I assume filters into your therapeutic style as well, and perhaps into your personal style, is that you don’t seem afraid to ask hard questions. You’re clearly willing to put someone on the spot in search of the most real they will allow you to have access to.

And that, to me, suggests a certain degree of confidence, and also an unwillingness to accept what’s offered as expertise without proof of that expertise. So, that’s just sort of a side comment for those of who will venture into this interview, which will probably take more than five minutes to read. I think it’s as important to watch your style of interviewing these masters, and the way you hold them accountable for their presumed expertise, rather than just fawning over these masters.  

The Art and Artistry of Psychotherapy

LR: Most of your audience “knows” you through the interviews you’ve done with master therapists and through the cartoons you create for the site, but they likely don’t know that you also work in paint, metal, and wood. I’m wondering how this continual drive to express your creativity has manifested in your own identity and practice as a therapist?
VY: Interestingly enough, I didn’t grow up doing things I considered artistic, certainly not in the visual arts. This all started at a workshop with my mentor, James Bugental. I have a hard time sitting still and listening, so I would draw. I was drawing little stick figure cartoons, one of which eventually evolved into a cartoon. It was a stick figure of a cactus laying on a sofa saying, “Well, I didn’t come from what you would call a touchy-feely family.” 

My drawings were literally stick figures. And when I created the website, I had an idea to put a few cartoons up there, so I hired some people who knew how to draw and took these ideas and made cartoons out of them. And then at some point, an ex-girlfriend of mine said, “Well, you have a very primitive drawing style, you should draw them yourself.” So, I started drawing my own cartoons, and that led me to taking a painting class, and as you mentioned, I now do metal sculptures. But this all started maybe 20 years ago when I was about 40. So, I credit Psychotherapy.net with helping me to discover some activities that bring me a great deal of pleasure. 
 

increasingly view therapy as a creative enterprise
In terms of your question about how that may impact my therapy or show up in my therapy, I increasingly view therapy as a creative enterprise. I grew up in an academic family. My parents are writers. I’m taking another little aside here, but I always had an interest in or fascination with the business world but was very much an outsider, and back then, you know, when I graduated from college, you couldn’t start a business as you can today. If you wanted to work in the business world, you worked in a Fortune 500 company. I tried and I was fired. I failed miserably. 
 

And in the process of creating Psychotherapy.net, which was just a side hobby for many years while I was in full-time practice, I came to realize that building and growing a business is the ultimate creative enterprise. I had an idea to make a videotape, I took that idea and created something from it, and then that evolved to something else, which evolved into something else. 
 

And now here, you and I are having this interview on a technology that didn’t exist when I started this, so getting finally to your question about psychotherapy; it’s an extremely creative enterprise, just like this conversation. A client comes in and says something and you react, you have internal reactions, and then somehow words come out of your mouth and you say something, and it goes from there. 
 

You don’t know what’s going to happen with what you do with them and what’s going to happen with their life. You try to adapt what you do and what you say in a way that’s going to be helpful. Certainly, there are certain approaches that give you more structure or guidance, and those can be critiqued as overly manualized or cookie-cutter, but ultimately, in my opinion, if you’re going to do work that’s at all meaningful and helpful, you need to find a way to enter their world and to do so in a creative and imaginative way. 

LR: And that goes back to what you were saying before in terms of your own personal evolution, becoming more comfortable with who you are in your own skin, warts and all. I think therapists are most effective when they are most genuine and when they’re most vulnerable, and they invite themselves into a co-creative experience with their client. That’s evident in watching you work, at least in the interviews.

You have taken what I consider a heroic step, as you recently transitioned from the man behind the camera to the man in front of it. You did part one of an experiential teletherapeutic interview with an Italian woman. I wonder what it took for you to put the director’s hat down and step in front of the camera and, in a sense, expose yourself to your audience in a new way?  
VY: I feel very fortunate that I had a chance to study with quite talented therapists like James Bugental and, of course, learn a tremendous amount from my father, and then in the process of creating other videos work with and get to know Sue Johnson and Peter Levine and Otto Kernberg and Reid Wilson, and many others. Some I had more contact with and thus learned more from, and others less. 

I feel reasonably confident that I have some things to offer myself and some important things I’ve learned that I don’t think are widely taught
And over the years, like I think any maturing therapist, I have been able to integrate and internalize that into my own style of working to the point where I feel reasonably confident that I have some things to offer myself and some important things I’ve learned that I don’t think are widely taught. 

LR: Such as?
VY: Two things come to mind. From Bugental, some specific techniques to help clients more vibrantly explore their internal world, their subjective experience in an alive and present way versus just talking about themselves. In particular, he taught some specific techniques as well as an underlying philosophy, and numerous ways to deepen that exploration. He suggested that therapists often encounter what he referred to as resistance, which can be a confusing term. Another way of thinking of it is that we get stuck in our ways, whether you call them defense mechanisms or just modes of coping or ways of being.

As we know as therapists, it’s hard for clients to really change the way they adapt to situations even when they aren’t helpful. So, we can help clients explore themselves, but often they reach a wall or there are restrictions in their ability to explore freely, and those could be that they intellectualize, that they shut down, that they focus excessively on pleasing you and the people around them and have a hard time accessing their own experiences and needs. So, in the process of getting them to do this internal searching, as he called it, you hit these roadblocks. He taught ways to help identify and loosen up those roadblocks; that might be a way of putting it. So those are some things that he taught me that feel very vital and powerful, and I don’t think are widely known.

with the advent of online therapy, it's been much easier to make recordings of not just one session, but longer-term therapy
And my father writes a lot about working interpersonally in the here and now between client and therapist in a way that I haven’t seen discussed much in other forms of therapy. How do you use the here and now of the therapeutic relationship? How do you work with that in a way that’s beneficial to the client?

So those are a few ideas that I feel are important and I don’t see discussed or represented in most of the types of therapies that are generally taught. Now, there are exceptions to that, but I feel compelled to teach them. And I’ve been mulling over this for several years now. And finally, with the advent of online therapy, it's been much easier to make recordings of not just one session, but longer-term therapy. I’ve just completed the course of seeing a client for 18 sessions, which we recorded, and I’m at the beginning stages of producing a course that will include excerpts of these sessions, and hopefully of some other colleagues as well, to teach some of these ideas.   
LR: You’ve mentioned James Bugental numerous times as being historically and personally influential in your own life’s work. So, I want to ask you, Victor Yalom—perhaps you haven’t thought in these terms before, but do you see yourself as an influencer?
VY:
I’m proud of what we’ve created with Psychotherapy.net, and I think we’ve done something useful and I’m certainly part of that
IOver the years running Psychotherapy.net, we’d get phone calls and emails, and sometimes when I’d answer the phone, I would get comments like, “Oh, I can’t believe I’m talking to Dr. Yalom,” and I always assumed they were confusing me with my father.
LR:  would never do that. [Note: LR actually did this when first applying for the Editorship]. 
VY: And many times they were. But since you asked, I can’t resist responding from time to time to customer emails. I find it helpful to keep my finger on the pulse of what’s happening there. And occasionally I do get people who know me from the videos I’ve made. Our videos are widely used in universities in the US and around the world, so it’s fair to say that I’m proud of what we’ve created with Psychotherapy.net, and I think we’ve done something useful and I’m certainly part of that.

The Long View

LR: As someone who has had a front seat to the evolution of the field of psychotherapy over three decades, how do you think the field has changed on your watch? Or more specifically, what tensions in the field have you noticed?
VY: It’s really hard to say. I remember when I just started grad school, Nick Cummings, who started the California School of Professional Psychology, and hence the whole professional psychology school movement (we have an interview of him on our site), gave us a rousing lecture about how private practice is dead. This was in the late 80s, and that hasn’t come to pass. 

In terms of approaches, CBT and other so-called evidence-based approaches are being taught much more widely. I have concerns about that. I think that yes, we want to do therapy that’s effective, and yet we seem to have traded on the idea that evidence-based treatment somehow defies this entire other line of valid research showing that the most important elements of change are the therapeutic relationship and client factors. 
 

The research consistently shows that one approach is not better than another approach
The research consistently shows that one approach is not better than another approach. And that may be just a research limitation—there are so many complexities and variables involved. But it’s clearly easier to research treatment methods than relationship variables, and there’s more funding available to research certain types, so there may be more data showing that those approaches are effective, but that does not mean that other approaches are less effective. 
 

So I don’t know what the answer is. I’m not involved in policy making or in formal training programs. But I am concerned about the narrowness or limitations that seem to be taught in many of the clinical graduate programs that students are being trained in. 
 

There are obvious other big changes in the field, the most striking of which is the move to online therapy that accelerated with the onset of COVID. And that’s never going to go back to fully in-person, though it’ll be a hybrid model. I think in many ways, it’s a good thing. It’s going to increase accessibility. It’s going to increase availability. 
 

I continue to do a group that moved online. While I was reluctant to do so initially, it allowed people who have moved or are on vacation or in another town to continue to be in the group. So, it’s better in that way, but you do lose the vitality of the in-person group experience. 
 

We all know of these other changes, app-based therapy, chat therapy, different pricing models, etc. There are problems with many of them, the reimbursement rates for therapists are quite low. Does chat have a useful place in therapy? The good thing, I think, is that it’s loosened up this historic and restrictive idea that therapy should be once a week in the office for 50 minutes, which came out of the idea that people have to get in their cars every day and drive to the office. Well, you know, I was guilty of that as well, in having our staff work primarily in the office. Suddenly we realized, as with all our assumptions, that doesn’t need to be the case. 
 

Therapy, like most every other business, has moved online and is doing just fine. So, in terms of therapy, what’s the best way to do it? Can it be fully online? Can you, when possible, combine online with in-person sessions? Should it be every week for 50 minutes? Should it be some more fluid model? I mean, for clients in crisis, why not meet for 90 minutes or two hours, and why not be able to have email or text during the week? Then you have to come up with different pricing models for reimbursement. But surely, we’re not going to go back to once a week in the office for 50 minutes, and I think that’s a good thing. 

LR: Traditional models have to be challenged and evaluated on a regular basis, or else they just become vestigial.

As we near the end of our time together and this journey you’ve taken us on, I can’t help but to reflect on the passage of time since I was in graduate school and what I have witnessed. And maybe it’s just a function of my getting older, but are therapists getting younger? It seems that therapists are getting younger and younger each day.  
VY: It’s incredible.
LR: They’re getting master’s degrees at 22 years old and within a year, and at the cost of sounding jaded and cynical, they have business cards advertising that they specialize in working with children, adults, and the elderly.
VY: I don’t know if people even have business cards anymore.
LR: Right. We have websites. It just seems that the entire field, both therapists and clients, if not society, is so much more restless, so much more impatient, and as you said before, hungry for quick change. Everybody’s an expert. There are a thousand books out there, 18 ways to this and 17 ways to that. How will Psychotherapy.net survive that seemingly insatiable hunger for more, faster, shorter, and sexier? What will be the secret to your survival? 
VY:
as many of the masters die off or have died already, we try to find clinicians who are doing good work and try to capture that work on camera
I’m not worried about that. I think we just have to keep producing relevant, good content, and
as many of the masters die off or have died already, we try to find clinicians who are doing good work and try to capture that work on camera. That’s what differentiates us from most of the competition out there. 

Most of the online training seems to be done primarily by talking heads, lectures, webinars, and it just seems crazy to me that this is the way training has traditionally been done in our field, reading books, talking about therapy. In every other field, and I’ve said this over and over and over again, whether you’re a plumber, a dancer, a lawyer, or an architect, you learn by watching others do their work. I mean, you have to study and know the basics, but you learn by watching other masters doing their work, your bosses. 
 

You’re in court. You’re in second seat in a trial, and then your bosses are watching you do the work and giving you feedback, giving you coaching. Hopefully, constructive feedback. So, that’s kind of the essence of what we do, which is to show excerpts of therapy in action and explain why we’re doing it. Now, certainly, we’ll adapt. We’d like to do some live events, live webinars, and do these interviews. I don’t know what we’ll be doing, exactly. People talk about gamification and interactive video. I haven’t seen much of that yet, at least in our field, that’s useful. So, I’m not worried about that. 
 

I think the great thing about our field is that life experience helps
In terms of your thing about therapists getting younger, well, obviously, there’s partly a tongue-in-cheek thing going on there, because we’re getting older. I still have this little thing going back to Transactional Analysis, kind of a one-down stance where I still feel like I’m the kid in the room. I’m often surprised, I may be emailing people, I get on a Zoom call, and “Hey! You look so young.” I’m still kind of assuming that I’m going to be the youngest. 
 

But I think the great thing about our field is that life experience helps. Yes, you’re more in touch with young students, or have been as a professor for many years, but it’s a great profession for people to go into as a second career. If you start doing this when you’re 30 or 40 or 50, what a gift that you know something about life, having worked in other fields, having children, having a family, having suffered losses that invariably occur. So, you do what you can with the resources you have, and hopefully those grow over time. 

LR: Kicking and screaming in some cases. I think that’s it for me for now, Victor. Do you have any last thoughts or questions you want to ask me or reflections on how our time together went for you?
VY: It’s been a pleasure working with you over the last several years, Larry. In terms of this conversation, what I’ve tried to do is to respond in the moment to thoughts or feelings that come up as we’ve been talking.

I’ve done a number of these interviews, we’ve been on podcasts, and I just realized it’s easy to start telling the same stories over and over again. It’s an interesting phenomenon. And if you think about therapy, it’s easy for clients to do that. They tell a story about the losses they’ve had or the disappointments they’ve had, and it’s important for them to convey that to you. But as Frieda Reichmann has allegedly said, “Patients need an experience, not an explanation.”

It’s strange and honorable, and at times a captivating and rewarding profession to be able to sit with clients and enter their world
I don’t know if I’ve said anything new. Hopefully, I’ve conveyed some ideas that someone will find interesting. As I reflect on our conversation, the one thing that stands out is when you asked me about my own evolution and I talked about becoming more comfortable with myself and things that I was uncomfortable with, and I used the words “ashamed of.” That felt like one moment where I said something I don’t think I’ve said before.

I’m sure it’s true for all of us. We have things about ourselves that we don’t feel good about or feel ashamed of or feel vulnerable around. And it’s also true that those, in general, for me, are much more contained and more in the past, and I’m grateful for that.

As I say that, it makes me think about the work of a therapist and the work we do with clients to really cherish and embrace the idea that everyone has this unique world inside of them, and sometimes that world is extremely painful and chaotic. Sometimes that world is just chugging along and doing okay, and sometimes that world is expansive and exciting. It’s strange and honorable, and at times a captivating and rewarding profession to be able to sit with clients and enter their world and see what help we can be to them in navigating their life’s journey.  
LR: From my perspective, and as I prepared for this interview, I was acutely aware that our relationships these past five years have evolved. And as I became more comfortable in my space in our relationship, I’ve come to feel more confident, not just in my role as Psychotherapy.net’s Editor, but also in my own skin. I think every good relationship, whether it’s therapeutic or not, is a growth opportunity, whether it’s inside of a therapy room or not.

And I wasn’t looking for this interview to be a growth opportunity per se. I wanted to offer you something interesting; how do I ask interesting questions when you’ve been asked so many similar questions before? There was a part of me that wanted to ask interesting enough questions to interest you, to please you. I wanted, and perhaps still do want, to be interesting, relevant. Perhaps even more so after having retired from the university. I wanted to honor what you’ve done, and I wanted to also provoke you when I could without unnecessarily doing so. I wanted to create, I guess, as in therapy, a safe space where sharing could happen.

This was different from some of the other interviews that I’ve seen conducted with you. I sensed an even greater level of vulnerability, especially in that comment you made about shame, and I was very impressed with your willingness to share that. So, before we sign up as the first two members of the mutual admiration society, I’ll say goodbye and thank you again for welcoming us into your space.  
VY: Well, thank you very much, Larry. It’s been a wonderful and enriching conversation. 

Stephen Schueller on the Power and Promise of Mental Health Apps

Mental Health Apps 101

Lawrence Rubin: Thanks for joining me today, Stephen. I first became familiar with your work when I took a deeper dive into mental health apps and came across your work with One Mind PsyberGuide, a system for evaluating these tools. For those of our readers who may not yet be familiar with or worked with them personally or professionally, can you define a mental health app?
Stephen Schueller: A mental health app is essentially a software program that can support people in their mental health journeys. There are various kinds of mental health apps, with estimates suggesting that there are somewhere between 10,000 to 20,000 of them out there. Some of them are intended to be used on their own, so a consumer might use a product to self-manage facets of their own condition, like anxiety, depression, or trauma. And others are really meant to be used in conjunction with standard therapy.
So, for example, the Veterans Administration and the Department of Defense have developed a suite of different apps that are designed as adjuncts to standard evidence-based treatment. For example, CPT Coach for cognitive processing therapy. PTSD Coach for PTSD treatment. PE Coach for prolonged exposure. These are meant to be tools that help support a therapist and a client who are engaged in a specific type of treatment, like prolonged exposure or cognitive processing therapy.
LR:  Are the apps themselves subjected to the same type of empirical validation standards as the therapies they are adjunctive to?
SS: I think it is an appropriate question to ask. To consider what level of evaluation is needed depends on the type of product, the type of app. Those apps that are meant to be therapy adjuncts for example, are designed to replace worksheets or other supplemental content that would go along with an established evidenced-based treatments. Cognitive Processing Therapy Coach, developed by the VA and DOD, is meant to support cognitive processing therapy. Its various homework assignments, tracking components, and capacity to record the actual sessions so that clients can listen to them later and do some of the exposure exercises, all get done in the context of the app. And so, to the same degree that you probably don’t need to evaluate every new version of a worksheet associated with an established treatment protocol, you don’t need to undergo the same types of rigorous evaluations as you would do to the treatment itself.As opposed to apps that are therapeutic adjuncts, there are those that are meant to be more treatments unto themselves. And if they’re not some type of formal treatment like the ones I mentioned, they might be like self-help or self-management products, which opens some interesting questions. Like if these are replacing the self-help books of the past, do we need an evaluation of every single self-help book out there? Or is it sufficient that a self-help book aligns with evidence-based treatments and evidence-based principles if it does not have a formal evaluation?

And so, I think for these adjunctive apps, it’s important to distinguish between direct and indirect evidence. Direct evidence would entail an evaluation of the app itself that explores whether it has been subjected to clinical research studies that show effectiveness for the target condition or goal that that app is trying to change. Indirect research would be based off a pre-existing evidence-based practice, where we would be looking for fidelity of the app to that evidence-based practice.

In this latter case, the app would be evidence-informed rather than evidence-based. An app like that might be a digital CBT tool, that has some fidelity to Cognitive Behavioral Therapy principles. And I would argue that there are various levels of evidence that we should be looking at for with these apps. Obviously, I would love it if every app out there had a clinical trial showing its benefit, but I will tell you that’s not the case. Research suggests that about only 1 to 3 percent of mental health apps have any direct scientific evidence behind them. But I think if it doesn’t, an app that is evidence-informed is probably better than an app that is not based on evidence-based treatment. I think, again, it’s degrees of evidence, and that’s one of the things that we explore at One Mind PsyberGuide, is trying to look at the various degrees of evidence that are supporting various products.

LR: So, what you’re saying is that just as there is a hierarchy of what are considered highest levels of empirically backed treatment research, from randomized control trials down to anecdotal evidence, there are different levels of scientific evaluation that apps can be subjected to.
SS: That’s right. And I think I would add one other point, which is that in a lot of places we see that when treatments are adapted to new mediums, they often maintain their effectiveness. So, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for depression has evidence that it works in person. It also works via teletherapy, in a group therapy format, as well as through self-help books. And so, to some degree, to continue to conduct the same level of studies as we move to new mediums may not be the most efficient use of our resources.When we’re taking something to new mediums and apps, is this really a new treatment, or a new practice that’s being developed through this technology? Or is it taking something that’s worked before and packaging it in a new way? And so, I think that’s the thinking around the evaluation of indirect evidence. That an established intervention already works in various realities and formats gives a lot of confidence that it would likely work in this digital delivery format, as long as it shows fidelity to those evidence-based principles that that treatment involves.

LR: We briefly mentioned self-help books. John Norcross, as an example, has done treatment outcome research at the highest empirical levels, but he has also written self-help books based on the same principles that drive his research. So that’s what you mean when you say if a therapeutic modality is robust and valid, we shouldn’t be that concerned with the transition into a different medium, such as digital technologies and apps.
SS: That’s right. Or at least we should be less concerned. The situations I worry most about are where new, innovative treatments are made possible using technology. I think those do need to meet really high standards of evidence to support their benefits.
LR: What would be an example of this?
SS: I think there’s a lot of work to do around chatbot apps, where you would interact with the app as if you’re chatting with a person, or potentially a therapist. Although they’re often based on evidence-based principles, I have some questions about the benefit of chatting with a computer program

And similarly, I’m also curious about some of these virtual care platforms using text message-based interactions with a therapist. Does that work? And what is the benefit someone gets from text-messaging back and forth with someone, even if they don’t have credentials? How do we distill evidence-based psychotherapy practices into these very brief back-and-forth interchanges?

So, I think there’s a lot of places where we do need new evidence to suggest that these things are beneficial. And I think that there is some promising evidence supporting both chatbots and text message-based interactions as potentially being clinically efficacious. But I do think these are places where we need more research to support these practices.

LR: Are these chatbot apps like virtual assistants, driven by artificial intelligence programs designed to provide human-type responses?
SS: There definitely are products like that. Three examples would be Woebot, Youper, and Wysa. All of these are apps where a user who downloads the app would be able to message back and forth with this virtual agent that is going to provide back full-text answers. Again, they’re often based on therapeutic principles. But I think that these are types of things that were not possible just a brief time ago. This is not like taking a self-help book and digitizing it. This is a very new type of thing that is possible because we have computer programs and software that can do these types of interactions.
LR: Would these types of virtual assistants be programmed with keywords that might be sent off to a therapist if the person is simultaneously working with a “live” therapist, or are they completely asynchronous standalone surrogates for therapy?
SS: It’s a little of both. You couldn’t take this program and bring it to your therapist and say, “Okay, I’m going to use this on the side, and it’s going to reach out to you if these certain words come up.” Some of the programs are designed to communicate directly with a therapist. Or they are a gateway. One way to think about these is as a low-intensity first step that can then introduce or connect someone to a therapist if necessary. And some of these programs do have that model, where if there is need for a therapist, they can step up to that higher level of care. But these aren’t the types of things where you as a client would say, “Okay, I’m going to use this in conjunction with a therapist I’m seeing.”
LR: I know that there are apps for medical care. For instance, those that monitor cardiovascular activity and then send that data to a physician or a physician’s assistant. Are there ways for some of these apps to communicate directly with a therapist, who then would respond to the client?
SS: There definitely are some apps that try to digitize measurement-based care, to allow some communication or transmission of data based on symptom tracking or logging, or other types of things that people would be doing or as part of the treatment that they’re receiving and feeding that information back to their therapist.

The Wild Frontier

LR: In the “old days,” people crowded the self-help aisles at Barnes & Noble or other bookstores. Today, in contrast, e-consumers routinely scroll through platforms like Amazon. How do folks who may not be ready or interested in taking the step into therapy find their way through this labyrinth of 10,000 to 20,000 apps? Is there some sort of roadmap, or a central directory?
SS: I think it’s hard. And I’ll say that there’s no one centralized hub. But I think most consumers go to the app stores and they put in keywords like depression, anxiety, or stress, or whatever they’re struggling with. But I think that the app stores do a very poor job differentiating these products, because most of the search results bring up apps that have four-and-a-half to five stars. That doesn’t really provide a lot of information about the difference between these apps, or which are the evidence-based ones. Relatedly, a lot of people hope or think that the FDA is going to solve this problem. I will say that the FDA has cleared some mental and behavioral health apps, starting with Reset back in 2017, which was an app focused on substance use disorders. But since then, there’s only about a handful of mental health apps, about 10, that have been cleared by the FDA. But that’s 10 out of 10,000 to 20,000 over a period of about five years, which is about two products per year that are being evaluated and cleared.

There is a class of products about which the FDA has said that “they are exercising enforcement discretion,” which means, “We probably could regulate these, but given our assessment of the risk-benefit ratio, we’ve decided not to.” Examples of apps in that category are those that allow consumers with diagnosed mental health conditions to self-manage their own symptoms, such as by providing a tool of the day or different behavioral coping skills. A lot of people think that the FDA regulation shows that something is efficacious or effective, but in actuality the FDA is mostly concerned about safety. They’re looking at the risk profile of these products, and then clearing it based on that. This is all to say that FDA is not really doing much or has not done much in this space. At the beginning of the pandemic, they paused their review of products in this space given the potential need for digital services to help support mental health problems in the pandemic. So, this is a space that’s been traditionally messy and has gotten even more so over the past couple of years.

I think a couple of places that I would point to as being better able to provide more information for consumers are the Veterans Administration and the Department of Defense. While they are mostly focused on veterans, their apps and evaluation procedures are also useful to diverse consumers, especially for therapists who are providing some of these evidence-based practices. And my project, One Mind PsyberGuide, which really tries to collect and provide some of this information for consumers to help them make informed decisions.

LR: So, with the exception of the small handful of apps the FDA and the VA and DOD have approved, publishers of mental health apps do not have to post any black box warnings.
SS: That’s exactly right. There’s little regulation of this space outside of the area that the FDA decided that they’re going to regulate, which, as you mentioned, is quite small.
LR: What are some of the criteria that a consumer should be looking at when they go to the app store?
SS: I think there are three main buckets of elements that are important to consider when searching for a mental health app. Credibility or evidence base, user experience, and then safety, especially related to privacy and data security.Credibility or evidence base goes back to the conversation we were having earlier around the evaluation of the evidence behind these products. Is there either direct (evidence-based) or indirect (evidence informed) support of the app’s effectiveness?

User experience, which is subjective, is about whether the app is easy to use, easy to learn, aesthetically pleasing, free of technical glitches, engaging, something you would come back to? Based upon this criterion, users can narrow down a set of apps to a selection of three to four and then try each of them out to see which works better for their needs.

Lastly, safety and security issues are related to data security and privacy. What is their privacy policy? What do they do with your data? Who is it accessible to? A few years back, we did a review of security policies on 120 depression apps and found that about half didn’t have any policy whatsoever, so they told you nothing about what they did with your data, which was a major red flag to us. And of the half that did have data security and privacy policies, using our scale that we developed at One Mind PsyberGuide, half of these were deemed unacceptable. These apps didn’t provide their data security and privacy policies until after you already put in information about yourself. So, for example, you would create a user profile by putting in your personal information, only after which the app would tell you, “Okay, now we’ll tell you what we do with our data.” That would be a pretty easy red flag for a consumer.

LR: In this Wild West of the internet, what entities might data be shared with?
SS: Often, it’s back to some of the big tech companies—the Googles and the Facebooks, where one’s data might be used for advertising or other marketing purposes. That would make me a little uncomfortable with mental health apps, although, honestly, I do use products that are associated with those worlds. With some of these apps, consumers just won’t know.I talk a lot about the importance of transactional value for data in this space. So, what do I get back, and does that align with what I’m using the data for? With Google Maps, for example, I’m sharing my location information, but in return, it’s helping me navigate to somewhere based on my location. That’s the transactional value, but it feels a little bit different when it comes to mental health apps. Why do they need to know my location?

LR: And since the FDA has only regulated a very small percentage of the apps, I imagine the potential for consumer deception is very great.
SS: That’s right. I think another thing is that sometimes there is a misconception where some people assume that if there’s data present, these apps must be regulated under HIPAA. But it’s important to realize that HIPAA is related to data that’s coming from covered entities, which in our case would be traditional health care providers. If an app is sharing information with a health care provider like your therapist, it should be, and hopefully is, following HIPAA regulations. But if there’s not a covered entity, then a lot of these apps are not regulated by HIPAA regulations, and they can change their terms of services or privacy policies without having to get approval from you. I’m much more comfortable with apps that are not collecting or sharing data, like a lot of the VA and DOD ones that don’t collect or share your information.

LR: I would also imagine that if a therapist assigns or recommends a particular app to a client, there’s the issue of potential vicarious liability. It would therefore behoove the clinician to become aware of all these different elements of the apps, particularly their privacy policies.
SS: That’s exactly right.
LR: Have you found that there are particular mental health conditions or client types that are more amenable to the use of mental health apps?
SS: There’s a lot of evidence to support the use of these tools for depression and anxiety. That doesn’t necessarily mean that these conditions are more amenable to apps. It’s more a reflection of where the research started and what information has accumulated. What I often say is that everything that has been treated with a psychosocial intervention has a digital tool or app that might be useful.

LR: And relatedly, some of the most effective treatments for anxiety and depression are cognitive behavioral. Have you also found some useful trans-theoretical mental health apps or those that capitalize on other types of interventions like Gestalt, or Psychoanalytic, or Existential?
SS: A lot of the apps out there are based on Cognitive Behavioral Therapy principles, but I do think there are some that could be amenable to some of the other treatments like you mentioned. Especially if we think about some of the general aspects of some of these apps. For example, you might be interested in tracking your mood or your symptoms, or different goals or values you have over time. You could imagine an app like that could be useful in a variety of different treatments.It has more to do with the theoretically aligned goals that you’re trying to achieve in those treatments and what products might support those goals that you’re trying to accomplish. But you’re right in suggesting that a lot of the tools out there are CBT-based. We recently did a study in which we reviewed apps with different features of thought records for Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Traditionally, a therapist using CBT would give their client paper thought records to keep between sessions.

Since there are now all these digital tools that are promising or promoting that they can do this, we went back to see how faithful they were to traditional paper-and-pencil thought records. What we found is that although the set of apps we reviewed all had some elements of thought records, very few had all the elements. So, I think this is an important call for, if you’re a therapist or if you’re a consumer, to look under the hood of the app and to see what’s present in it. Pilot it, so you know what’s there. Just because it says it’s a cognitive behavioral therapy app doesn’t mean it has all the elements that you would want to be using, either as a provider or as a consumer.

LR: Have you found that to be an “optimal consumer” profile for users of mental health apps, defined by a certain set of characteristics?
SS: I think we see that people who are young, tech-savvy, and motivated tend to do better with these apps, especially on their own. In my own experience, older clients or those with less digital literacy might be a little bit more challenging to onboard. If you can train them and work with them, essentially providing a little bit of digital literacy training, these particular clients become most excited and engaged in using one of these tools. And for some of these clients, some basic digital literacy training or support can be useful in other areas of their life. I often tell clinicians to do some sort of assessment of their clients regarding their digital literacy skills, their interests, their previous experiences using apps, and health apps specifically. That information would help clinicians guide clients to the most appropriate and useful digital tool.

If they’re interested and willing to learn and excited to do so, that person might become a client who would be a good fit for a mental health app. I don’t think these tools are for everyone, and I would never, nor should a clinician ever force them on anyone. These should simply be a tool in the toolbox. It’s not the only thing we have available. But don’t assume if someone doesn’t fit the perfect profile, that there might not be some other ways to support them in using these tools. They might eventually end up being a very great fit and a very great client for it.

Challenges

LR: So, young, motivated, tech-savvy—got it! What about marginalized clients? Those that have been and/or continue to be disenfranchised, whether due to SES, education, race, culture, age?
SS: Yeah, well, I’ll say this is a place that I think the field has really failed so far. There’s a lot of promise, and a lot of dialogue like, “Oh, we’ll build these technologies, and we’ll reach people who haven’t been reached otherwise. And we’ll expand access.” The reality of the situation currently is that a lot of these products are made for White majority individuals, in terms of the language (English), the imagery, and the style of the dialogue that’s present.I think that’s shifting a little bit. I think there definitely are developers and entrepreneurs who are creating products that are tailored for traditionally marginalized and underserved groups. And I think that’s important. It’s something we’ve seen in both research studies and in our experience talking to consumers. Products that are tailored to specific populations are more effective and engaging, and those consumers see them as more appealing. But I think the reality of the situation is if you try to find a Spanish-language app or one tailored to another underserved group, there are far fewer out there. So, I think it’s a place where it’s an unfulfilled promise right now in this space, and more work needs to be done.

LR: Sort of the digital equivalent of the finding that specialized populations need specialized services by professionals who are most familiar with their needs?
SS: I think that’s exactly right, despite there being a lot of rhetoric of like, “Oh, we’ll have these products, and it gets around this problem, because we don’t have to rely on the provider. We’ve got technologies. But you still have to design it. It’s not technology—the apps must be able to meet the needs of these distinct groups. It’s not just going to be a one-size-fits-all and we can create a product without consideration of racial, ethnic, and cultural diversity.
LR: And availability is a self-limiting issue, because not everybody has an iPhone. Not everybody who has an iPhone knows what to do with it. And not everybody has a computer. If they do, it may just be for simple functioning. I don’t know if I’m overstating it when I suggest that mental health apps and digital technology like this really favors the educated, the employed, the informed, the digitally familiar.
SS:  I don’t think it’s overstated. Even if we look at research studies, the most common participants are middle-aged White women. So, I think that’s the group we know a lot about who these tools work for.
LR: What role do you see mental health apps playing in working with suicidal clients or those in crisis?
SS: I think there’s a couple places where these tools can be useful. I think one is having these apps be collections of crisis resources. I know, for example, in the case of PTSD Coach that there was a safety planning tool and crisis support services tool directly in that app. And it was such a popular feature that they developed a standalone version of that containing provider resources. So, I think some of it is putting the resources in the pockets of people at the places and time that they need them the most and that they can save lives. I’ve been part of a team that has done a little bit of work in using these tools while a person is undergoing acute treatment. We were working with people who were on an inpatient unit, learning Dialectical Behavior Therapy skills, who used this app or got the app after leaving the setting as a reminder to use the tools.We often talk about these tools as being on-ramps and off-ramps to mental health care. On-ramps to introduce people to what is this whole therapy thing about, and what are some of the things I’m going to be learning in therapy? So, not replacing treatment, but getting someone ready so that they might be more willing to go and have started learning some of those skills. And then off-ramps being the booster sessions, or the reinforcement of the skills. And I think the same thing applies to individuals who are dealing with suicidal ideation or who have been through a suicide attempt, in that these tools might be ways to provide them reinforcement of some of the skills that might be able to help support some of the things that they learned.

LR: So, mental health apps can have a wide range of usages for suicidal clients and other clients in crisis, but not as standalone resources.
SS: I think that’s exactly right. And a great point, and I think that’s something I should really emphasize and just say directly. I don’t think that these apps are replacements for therapists. But I also don’t think this is an either/or. This is a yes/and. I think that these tools can be useful in the toolboxes of therapists, as well as in toolboxes to provide mental health services broadly. And that we must think about ways in which technologies can really augment and support therapists to give them skills. Or give them resources to do things that they weren’t able to do before. But in all, I think that putting resources in the hands of clients at the times they need them is one of the biggest potentials of these tools.
LR: There’s a wide body of research that examines the impact of therapeutic relational variables on treatment outcome. When it comes to apps, that relational connection is absent. How might mental health apps, especially those that are asynchronous or not connected to a therapist, take the place of relationship? Or is it, again, not an either/or, but a yes/and?
SS:Yeah, I think it is a yes/and. We’ve done a little bit of research, as have others, looking at relational variables or therapeutic alliance to these products specifically. And we find that people do form relationships to products—in this case, apps. I think that people have attachments to their phones. It’s something I do often during in-person talks. I might say, “Everyone, hold up your phone,” and everyone whips their phone out of their pockets and shows like, hey, everyone has one of these. And I’m like, “Okay, now pass it to the person on your left.” And everyone looks at me like, “Why would I do that? I’m not giving up my phone. I’m not letting someone else touch it.” We can form attachments or feelings… I mean, not the same that we would to a therapist, but there are relational aspects that occur. I think sometimes with these apps, it’s to the authority or the sense of who developed this, and do we trust them? There are various aspects that come up. So, I think that’s one aspect.

I think another aspect, and this applies more to the products that do have some sort of human support or human component to it, is that having the smaller interactions sometimes can actually create a sense of connection or relationship. There was a study that a colleague of mine did where they had someone reach out to people. And they referred to this as mobile hovering. It was a daily text message from a person—not a therapist, not their therapist, but just someone who checked in—and would start out with three questions. Did you take your medication today? Have you had any side effects? And how are things going for you? And those were the three messages they got every day, and they got a response back. This was what was called mobile hovering. They had their therapist and their psychiatrist as well. And at the end of the study, they asked about relational variables, and the person felt most connected to the person sending them those three text messages every day, because they felt like they were really invested in them, and they were checking up on them. We’ve also done some work with automated text messaging — just pushing notifications to people every day. And clients will respond to them. And they’ll say, “Thank you.” We’ll tell them, “Hey, no one’s monitoring this. This is automatic.” Like, “Yeah, I just felt like I had to respond.” So, I do think it’s not the same. But there are relational things that come up, even with automated programs.

LR: What about mental health apps for children and teens?
SS: Some research suggests that a lot of teens have used these types of tools. There was a nationally representative survey of folks 14 to 22, and about two-thirds had used a health app. And a lot of those were focused on mental health conditions, stress, anxiety, substance use, or were apps that used interventions that related to mental health, like mindfulness. Interestingly, if you looked at those with elevated levels of depression, those who met clinical cutoffs on standard measures, three-fourths of those teens had used a help app.So, we find that they’re using these types of tools. I think one thing that is disappointing to me is that there aren’t a lot of apps that are really tailored for teens. And this goes back to some of the conversation we had earlier around traditionally underserved or marginalized populations. And I think the same thing occurs for teens, which is that a lot of the products that have been developed were developed for adults. And we typically youthify it by adding different images without really designing it with teens in mind.

we need to develop more products that are specifically designed for teens, with teens

So, I think it’s a place where there’s a lot of promise, and there’s a lot of potential. You mentioned some of them. Teens are on their phones often. They’re digital natives. They’re comfortable using technology. But we need to develop more products that are specifically designed for teens, with teens, in ways to make them better fits for that population.

Evaluation

LR: Circling back to the early part of this discussion when we addressed the evaluation of mental health apps, can you describe what One Mind PsyberGuide does?
SS: I can refer to One Mind PsyberGuide like a Consumer Reports or Wirecutter of digital mental health products. We identify, evaluate, and disseminate information about these products to help consumers make informed decisions. And we operate a website that posts all the reviews that we’ve done on them. We evaluate them on three dimensions related to the categories I mentioned earlier. We look at their credibility, user experience, and transparency around data security and privacy. And we say “transparency,” not “data security and privacy,” because we don’t do a technical audit of the app. We review their privacy policies. So, for example, if an app says that their data is safe and it’s encrypted, we don’t try to hack into their system so we can say, “Is it really encrypted?” We say, “Okay, we’ll take that at face value.” Our guide is designed to be mostly consumer-focused, geared toward people looking to use those products themselves. But we also know that a lot of clinicians turn to our product to be able to better understand what the evidence is base behind these tools.We also provide professional reviews for some of the products that we review, by which I mean we have a professional in the field use the product, review the product, and write up a short narrative review about what are some of the pros and cons, and how might you use this tool in your practice or your life. That’s like a user guide or a user manual for these tools, because a lot of these apps don’t come with instructions like, “Well, this is how you might be able to use it to help benefit clients or yourselves.” So, we provide some of that information. And that’s one of the more popular sections of our website — those professional reviews around specific products.

LR: Like what the Buros Mental Measurement Yearbook provides for psychological instruments.
SS: That’s right.
LR: I know the APA, the American Psychiatric Association, has its App Advisor. Is that similar or equivalent to One Mind PsyberGuide’s system?
SS: Yeah, I think it’s similar. The difference between the App Advisor at APA and what we do at One Mind PsyberGuide is the App Advisor is a framework that talks about the different areas you should be considering when you are evaluating an app. At One Mind PsyberGuide, we’re doing some of the evaluation and providing scores. The two systems can be quite complementary. What I often recommend for clinicians and providers is that you might use One Mind PsyberGuide as a narrowing tool, to be able to go from those 10,000 to 20,000 to a smaller subset that might be reasonable for you to look at. And then you could use the APA’s framework, to pilot and evaluate them yourselves.

As I mentioned, or as we’ve talked about, there’s a lot of ways these are like self-help books. And I wouldn’t recommend a clinician to give out a self-help book if they hadn’t read it or at least looked at it. So, I think the American Psychiatric Association’s framework is a good way to think about when you’re evaluating and looking at these apps, to identify the different features that you should be considering in your own review and evaluation of it.

LR: As we close, Stephen, I recall your saying that you were working on and had just submitted a grant to SAMSHA. Are you at liberty to share what the grant was about?
SS: It’s loosely related to mental health apps, although it will be more exciting if we get the grant. SAMSHA is starting a Center of Excellence on social media and mental well-being. So, effectively, developing a clearinghouse to help summarize the research and the evidence-based practices that might help protect children and youth who are using social media and support them in being empowered and resilient in using those tools effectively. And providing technical assistance to youth and parents and caregivers and mental health professionals around what they might be able to do around children and youth and social media.I think that it will be a great resource to help better understand what risks that social media plays, and how we might better help kids navigate that space. Because I do think that it’s an interesting challenge that was not present in my youth, in terms of the dangers, but also the opportunities that social media presents.

LR: What are you most excited about now in this whole area of mental health apps? What really gets your blood flowing?
SS:One thing I’m really interested in is how we can better use these tools to empower people who are not professionals to be able to support people in evidence-based ways. Or to embed them with extra skills that they don’t have. So, something that I’m really interested in is, as we’ve seen a lot of peer certifications programs develop across the country, how we might be able to better empower peers to connect or use mental health apps or digital products in their support of other people to bring evidence-based practices into the work that they’re doing.

So, how do we really scale with technology? Because I think that the current technologies we have, the most effective ones are those that have some form of human support. Although there’s a promise of scalability in technology, it’s not currently actual. That’s one aspect that I think is really exciting.

And another aspect that just kind of touches on the place that we’ve talked about a couple times is, how do we develop better products for different populations? For ethnic and racial minorities, for youth, for LGBTQ individuals? And I think that there are a lot of really exciting groups that are supporting that. The Upswing Fund, Headstream, different funding, and innovation platforms that are really trying to empower people from these groups to develop and evaluate products to show their benefit. Hopefully in a couple of years, I won’t have to say this is an unmet promise of this field.

LR: In a related vein, is venture capitalism something that might really boost mental health apps to the whole next level? Or is it something that might undermine the quality of mental health apps?
SS: That’s a great question. Venture capital funding in this space has grown exponentially over the past decade. So, I am excited to see people excited. And excited to see people investing money in this space. But I think ultimately it will be determined whether this is going to lead to more effective resources for those in need.
LR: Stephen, I appreciate your time. But even more, your incredible breadth of knowledge and passion in this burgeoning field. I’m going to close by thanking you.
SS: I appreciate your interest in the area.

Keeping or Ending Commitments, Excerpted from The Ethical Lives of Clients: Transcending Self-Interest in Psychotherapy

Keeping or Ending Commitments

A life without interpersonal commitments is a life untethered. Notice that I did not say a life without “relationships,” which can be fleeting. Commitment comes with obligations and an open timeline. It often involves sacrificing immediate needs. The person I am permanently committed to knows I’m invested in their well-being and makes life plans accordingly. However, if I’m in an intimate relationship that does not involve a permanent commitment, all I owe the other person is a respectful goodbye if I’m ready to move on. The same for most friendships: I don’t owe friends years of hard work (and maybe therapy) to maintain a relationship that has become hurtful for an extended time. In other words, committed relationships have an ethical dimension that simply being in a relationship does not. In the world of therapy, we have barely begun to take the ethics of commitment seriously as we work with our clients. To make this point more charitably: the therapy literature is rarely explicit about the moral dimension of commitment in how we work with clients in relationship difficulty. (There is scholarly work outside of therapy on interpersonal commitment—for example, Stanley, 2005, and Tran et al., 2019.). In this chapter, I focus on how therapists can support (and how they sometimes inadvertently undermine) commitment in two important relationships: marriage (by which I mean a lifelong, intimate relationship) and adult relationships with their parents (particularly as the parents become frail).

Therapy and Marital Commitment

Shortly after I finished writing Soul Searching in 1995, the therapy blind spot with the ethics of commitment came home to me in the form of stories I received from married people who were close to me. In telling their stories, which they gave me permission to do, I am aware that it’s possible that they misunderstood their therapists or did not recall the details correctly. However, they are all credible people to me, and their stories fit a pattern I have heard from many clients over the years about their experiences in therapy. This pattern includes stories from fellow therapists about their experience as clients. In other words, although I can’t vouch for the accuracy of any particular story, I can be confident in the overall trend.

Monica, a relative of mine, called from another city to say that she was stunned when Rob, her husband of 18 years, announced that he was having an affair with her best friend and wanted an “open marriage.”(1) When a shocked Monica refused to consider this alteration in their marriage, Rob bolted from the house and was found the next day wandering in a nearby wood. After 2 weeks in a psychiatric hospital for acute psychotic depression, he was released to outpatient treatment. Although during his hospitalization, he claimed that he wanted a divorce, his therapist urged him not to make any major decisions until he was feeling better. Meanwhile, Monica was beside herself with grief, fear, and anger. She had two young children to care for, a demanding job, and a chronic illness diagnosed 12 months before this crisis. Indeed, Rob had never been able to cope with her diagnosis or with his job loss 6 months after that.

Clearly, this couple had been through huge stresses in the past year, including a relocation to a different city where they had no support systems in place. Rob was acting in a completely uncharacteristic way for a former straight-arrow man with strong religious and moral values. Monica was now depressed, agitated, and confused. She sought out recommendations to find the best psychotherapist available in her city. He turned out to be a highly regarded clinical psychologist. Rob was continuing in individual outpatient psychotherapy while living alone in an apartment. He still wanted a divorce.

As Monica recounted the story, her therapist, after two sessions of assessment and crisis intervention, suggested that she pursue the divorce that Rob said he wanted. She resisted, pointing out that this was a long-term marriage with young children and that she was hoping that the real Rob would reemerge from his midlife crisis. She suspected that the affair with her friend would be short-lived (which it was). She was angry and terribly hurt, she said, but determined not to give up on an 18-year marriage after one month of hell. The therapist, according to Monica, interpreted her resistance to “moving on with her life” as stemming from her inability to “grieve” the end of her marriage. He then connected this inability to grieve to the loss of her father when Monica was a small child; Monica’s difficulty in letting go of a failed marriage stemmed from unfinished mourning from the death of a parent.

Fortunately, Monica had the strength to fire the therapist. Not many clients would be able to do that, especially in the face of such expert pathologizing of their moral commitment. I was able to get her and Rob to a good marital therapist who saw them through their crisis and onward to a recovered and ultimately healthier marriage.

In another case close to home for me, Jessie, a friend of my family, emailed me upset when her new counselor, whom she was seeing for depression and complaints about her marriage of less than a year, suggested that she consider a trial separation from her husband because an unhappy (but not highly conflicted) marriage was keeping her from feeling better. Jessie recounted the exchange: when she told her counselor that she was committed to her husband, the therapist kept repeating that she may not be happy again if she stayed in this marriage and that a “break” might help her. Upset with this counselor, Jessie turned to her priest, who also stunned her by suggesting that if her marriage problems were causing her depression, he could help her get an annulment, given the newness of the marriage. As with Monica, Jessie turned to me to ask whether this kind of undermining intervention was common in the field—and what she should do next.

In another example, the anxious wife of a verbally abusive husband who was not dealing well with his Parkinson’s disease reported that she was told at the end of the first therapy session in her HMO, which offered only brief therapy, that her husband would never change and that she would either have to live with the abuse or get out.(2) She was grievously offended that this young therapist was so cavalier about her commitment to a man she had loved for 40 years and who was now infirm with Parkinson’s disease. She came to me to find a way to end the verbal abuse while salvaging her marriage. When I invited her husband to join us, he turned out to be more flexible than the other therapist had imagined. He, too, was committed to his marriage, and he needed his wife immensely. That was the leverage, along with a change in medications, for him to start treating her better.

One of my students experienced serious postpartum depressions after the births of her two children. She told me that both of the therapists she had seen at different times challenged her about why she stayed married to a husband who did not understand her needs. (Her husband was befuddled by his wife’s moods and sometimes became impatient with her, but he was not, according to my student, a mean-spirited man). In the first session, one therapist said in a challenging tone of voice, “I can’t believe you are still married.” Although it’s fully possible that my student invited these responses by potent criticisms of her husband, it’s the job of a therapist to hold the presenting sentiments of a depressed, postpartum client with a degree of caution before giving advice about ending a marriage. However, as Schwartz (2005) observed, because of our empathic engagement, therapists are “powerfully drawn to our patient’s point of view in their assessment of others” (p. 276).

A final illustration involves a friend who went to a well-regarded therapist for his depression. After a number of months, the therapist requested that his wife come to a session. The following week after the conjoint session, the therapist recommended that, on the basis of what she had observed and heard from the client, he consider divorcing his wife. My friend responded emphatically that divorce was not on the table for him and that he loved his wife and was committed to her. The therapist persisted, maintaining that his marriage problems were complicating his depression. My friend pushed back even harder: “There is not an ounce of interest in my body for divorcing my wife.” The therapist’s final words were, “I’m just asking you to think about it.” As in the other stories, my friend contacted me for help in understanding what had just happened, wondering whether this was standard care in the field. In this case, part of his confusion was that he felt he had received excellent treatment from a therapist he had sought out because of her strong reputation. How could a therapist who seemed so thoughtful and skilled in treating his depression be so clueless and undermining when it came to his commitment to his marriage?

Why Many Therapists Approach Marital Commitment This Way

These illustrations should not be dismissed as examples of random bad therapy or incompetent therapists—or just the biased recollections of the clients. (As I said, although no doubt clients sometimes misinterpret their therapists, when similar stories come up repeatedly, including from colleagues as clients, they cannot be dismissed.) In my view, these stories reveal the challenge for many therapists of how to think about and address clients’ life commitments in situations when those committed relationships are sources of pain and distress. It’s not that therapists deliberately undermine marriages; the rub comes when the marriage seems to be harming their client or keeping them from achieving their therapeutic goals. As I have repeatedly argued, when we lack a way to think about ethical issues in everyday life, we fall back on the mainstream cultural priority of individual self-interest. We challenge clients to privilege their immediate self-interest over relational commitments. This looks like neutrality, but it’s a heavily value-laden stance, one the therapist is usually not conscious of holding in an individualistic culture.

I was not immune to this way of working as a young therapist. I learned to treat the divorce decision with what I thought was neutrality. I remember working with Mary Ann, a 35-year-old woman in an unhappy marriage who wanted individual help to decide whether to keep working to change her marriage or end it.(3) She and her husband had two small children. This was the height of the divorce boom in the 1970s, and a number of her friends had recently left their husbands. Mary Ann felt stifled in a bland relationship with a man who didn’t connect with her emotionally in the way she wanted and who expected her to do the lion’s share of the parenting and housework, along with her part-time job. Sound familiar as a marital complaint? As I sat with her, I realized that I’d never been taught how to work with someone on the brink of divorce. My training in marriage therapy started with the assumption that both parties wanted to stay together, at least for the time being. My training in individual therapy had taught me that my job was to help my clients clarify their feelings, needs, and goals and then make their own decisions without my values and viewpoints getting in the way.

So, I did a kind of rational-choice consultation with Mary Ann, helping her clarify what she’d gain or lose personally from her decision. “How would your life improve from leaving your marriage,” I asked, and “What might it cost you to leave?” I asked the same about staying: “What are the pluses and minuses of remaining in the marriage?” (I was studying statistics at the time and even imagined a two-by-two contingency table!) When she worried aloud about the effects of a divorce on her kids, I responded, “The kids will be fine if you’re happy with your decision.” Mary Ann ultimately decided to file for divorce and start a new life.

Even at the time, I felt odd about treating this client’s dilemma as if it were a decision that only affected her. And I felt sad that another not-so-bad marriage was biting the dust. Not that I’d have admitted this to a supervisor or peer, because a hallmark of a good therapist in my circles was to be cool about the rash of divorces we were seeing among our clients and peers. No one wanted to come across as a moralistic marriage saver. Divorce was a hard-won right and a legally supported, no-fault personal choice. At this point in the early 1980s, Putnam (2020) observed that “expressive individualism framed marriage as a limited liability contract dissolvable with a ‘no fault divorce’—‘expressive divorce’” (p. 152). The common wisdom was that a therapist should not get too involved beyond clarifying the options and supporting the client’s autonomy.

Looking back, I’m struck by my naiveté about what’s involved in leaving a marriage, especially one with children, and my innocence about my lack of influence on the outcome. Like most people facing this decision, Mary Ann was caught in a morass of ambivalent feelings and values. (Harris et al., 2017, documented the volatile ups and downs of divorce decision making). She’d made a lifelong commitment to her husband and now was considering withdrawing it. She wondered whether her expectations for this husband, or any husband, were realistic. She hadn’t done much psychological work on herself and didn’t have an idea of what good marriage therapy might accomplish. She worried about her economic future, and she was deeply concerned about the effect of a divorce on her children, who’d lose their daily connection to their father, take a financial hit, and face a series of substantial life changes. She also believed that her parents and friends would be shocked and upset with her if she left the marriage.

Mary Ann’s journey toward her decision was, like most people’s, highly unstable and marked by ambivalence (National Divorce Decision-Making Project, 2015; Vaughn, 1990). But despite this instability and the high stakes, I treated her as if she were thinking of changing jobs from Walmart to Target: what does each company offer you, and what would be the downside of staying or switching jobs? And, by the way, you owe nothing to your current employer as you make this decision. Maybe her choice of divorce was the best one, and maybe she would have made the same choice regardless of how I’d worked with her. But she deserved a complex therapy to match the complexity of her dilemma, not an oversimplified, “neutral” therapy that failed to engage both sides of her ethical dilemma. Her husband, children, and future grandchildren also deserved better from me. As the novelist Pat Conroy (1978) famously wrote, “Each divorce is the death of a small civilization.”

As therapists, we are midwives for relational deaths and rebirths, the shattering and rebuilding of committed intimate relationships that are at the heart of human experience. But you won’t find much training, writing, or even conversation among therapists about how we handle these moments in therapy. The result is that we’re each left to make things up on our own, mostly using the implicit ethical norms embedded in our culture and profession.

Adults’ Commitments to their Parents

Riding in an elevator once in Singapore, I saw a sign for one of the floors of the government center labeled something like “Parent Court.” When I inquired, I learned that it was a place where parents who felt neglected by their adult children could seek the help of the court to enforce filial obligations. I knew I wasn’t in Kansas anymore! In the United States and similar Western countries, adult children have no legal obligations to care for their parents (just as the parents have no legal obligations to their children when they turn 18). Adult familial relationships are voluntary in the ethical realm, not the legal one.

The field of psychotherapy has been hard on parents from the beginning, seeing them as primary sources of the pathologies in their offspring. Whether it’s toilet training in traditional Freudian theory or inadequate attachment bonds and authoritarian or permissive discipline in contemporary models, there are plenty of parent deficiencies to sort through with clients in therapy. However, I suspect that the working assumption among therapists was that you could work to recover from poor parenting in the past while still having a relationship with your parents in the present. That began to change in the 1980s with the rise of cultural interest in “the dysfunctional family,” including intrafamilial sexual abuse and codependency on problematic parents and other family members (Bass & Davis, 1988). Parents were not just toxic influences from the past; they were continuing to harm their adult offspring in the present. What’s more, they could be a threat to their grandchildren.

From the mid-1980s through at least the mid-1990s, many therapists joined the recovered memories movement in the field, believing without evidence, for example, in the near pervasiveness of multiple personality disorder brought on by intrafamilial sexual abuse (Acocella, 1999). I recall case consultations where therapists, again without evidence, said that 90% of women with bulimia had a history of incest in their families. The next wave was about the since-discredited claim of widespread satanic ritual abuse of babies and children. The upshot was a wave of therapist-encouraged cut- offs from parents and often from other family members who did not accept the claim of that abuse. Parents would receive “goodbye” letters, crafted with the encouragement of therapists, from their adult children, especially their daughters, who were more apt than their sons to be in psychotherapy. Our field got caught up in a huge wave of cultural negativity about family life (Wylie, 1993).

Eventually, there was a cultural pushback, highlighted by a New Yorker article and subsequent book by investigative journalist Lawrence Wright (1994) on satanic cult accusations and an acclaimed PBS Frontline episode, “Divided Memories” (Bikel, 1995), which featured a high-profile therapy clinic where nearly all clients were encouraged to achieve the goal of “detachment” by cutting off from their parents and, in some cases, from their spouses and even their children while they recovered their sense of self. In these and other cases around the country, the therapists involved were proud of their work and had a theoretical model behind it (if no research data). After successful lawsuits ensued, therapists quietly abandoned their practice of suggesting family abuse via recovered memories, and they stopped taking as accurate the notion of large numbers of dead babies as a result of satanic cult abuse.

But the idea of a therapeutic cutoff from parents (and siblings who ally with the parents) had been loosed in the field and continues in practice and books by therapists for the lay public, such as Campbell’s (2019) But It’s Your Family…: Cutting Ties With Toxic Family Members and Loving Yourself in the Aftermath. That author described in detail how she came to cut off all contact with her pathological father and mother, and she urged the same for her readers after they evaluated whether the criteria she offered fit their parents.

In the mid-1990s, as my own children were entering college, I gave a presentation to a group of college counselors that included interns and staff. The topic was the value of seeing college students as members of families instead of just as emancipated individuals. I will never forget an exchange with a junior staff therapist who asked, “Aren’t there times when the student’s family is so toxic, not only in the past but also still now, that it’s best that the student break off a relationship with them?” I replied that I had seen some tragic cases where the past abuse was not only denied but also continued with intensity and that in those cases, it can be useful for a young person to take a time-out from connecting with family. Then I thought to ask, “I’m curious. For what percentage of your caseload do you believe a family cutoff would be called for?” I froze in my chair when he said, “Maybe 40%.” The chill I felt was that I was soon to launch my oldest child to college—what if he developed emotional problems and saw this therapist? No one present offered a counterview, and we moved on after I mumbled something about this not being my experience. In retrospect, I wish I had challenged him about how he came to his perspective. It was a failure of nerve on my part that I vowed never to repeat.

I have heard many clients report encouragement by therapists to end relationships with parents and other family members, and I’ve seen this in my extended family. These days, whenever I hear about a definitive cutoff from family, I ask whether there is a therapist in the picture. To be clear, I believe that these therapists want to help their clients avoid unnecessary emotional pain by encouraging them to exit relationships that continue to cause this pain. It’s not that therapists hate families or that there are never situations that call for a strategic time away from abusive family members (in my mind, always with the hope for later reconciliation). Rather, these therapeutic interventions reflect a cultural orientation where all relationships are transactional—what is the benefit I am gaining versus the cost to my well-being? If the relative psychological cost of maintaining a family relationship is too high, the healthy thing to do is to end it. I later return to the case of Laura, whose story opened this book on the note of adult commitment to a difficult parent. Here I just note that Laura told me that she had several therapist friends who encouraged her to “ditch” her mother. Missing here are two ideas: first, that parent–child bonds are not psychologically disposable—they go on until the death of the parent and beyond—and second, that there is an ethical dimension to the parent–child (and other family) relationship. A permanent cutoff means that adult children have no moral obligation to respond to their parents’ current needs and the eventual frailty and end of life. These two levels—psychological and ethical— go together. Like it or not, we are emotionally tethered to our parents and they to their adult children. Therapists come and go, but not parents. As I’ve heard the psychologist Mary Pipher (2008) say, “Nobody calls out for their therapist on their deathbed” (p. 2).

I don’t have a one-size-fits-all formula for obligations to parents, especially when the parents are in need of support and help. There are so many factors, including the history of the relationship. Obligation to a parent who abandoned you at birth and has now reentered your life wanting support will look different from obligation to a parent who has shown consistent care and support over the years. How much to be involved personally, with openness and vulnerability, with a frail or dying parent will depend on how much emotional safety there is in the relationship. Then there is the complex issue of what forms of help are, well, helpful. As asked earlier in this book, when is taking a parent home to one’s own house the best decision for all concerned versus placing the parent in a care facility? Culture comes into play here: in some cultures, an out-of-home placement is seen as an act of cruelty, while in others, is it considered loving when done at the right time. My main point here is that the job of the therapist is to help the client navigate these difficult waters, discerning the interests of the self, parent, one’s spouse and children, and others. Moral foundation theory can help to sensitize us to competing ethical intuitions: care/harm, fairness/reciprocity, and respect for authority seem particularly relevant here. Good ethical consultation does not mean that the therapist has the answers but that the therapist honors the client’s commitment to parents in light of all the other factors involved.

The Craft of Ethical Consultation about Commitment

I use the LEAP-C (listen, explore, affirm, offer perspective, challenge) skills to demonstrate strategies for ethical consultation when commitment to a marriage or a parent relationship is on the table—that is, when a client is struggling about staying in a marriage or about cutting off or withdrawing support from a parent in need.

Listen

Listen for the ethical part of the client’s decision making. For marriage, it might be a dilemma over personal happiness versus the original commitment or the needs of the children. For adults with their parents, it might come out in the form of the client’s guilt, sometimes accompanied with resentment, over not doing enough for one’s parent. As with all forms of listening in ethical consultation, it’s important to give a full hearing to both sides of the dilemma and to how the client is expressing a number of moral intuitions in light of their life experience and their culture, including intuitions such as authority and loyalty that do not come readily to mind for a Western therapist. In Laura’s situation with her challenging, soon-to-be-frail mother, I listened carefully to her ambivalent feelings and thoughts: on the one hand, self-protective ones for herself in the face of current and future burdens (the current one focused on her mother’s criticisms, and the future one added caregiving) and, on the other hand, a sense that it would be wrong to cut off her mother. Her friends were listening mainly to the self-protective side of her ambivalence. Laura said she came to me for therapy because she believed I would also listen to the other side.

Explore

The nuances emerge during exploration. For parent dilemmas, these include the quality of the relationship now and in the past, the possibility of manipulation versus genuine need, the availability of other caregivers such as siblings, and the resources of the client to help the parent in light of other obligations. Often a decision will emerge from this exploration, one that the client can live with in terms of resolving the tension between personal needs and responsibility for parents.

For Laura, the exploration revealed the details underlying her sense that she could not just walk away from her mother: it didn’t seem right as the only child of a widowed parent. But she also lived with an emotional burden of listening to her mother’s weekly phone monologues about how others don’t treat her fairly, including her daughter. Her mother also offered critiques of Laura’s mothering (those hurt the most). I especially paid attention to how the client responded to her mother on these calls, uncovering how passive and annoyed she would become but not set limits. This exploration opened up possibilities for her to remain regularly in her mother’s life while building healthier boundaries.

In terms of marital commitment, the following is a series of exploratory questions that I developed for a specialized approach to couples work called discernment counseling, where at least one spouse is considering ending the marriage (Doherty & Harris, 2017):

  • What has happened to your marriage that has gotten you to the point where you are considering divorce? Notice that this is not framed as “What are the problems?” or “Why are you unhappy?” but in terms of the marriage being a major part of the client’s life that is now under question.
  • What have you or your spouse done to try to repair the relationship—to fix the problems before you got to the point where divorce is on the table? This question carries the assumption that marital commitment is worth an effort to find a way to maintain—the relationship deserves repair attempts if it’s broken.
  • What role, if any, do your children play in your decision making about the future of your marriage? This delicately crafted question brings the needs of the children into the conversation in a way that gives the client space to respond in a variety of ways.
  • What were the best of times in your relationship since the time you met— the times you had the most connection and joy? This question brings clients back to what they used to love about their spouse and what led to their original commitment.

The point behind questions like these is to show that exploring ethical dilemmas over commitment can involve more than “tell me about both sides of your struggle.” There are lots of nuances and often more than two stakeholders— for example, third parties such as children who will be affected by the decision. Laura, for example, weighed the effect of a parental cutoff on her children, who would grow up without contact with the grandmother.

Affirm

Affirming involves acknowledging and supporting the client’s ethical commitments. In Laura’s case, I explicitly affirmed her moral sense that she should not take her therapist friend’s advice to “dump” her mother like a bad boyfriend. I used words like these: “I appreciate that you want to do right by your mother even though she’s a difficult mother. It’s not easy, but you’ve decided it’s important that you stay in her life, especially at this time when she’s pretty much alone.” Laura sat up straighter in her chair and said, “Right. That’s the path I have chosen. Now I want to figure out how to do this and keep my sanity.”

Affirmations on divorce decisions are trickier because of the inherent volatility involved for many clients in coming to a conclusion. When clients bring up their ethical concerns, say, about their marriage vows or the children, I affirm them without suggesting that those concerns are determinative—they don’t necessarily mean staying in the marriage. It’s just that commitment has an important role in the decision. In contrast to how I used to dismiss these concerns, I’ve learned to simply acknowledge and accept them with language such as “I appreciate that you are taking seriously your original commitment to your marriage; leaving is not something you take lightly,” or “I hear your concerns about the children, and I’m glad you are taking these concerns seriously. There is a lot at stake all around.” By the way, many older clients with adult children and grandchildren are concerned about hurting these stakeholders. I affirm that concern as well. And, of course, I affirm the client’s right to think about their pain and harm to self from staying in a bad marriage and their concerns that a highly conflicted marriage can also be harmful to the children. That’s why it’s an ethical dilemma: there are legitimate needs and claims in tension.

Perspective

As mentioned, it’s often not necessary to share one’s perspective on an ethical dilemma because clients sort out how to proceed with the help of the listening, exploring, and affirming skills. In situations when commitment is in play, however, clients can often benefit from the therapist’s perspective on how to have a healthy, satisfying life while maintaining commitments to others, such as a difficult spouse or a burdensome parent. Self-sacrifice for the sake of ethical commitments can be difficult to sustain and, in some cases, may not be healthy or wise (as with an abusive spouse who will not seek help).

In the case of Laura, I shared a perspective this way:

ME: I hear you on your desire to be a supportive daughter to your mother—saying goodbye to her is not an option for you. Now let’s talk about how you can support her in a way that’s healthy for you. The current situation is not working: you feel burdened by her weekly calls, stressed for a day beforehand, and upset for a day or more afterward. You go through the week with negative thoughts about her and then feel guilty for being so negative. Do I have that right?

LAURA: Yes, exactly.

ME: So, your bind is that you don’t feel like a good daughter when you are in touch with her, and you would not feel like a good daughter if you abandon her. [Notice that I used explicitly ethical language— “good daughter”—because the client had been using that kind of language. I did not substitute nonethical language such as “responsive” or “measuring up”].

LAURA: Oh, my, yes!

ME: So, let’s think together about two things: what might be going on for your mother that she acts this way and how you can learn a healthier way to interact with her. Right now, it doesn’t seem as if you have good boundaries with her on the calls—you let her go on and on, and when she criticizes you as a mother, you’ve said you defend yourself and feel angry at her. My idea is that we would work to find a way for you to have healthy boundaries with your mother on these calls so that you feel you are there for her and protecting yourself at the same time. And by the way, it’s not healthy for your mother when she treats you poorly. So, a better-boundaried relationship would be good for both of you.

Here, I was offering a perspective on how Laura could take care of herself and her mother at the same time. Over the course of our work, she did find helpful ways to listen to her mother’s complaints about her life while at the same time setting firm limits when her mother started to offer personal criticism of Laura’s mothering. All of this was standard therapy work on my part. The point of emphasis for present purposes is that I framed this, in part, as ethical work, a way to resolve a moral challenge for the client who had wondered whether it was unhealthy of her not to walk away from her mother as others, including her therapist friends, had advised her.

In terms of offering perspective on divorce decisions, a key is to honor both sides of the ethical dilemma in two main ways:

  • Normalize the dilemma. It’s hard to know the right decision when dealing with ongoing personal suffering and hopelessness in a marriage, along with struggles about abandoning one’s commitment and putting one’s children at risk. And most people go up and down in their decision making.
  • Share concerns. When a client seems to be making an impulsive decision to divorce (say, right after learning of a spouse’s affair), the therapist can share some general wisdom about the value of slowing down in making a lifetime decision. I like to use the phrase of a wise collaborative divorce lawyer: “Divorce is never an emergency; it takes months to play out.” A separation can be an emergency decision when there is threat and risk, but deciding to divorce rarely has to be done immediately and in emotional turmoil. Another example of perspective is when a client seems to be downplaying a future consequence of a divorce. I recall a married man who thought that his adult children would readily accept his lover (because she was such a great person) if he ended the marriage to be with her. I offered an alternative perspective so that he could be more realistic in his decision making: the likelihood of resentment from his children, at least for some time. A final example was a client in a volatile marriage who said that he could just stay away from his wife until the last child left home in 6 years. I offered that I’ve seen this work sometimes for couples who already have a lot of distance and little conflict, but I wasn’t sure it would be feasible in his more engaged, high-conflict relationship, especially if it was his unilateral decision to stay married but be functionally single.

Challenge

To discuss challenges in intergenerational commitments, I switch to parent-to-child commitment because it’s more commonly needed there. Recall my discussion in the Introduction about Bruce, who was about to move away and abandon his children after his wife kicked him out of the house. When I asked him the exploratory questions of how he thought leaving his children would affect them, he replied, “I’m sure it will bother them for a while, but they’ll get over it before long.” Given the urgency of the risk (Bruce had come to what he said was a final session to wrap up our work before he left town), I decided to immediately challenge him with these blunt words: “I don’t think so. Walking out of their lives will affect them for a long time, even permanently.” Bruce soberly replied, “I know you’re right.” I asked why he thought what I said was right. “They will feel hurt and not understand why this happened. You know, I left my daughter in California the same way, and I think about how it affected her. I don’t want to do that again, but I don’t know if I can go back to that house and see my wife, not in the state that I’m in.” Bruce and I were now in accord that he wanted to keep his commitment to his kids. Our work now was to figure out how to do this while maintaining his fragile emotional equilibrium.

Ethical challenges require a caring relationship so that they don’t come across as judgmental. I recall a divorced father who learned that his 7-year-old son was calling his new stepfather “Dad.” My client felt terribly hurt and replaced. I empathized with his feelings. Then he told me that he had told his son that day that if he ever heard that he was calling his stepfather “Dad,” he would never see the child again. I was shocked and worried for the child, but I held on to the craft of ethical consultation by first connecting with my client:

ME: Joe, I know you are in a lot of pain about your divorce and scared to death about losing your kids’ love and affection. And I know that you would never intentionally harm your children. [Slight pause] I also have to tell you that what you said to Bobby probably hurt and wounded him and left him fearing that he could lose you. You are the only father he has, and he should not have to live with the fear that if he slips and calls someone “Dad,” he will lose you forever.

JOE: [Looking worried] Do you think he could feel that way? I just wanted to get through to him about me being the only one he calls Dad.

ME: I’m really worried for him right now. That was a big threat you made to him.

JOE: I can see it now. I was beside myself upset, and I took it out on him. What do I do now?

We went on to discuss how he could repair what he had done, beginning with contacting his son right after our session. We went over the words he could use to apologize and offer reassurance that his commitment was forever and not contingent on something his son would say.

Most therapists would be with me in cases of parent commitment to young children: ethical challenges can be appropriate there. When it comes to marital commitment, many therapists take a neutral stance on whether clients divorce and would be reluctant to go beyond sharing perspectives for the client to accept or not (Wall et al., 1999). My view is that while there can be good reasons to let go of a marital commitment, it’s a weighty ethical decision because it affects the welfare of at least one other person who made life decisions based on an expectation of continued commitment, and usually, there are additional stakeholders such as children and extended family members. Therefore, I am willing to challenge clients when I believe they are not including concern for other stakeholders in their decision making. Keep in mind that challenge generally only comes after using the other skills of listening, exploring, affirming, and offering perspective. Here are some examples:

  • Challenging a client to seek couples therapy. “I’m concerned that you are leaving your marriage without seeing whether it could become healthy again through good couples therapy.”
  • Challenging a client to let a spouse know the marriage is on the brink. “I realize you don’t think your spouse can change. Maybe so, maybe not. What I want to challenge you about is not signaling to her that you are so unhappy that you are considering divorce. It seems to me that she is owed a chance to see whether she wants to make changes that might preserve the marriage. She’s flying blind now.”
  • Challenging a client about ending a good-enough marriage when the client is depressed or in personal crisis. This challenge can take two forms: appealing to self-interest (“I’m worried that you will do something that you will regret when you are in a better emotional place”) and appealing to the interests of others (“This decision is going to affect a whole lot of people, such as your kids, and I’m worried that it’s hard for you to fully consider those consequences when you are feeling the way you do. You could look back with regret about the fallout”).

I end this chapter’s discussion of ethical commitment with words I wrote in Soul Searching:

Our therapy caseloads are like Shakespearean dramas suffused with moral passion and moral dilemmas. But we have been trained to see Romeo and Juliet only as star-struck, tragic lovers, while failing to notice that the moral fabric of parental commitment was torn when their families rejected them because of who they loved. We focus on the murder of Hamlet’s father and Hamlet’s own existential crisis, rather than on how Hamlet’s mother abandoned her grieving son. Commitment to loved ones, and betrayal of that commitment, are central moral themes in the human drama played out in psychotherapy every day. (Doherty, 1995, p. 46).

______

From The Ethical Lives of Clients: Transcending Self-Interest in Psychotherapy, by W. J. Doherty Copyright © 2022 by the American Psychological Association. All rights reserved.

References:

1. This case example is from “Bad Couples Therapy: How to Avoid Doing It,” by W. J. Doherty, 2002a, Psychotherapy Networker, (November/December), pp. 26–33 Copyright 2002 by The Psychotherapy Networker, Inc. Adapted with permission.

2. This case example is from “Couples on the Brink: Stopping the Marriage-Go-Round,” by W. J. Doherty, 2006, Psychotherapy Networker, (March/April), pp. 30–39. Copyright 2006 by The Psychotherapy Networker, Inc. Adapted with permission.

Brooke Sheehan on Psychotherapy Behind Bars

On the Inside

Lawrence Rubin: Brooke, you are the director of the intensive mental health unit in a correctional facility in the Northeast with acute, subacute, and chronic clients. What are some of the greater challenges that you’ve experienced working therapeutically in this facility?
Brooke Sheehand: I think, for social workers or any clinical staff that decides to get into correctional work, grit, toughness, and the ability to roll with quick-moving and unpredictable changes are important. I’ll give you an example. You might have a schedule of clinical and therapeutic activities like individual and/or group therapy, when all of a sudden, there might be an ICS (Incident Command System) alert, which calls for an immediate response to some type of problematic event.

to get into correctional work, grit, toughness, and the ability to roll with quick-moving and unpredictable changes are important

A resident on the correctional side of the facility, what outsiders typically refer to as a prisoner, could be having chest pains, which obviously calls for immediate attention, or a piece of equipment goes missing, and you have to do a search for that equipment. These kinds of things, not to mention conflicts between residents, derail what you might have otherwise planned therapeutically for the day. I’m pretty lucky because I work on the mental health unit, as opposed to the correctional side of the facility, where the primary focus is on mental health events, and where we generally get to keep going. This shared focus really helps to maintain the stability of the therapeutic community, or milieu.

Another challenge is working with the residents on my unit for whom simply being locked in causes its own stress because they lack control over their immediate environment, their only world, at least for the present.

LR: I used to work in a forensic unit of a state psychiatric hospital, which had a very particular feel for me, and it wasn’t pleasant—far from it. What’s the “feel” of a mental health unit within a prison?
BS:

Unlike the correctional side of the facility, the mental health unit feels very familial

Unlike the correctional side of the facility, the mental health unit feels very familial, which is interesting because that’s not a term you’re usually going to hear from residents in a correctional environment. And I think the staff would say the same thing. Despite the wide range of residents from the acute to the chronically mentally ill, we seem able to create a balanced environment. For example, our longer and long-term residents are able and willing to check in with new or acute folks, which allows them to introduce them to the way that we do business on the unit. And oftentimes, that includes letting these new or acute folks know that we don’t get caught up in typical prison politics, like if someone brings you coffee, they’re not looking to have a favor in return. We really stress the importance of residents on the unit doing things for each other because they care about other people. You might not see this nearly as much on the correctional side of the facility.

LR: So the residents live in the mental health unit as opposed to visiting a clinic for an hour or so for individual or group therapy?
BS: Exactly. Folks end up doing treatment at different intervals that work for them and their clinician. We also have activity therapists, and they really help. If the clinician establishes a treatment plan, those activity therapists help with non-clinical activities, like social skills or physical activities that might be outside of the resident’s comfort zones. An example I usually give is that we have beachball bowling, which provides for social connection, teamwork, and goal-directed activity. And in addition, it’s fun for residents.
LR: Is the mental health unit comprised of both male and female residents, as well as mixed pathologies, from acute all the way to chronic?
BS:

most commonly, we see people with psychotic disorders, either acute or related to chronic conditions like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or schizoaffective disorder

Yes. I would also say that most commonly, we see people with psychotic disorders, either acute or related to chronic conditions like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or schizoaffective disorder. Those are all really common. And I would say most people who come into the facility are dually diagnosed, which is a very common and more recent trend; as well as both males and females.

LR: So, it’s not a substance abuse unit per se. But you might have people with substance abuse problems mixed in with other folks who do not abuse substances and who may be experiencing depression or bipolar disorder.
BS: Absolutely. We definitely have people who experience major depression, and those who experience anxiety—although I would say that’s a little less. More commonly, we have people who are actively delusional or for other reasons are unable to navigate the regular prison environment.
LR: What are some of the clinical or therapeutic challenges that the residents on your unit experience?
BS: Our unit is really a need-to-know unit, which is so unique in the correctional realm. So, for example, the correctional officers on my unit do have more mental health training, which is a cool difference from other facilities that don’t have a mental health unit. But, like all the staff on the unit, whether they are mental health-trained or not, everyone is involved in all aspects of treatment planning and implementation. You just don’t see that in a lot of other correctional facilities.
LR: So this is a true therapeutic milieu, where everyone is technically a part of the treatment team.
BS: Absolutely. Everyone, from the behavioral health techs to intensive case managers, to the clinicians, to the correctional staff.

A One-Stop Shop

LR: You have a DSW (Doctor of Social Work). What is your primary function?
BS: I do an array of things. In addition to individual and group therapy, I still have my hand in the less exciting parts of day-to-day management in terms of staff supervision and training, as well as helping with intake and discharge planning.
LR: Parenthetically, is this mental health venue common in the prison system in your state or, as far as you know, across the country? Because it sounds rather unique.
BS:

Our unit is also quite unique because oftentimes facilities attempt to expedite stabilization by quickly treating residents from the correctional side with medications

As far as I know, there is not another facility or unit that has something like this. We’ve had different people from different agencies even within our own umbrella trying to develop something similar. It’s really difficult if you don’t have a lot of stakeholders on board. Our unit is also quite unique because oftentimes facilities attempt to expedite stabilization by quickly treating residents from the correctional side with medications, getting them back to some baseline, and quickly sending them back. So their stay can also be very short. Our unit can take a little bit longer. These particular folks actually get a shot at trying to navigate their way out of the criminal justice system.

LR: So, some are referred directly from court into the intensive mental health unit, after which they go back into society? Or do they go back into the general population on the correctional side of the prison? Sorry to use television terms like “gen pop.”
BS: It can vary. I think that’s one of the other interesting aspects of our model, since we have those three levels of care (acute, sub-acute, and chronic) that for all intents and purposes, should not exist together in a single place.
LR: Where do folks go after completing treatment on your unit, if that is the correct term?
BS: To different gen pop settings, which could be a different correctional facility—whether that’s back to the county jail or to another state facility. We also have folks who will go to a state hospital. And then we also have folks who will be released.
LR: These gen pop residents are the ones who are not living in the intensive mental health unit, but rather what you refer to as the correctional side.
BS: I’m also thinking of that criminal justice realm, where they’re perpetually in this cycle which leads them out but inevitably back to prison for reasons that might be more related to mental health issues. We try to get them into outside settings that are really focused on mental health.
LR: Do you have a psychiatrist who works on the unit or just visits the unit and prescribes meds?
BS: We are fortunate enough to have a psychiatrist who is embedded in our team, which is wonderful. And they really are an essential part of the team. Because what is very different, I think, about an intensive mental health unit in a correctional setting, is that if and when the residents are acutely psychotic, they’re going to need a med adjustment, you know, at the drop of a dime. And we’re really able to do that because that prescriber is embedded with us.
LR: A one-stop shop.
BS: Yes. Exactly.

Working Within the System

LR: What are some of the nontherapeutic aspects of your work, when you’re not sitting in a session with a resident, doing traditional therapy?
BS: Entering into the world of the correctional environment as a clinical person can be quite distressing. You see people engaged in a broad array of challenging behaviors, including self-injury or hunger strikes. When people are confined, they can resort to some really desperate measures. And so I think that’s definitely one of the more challenging aspects of the job.
LR: So, there are issues that some of the residents bring with them into the facility, but some psychiatric behavioral issues that evolve as a result of being in the facility. What other kinds of behavioral and emotional problems develop as a result of being in the facility?
BS:

I’ve got a lot of folks I work with who are lifers or simply won’t outlive their sentences

I think one of the biggest components and barriers for these folks is the lack of control over their own life. I mean, I’ve got a lot of folks I work with who are lifers or simply won’t outlive their sentences. When they have people on the outside whom they’re still trying to be connected to, there’s so much that they miss or are not able to participate in, or celebrate, or grieve. This leaves many of these residents feeling absolutely cut off and without meaningful or rewarding outlets.

LR: What are some of the unique therapeutic challenges of working with a so-called “lifer”?
BS: That’s one of those predicaments where you have to be really comfortable being uncomfortable and able to walk together through this barrier of acknowledging that this person is in this very limited environment forever. And oftentimes, I’ve found that by just calling that what it is and not trying to tiptoe around it, you become better able to provide the necessary supportive interventions. These particular residents really just want to talk about that and acknowledge that this is a different walk and a different journey for them than for someone who might be getting out in nine months.
LR: How has your training in social work, as opposed to that of a clinical psychology background, prepared you to work in this particular environment?
BS: The fundamental difference that I often see is that our training as social workers is really based on a systems orientation as opposed to an individualistic one. I see systemic barriers and challenges more quickly on the unit and am prepared to think and act more quickly to address those.
LR: Can you explain that?
BS: The unique part of this type of job is that I’m working right there in the middle of the intersection, so to speak. We do a lot of work with families, especially in the world of mental health, because many of our residents still typically have connections, both on the inside and outside, and in many cases that includes family members who care. And for these family members, it can really be difficult to navigate the system of care that their loved one is embedded in. That can often leave family members on the outside feeling both hopeless and helpless. And the flip side is that working in the milieu requires constant attention to the politics on the unit, as well as the ebb and flow of policies that flow from the Governor’s office.
LR: In this context of the systemic orientation, what kind of family work are you able to do as a therapist in the facility?
BS:

even before the pandemic, we were able to do a lot of family work through Zoom and Skype

I worked with one of the residents and his mother who was actually able to come into the facility for visits. We were able to do some family work right there, which was pretty unique. And even before the pandemic, we were able to do a lot of family work through Zoom and Skype. And we are also able to provide extra assistance to those families who struggle due to enmeshment, which can be exacerbated by the confinement of one of the family members.

LR: Would you do family work with someone who is a lifer?
BS: Oh, yes. In fact, we do. And that’s been very therapeutic. One of our lifetime residents has family members who live out of state. It’s been a gift to be able to work with the resident and his family on a fluid, continual basis, through which they actually get to mend and work on enhancing their relationship even though they will never live under the same roof or close to one another again.
LR: Can you think of another family with whom you’ve worked that was particularly poignant for you as a clinician?
BS: One that comes to mind is a gentleman who was able to do some inner younger-child work that he really hadn’t been able to do when he was actually young. It was the safety of distance, both from his own childhood and his family members, that allowed him to work through these complex issues. And so, they have, let’s say, like a 30-minute video conference that they’re able to do. Doing it this way gave both sides the time and space between these remote sessions to sort through things.
LR: How did the isolation that COVID forced upon us impact the family work with some of these residents who depended on family members’ coming to the facility?
BS: It absolutely did have an impact. I think you’re right in saying that there are some folks who really are pretty fortunate. In my experience with folks in this system, particularly those with mental health needs, many have burned a lot of bridges, and they don’t have people who come anymore. But for the others, and a couple come to mind, not having those connections has been a challenge. But video conferencing has really lifted people’s spirits and allowed them to stay connected.
LR: In this context of connection, what are some of the benefits that you’ve found by doing group therapy with the residents?
BS: Before we even get in the room for group treatment, they’re all there. Everyone is there, which is so cool. I’ve worked in a lot of places and with other populations, and folks just don’t show up at the same rate for group therapy. They all really push each other to get outside of their comfort zones and be there for the group.
LR: Are your groups process groups, or are they psychoeducational groups, and are they unique to being inside of a prison?
BS: Working with this very interesting and mixed cohort means that we have to get creative a lot. We do a lot of processing, a lot of meeting people where they’re at during the day. And I’m telling you, that’s where the magic is. People really seem to connect with that and feel like they’re able to be heard. We’ll have people who—even if they’re chronic—still struggle with a lot of delusional thoughts. It’s amazing to watch group members patiently help these particular folks get back on topic. The group knows how to re-center itself and continue on.
LR: It sounds like an incredibly cohesive group of residents, despite the diversity of their psychiatric needs. Have you found any particular method or theory of therapy more useful with these incarcerated residents?
BS:

staff are always available and willing to respond to the residents’ needs, and quite honestly, the residents are very protective of the staff

When it comes to the work in this type of environment, I’ve never felt more successful or seen therapists be more successful then when they’re able to forge a relationship. And that takes that kind of grit that I was talking about earlier, because people can be afraid, coming into an environment like this. I have done a lot of work in homes and have even delivered meds to people, so I’ve seen the importance of connection. In here, staff are always available and willing to respond to the residents’ needs, and quite honestly, the residents are very protective of the staff.

LR: So, we’re not talking about CBT being preferred over DBT or being more appropriate than ACT—we’re talking about core relationship-building skills that you might find in client-centered therapy?
BS: Absolutely. But I do want to mention that we use all those other modalities as well. Because each has something to contribute, depending of course on where people are. But definitely, the relational aspect goes far and beyond.

Gendered Issues

LR: You’ve written a few blogs for us on some of the challenges of working with women around pregnancy, parenting, and even your own pregnancy while working here.
BS: Many of the women in here are on a new journey of their own. It has really tugged at my heart working with the women, because there were so many folks who are in the throes of losing their children or have lost children. And I have had both of my pregnancies while working here. I worked with a pregnant resident who understood that she was going to have to give up her child, which was very hard to witness. But being able to navigate those waters in a truthful way, particularly as I happened to be pregnant at the same time, I was grateful to be able to help her get to a place where she was like, “Looking at you is so difficult for me.” A lot of growth and healing came from that relationship.Being with the men can result in a range of unexpected and awkward questions. That has to do with the elephant in the room of human sexuality, which can also be very uncomfortable. I’ve gotten some really bizarre questions.

LR: Oh, that you got pregnant as a result of sexual activity and they’re not allowed to have sexual activity! I get it now. Does sexuality—sexual behavior, sexual behavior problems—come to the fore in your clinical work?
BS:

a lot of the men I work with have had really either horrific or very challenging relationships with women

I think that is a huge component in this type of work, especially from the vantage point of being someone who identifies as female and working with folks who identify predominantly as male, and who are constantly trying to figure out their own equilibrium. Oftentimes, a lot of the men I work with have had really either horrific or very challenging relationships with women. Or didn’t get any education around human sexuality. So they’re trying to guess how to piece this all together. Most younger males have gotten a lot of their sexual and even relational references and experiences through pornography. So that’s their lens, and they don’t have the context for how to have healthy interactions with women.

LR: Can we circle back to some of the issues that pregnant inmates experience?
BS: Postpartum depression and anxiety are huge. The depression piece, I think, is so important. I think, oftentimes once you have a child, the mom kind of gets left behind. And you can see that, too, in an environment like this where people are kind of like, “Okay. You’re separated. Now, let’s just move on.” But there’s so much there happening, you know, hormonally and mentally, that requires a lot of attention. Because, if you don’t, someone could end up suicidal.
LR: What about those residents who have lost access to their children, who lose their parental rights after they give birth, or who have—as a result of their criminal or mental health histories—lost connection to their own children? What are some of the challenges in working with them?
BS: This is one of the points I’m always eager to talk about. One thing that really jumps out is that most women who are incarcerated are here because of substances or some type of interpersonal relationship. It takes about 15 months from arrest to sentencing, which is the amount of time that it takes to be away from a child before an agency like a Department of Human Services would take away or petition to take away a child. So the system kind of sets these women up for failure and undermines their ability to build a relationship with their child.
LR: And the children lose precious and necessary early attachment to their mother.
BS: And so many of these folks are impoverished, which means that the bail system makes it that much harder for these women to reconnect with their children during that very sensitive bonding/attachment period.
LR: It sounds like there’s an inevitable cycle of attachment disruption, depression, alienation from the children, and attachment disturbance.
BS: BS: Absolutely.

Developmental Impairment

LR: You mentioned in one of your blogs that you work with incarcerated residents who are on the autism spectrum or have intellectual disabilities. What are some of the challenges that you face in working with these residents?
BS:

A correctional system is just not built for folks on the autism spectrum or with intellectual disabilities

A correctional system is just not built for folks on the autism spectrum or with intellectual disabilities, despite the fact that we’re seeing more people with these types of disabilities entering the system. I think this environment is really confusing for folks with such an obtuse vulnerability, because it’s really easy for other folks to take advantage of them by using them for their own gain. There’s a lot of data to support the idea that folks with these types of disabilities do better in smaller, contained units. And it can be really dangerous, because they are more easily victimized physically and emotionally, which contributes to their already fragile coping skills.

LR: I would think, then, that for these folks you would have to focus on life skills, survival skills?
BS: Absolutely.
LR: Why do you think that the residents on the autism spectrum or those with intellectual disabilities end up in prison as opposed to residential treatment centers on the outside? Have they committed crimes? It seems so complex.
BS: My experience has been that we have these gaps in our community services network, not only in my state but across the country. What I’ve seen happen is that someone with these particular difficulties who lives in a residential setting typically acts up in response to a stressor that is beyond their ability to cope with. They end up in emergency rooms or in police custody. And then, very quickly, charges are filed against them. And once they’re in the system, it’s really challenging to get them to where they need to be. Another thing we’re seeing is related to their difficulty navigating the sexual realm, where they may end up committing a sexual offense, albeit unknowingly.
LR: They don’t really understand what they’ve done. Are they amenable to corrective therapeutic work in your facility?
BS: You really have to find ways to teach the concrete skills—it’s almost like going back to middle school for them—and really helping them get that formative education on just, first, how to have a social relationship. And then bridging that with behaviors that are socially appropriate and what behaviors they need to have hard boundaries around.

Preparing for Re-Entry

LR: How do you prepare soon-to-be-released residents, and what are some of their psychological needs that need to be addressed in therapy before they go?
BS:

We definitely do a lot of normalizing around this huge gap that exists between the world inside and the world outside

We definitely do a lot of normalizing around this huge gap that exists between the world inside and the world outside. One of the things that I think has been most pronounced is technological advances. Sure, we use tablets in here, as I mentioned before, but there’s still a huge plethora of technological skills that they just don’t have, like chip cards, which seem so second-nature to us on the outside. Even cell phones have changed so rapidly and can be so very confusing. So we try to do a lot of practical things in these areas to prepare our residents who will need to catch up to the technology on the outside.

LR: With no experience in this domain, I think of the movie Shawshank Redemption and wonder about the psychological challenges of freedom from incarceration.
BS:

getting them ready to reconnect on the outside, we kind of try to wrap them back together and cinch them up

Absolutely. I think one of the biggest ones—and you kind of hit on it in your remark—is the anxiety that is inevitable upon their release and the temptation to push everyone away as they try to wrap their head around this very big transition. We really try to work with them to stay aligned with the values that make them individuals and some of the important insights and messages they got while they were inside. Many of these folks are kind and loving people who enjoy humor and relationships. So in getting them ready to reconnect on the outside, we kind of try to wrap them back together and cinch them up and allow them that space to move through this big impending change.

I think COVID has added a whole other layer to this, especially for those residents who will need to quickly connect with resources for substance abuse support on the outside, many of which are virtual. And these folks have been so accustomed to face-to-face groups on the inside. They desperately need continuity in their sense of community.

LR: What suggestions would you offer to fellow clinicians on the outside who might be working with these released residents?
BS: I love that question. I think one of the biggest things clinicians on the outside can do is to look at their own intrinsic biases about this population of clients. While a lot of momentum has been generated towards working with people who are incarcerated, I worry that many struggle with the idea that these folks are bad seeds. A lot of people, in their lifetime, have driven drunk or violated some rule. But there’s a fine line that is easy to overlook, especially in the United States where we incarcerate more people than anywhere else. Many of us are connected to someone in our family or close circle of friends who has crossed the line, so we really need to look at that and try to wrap our arms around these people.
LR: Have you come across any misconceptions or particular biases that clinicians on the outside have when they see the clients that you discharge?
BS: My residents are particularly challenging because they’re coming from an intensive mental health setting. I worry that clinicians assume that they’re automatically going to be violent, that they’re not going to be someone who follows the rules, and that they’re not going to be able to handle the treatment. You know, if you build that bridge, people are going to be able to meet you there. But it takes immense vulnerability to walk out of a correctional facility and try to get back into the world. So, if we could kind of build that bridge together, that would be huge.

Summing Up

LR: Brooke, how has working in a prison impacted you as a person, as a mother?
BS:

I think through this journey I’ve definitely been able to see people as fellow walkers in this life

That is an awesome question. I think through this journey I’ve definitely been able to see people as fellow walkers in this life. We’re all human beings. And I really, truly believe that no one should be judged on their worst day. And I’ve definitely worked with a lot of people who have committed a lot of different crimes and come with a lot of different baggage who will adamantly say that—we are really just fellow human beings. So it’s definitely changed my mindset to viewing the world as this place where we’re all just doing our best.

LR: You will have wonderful insights to offer your own kids when they’re old enough to appreciate them. Last question. What obstacles have you encountered as a woman coming into corrections in a clinical facility with a doctorate?
BS:

The challenge of being a female clinician is that people sometimes think I’m like a hug-a-thug or something like that

I think a correctional environment, just by sheer nature, was not designed to house women. When they first decided that they were going to have prisons in the world, they were really designed around men. So there’s that. Then, you have a hypermasculine environment, which is not a criticism. It’s a paramilitary society—so it’s very based on order. It can be very strict at times. The challenge of being a female clinician is that people sometimes think I’m like a hug-a-thug or something like that, where, oh, gosh, you’re just going to have no regard for the rules, and you’re definitely going to be someone who doesn’t have boundaries because you’re a woman. And that’s really not true. I think having a doctorate has also been a very interesting experience. Because I will be with a male colleague who also has this doctorate, and they will call him “Doctor” and me by my first name.

LR: Sounds like you’ve had your challenges, Brooke. But you’ve also found your stride.

Thomas Insel on Science, Zip Code, and Future-Proofing Psychotherapy

Return on Investment

Lawrence Rubin: Hello, Dr. Insel; it’s an honor to be with you, the former director of NIMH, the leading federal agency on research into mental health and illness and author of the recently-published Healing: Our Path from Mental Illness to Mental Health. It’s a rare opportunity for our readers, largely practicing nonmedical therapists, to gain a glimpse into some of the critical issues impacting the assessment and treatment of those with behavioral and mental health challenges. Thank you so much for joining us.
Thomas Insel: It’s a pleasure to be here, and I’m glad that we’ll have a chance to talk about some of the nonmedical aspects of mental health care, which have not received enough attention.
LR: Why do you think that’s the case?
TI:
we have bought into a medical model for how we think about mental disorders broadly
There are two parts to that. I think the first part is that we have bought into a medical model for how we think about mental disorders broadly. And the second part is that the medical model is part of a large healthcare industry, at least in the United States. I don’t know if this is true in other places, but in the United States, healthcare is a massive business, a $3.5 trillion business.

A lot of that business is driven by a particular model which says that illness is due to a singular, often simple cause, whether that’s a bug or a gene or a particular endocrine factor, and that the solution is a relatively simple intervention, often a drug. And that has proven to be really a good business model for the pharmaceutical industry and, to some extent, the medical industry, which has done pretty well over the last four or five decades.

And I must say that for a lot of people with medical problems, this has worked pretty well. I think if you had gotten HIV in the 90s, you certainly were better off than if you got it in the 80s. And if you have cardiovascular disease today, you’re certainly much better off than you would have been 30 years ago. And that’s true now, fortunately, for some forms of cancer as well, where we’re seeing remarkable progress with new diagnostics and new treatments.

the simple bug-simple drug model that has been so effective in the world of infectious disease is really not so effective for the millions of people who have a mental disorder
I just don’t see the same sort of breakthroughs and the same opportunities yet for people who have PTSD, depression, OCD, a range of mental disorders. It feels to me like that medical model has helped some but not enough in the mental health field. Part of why I wrote the book was to try to understand why we haven’t made more progress. And part of that “why” goes right to that issue that the simple bug-simple drug model that has been so effective in the world of infectious disease is really not so effective for the millions of people who have a mental disorder.

A Crisis of Care

LR: You began your time at NIMH shortly after the end of the decade of the brain, when so much research funding was going into genomics and neuroscience. Do you think that we got the bang for our therapeutic buck under your stewardship there?
TI: In some ways! It’s a mixed bag. I think that we learned an enormous amount, but I would say that it’s still very much in process. I don’t think we’ve fully gotten the return on the investment. I think we will, and that science is going to be really critical for us in trying to go deeper into understanding these disorders.

The problem for me was that—and this is just a personal reflection and is not in any way an indictment of the NIMH—but when I look at this state of care and what’s happening for most people, particularly those with severe mental illness, with schizophrenia, bipolar illness, severe depression, severe PTSD, it’s not a scientific problem these people face.

They face incarceration. They face homelessness. They face this massive injustice in a kind of crisis-driven system that actually leads them out of the care system and into these other pathways that are often deadly and certainly unfair, generally punitive, and not compassionate. So, that’s not a NIMH problem.

what we are seeing is this egregious set of policies that lead to people with mental illness going everywhere except into compassionate care because there’s no capacity for that
For me, so much of the sorts of public health problems that we’re facing aren’t really about genes or neuroimaging or the science. It’s more of an almost, and I loath to use the term, but really a social justice issue. And what we are seeing is this egregious set of policies that lead to people with mental illness going everywhere except into compassionate care because there’s no capacity for that.

So it actually had nothing to do with NIMH. I left NIMH and kind of never went back because if you want to address those issues, you’ve got to go someplace else with a very different army. And it’s not the army of neuroscientists and those who are brilliant in the fields of genomics and data sciences. It’s an army that is really willing to take on those big social problems and begin to deal with them.

And I think we know what to do. I think we know how to do that, and that’s beginning to happen. But my goodness, it’s not going to happen through NIMH funding. It’s just not their job. That’s something very different from the world that they’re focused on.
LR: Is that why you said in your book that “there’s a crisis of care for the mentally ill in this country?”
TI: That’s right. A crisis of care. It’s not really a crisis of science. It’s not because we don’t have good research or that we’re not spending the research dollars correctly. I argue, actually, that we probably need more research, more science, more funding for NIMH.

You know, we always need better treatments; we always need new diagnostics. But let’s get real here. We haven’t been implementing the things that we discovered 30 years ago. NIMH spent a huge amount of money in the 80s and 90s on the Nurse Home Visitation Program. I write about this a lot in my book because I think it was just a brilliant investment.

But it’s not a research question anymore. We don’t need to put a lot more NIMH dollars into that. We need to implement this for millions and millions of families who are disadvantaged and who need that kind of support, because we know it works.

At some point, you have to try to solve the problem and not just study it
I don’t want to see us get caught up in this academic cycle of “let’s keep studying this problem.” At some point, you have to try to solve the problem and not just study it, and that was what led me moving from this kind of research career to a career that was much more about advocacy, policy change, about making sure that we were starting to invest in the kinds of services and broad social supports that we need and sadly lack in this country.
LR: Is that related in part to what you also said in the book that for therapists, whether researchers or applied clinicians, that zip code is more important than genetic code?
TI: Yeah, exactly. I think where I ended up, and it’s so interesting when you write a book like this; you think you know what you’re doing, but you have no idea. You usually end up someplace very far away from where you started, and that was exactly the case here.

I started this book when I was working at Google, where I was trying to develop really interesting ways of digital phenotyping. I was convinced that technology was really going to transform mental health care, and I still think that’s probably true. But I ended the book by realizing that the problems that we’re focusing on are really problems of mental health. That’s very different from mental health care. And I have to say, I don’t think I understood that.

When I started the book, every conversation I had about health or mental health was about health care or mental health care. And it wasn’t until I was two-thirds of the way through this, and in this odyssey that I took around the state of California to try to understand why we hadn’t seen more improvements in public health measures like morbidity and mortality, that I began to realize, like, wait a minute, this is not a health care problem.

All this stuff, incarceration, homelessness, poverty, health disparities, is happening way outside of healthcare. It’s actually something very different. We could probably fix healthcare. We could probably do so much better on health care, but barely move the needle for morbidity and mortality.

most of the disparity in race- and gender-based mortality in this instance is really about your zip code
As an example, I was just looking at this over the weekend: the chances of turning 70 years old or living to 70 in terms of life expectancy are at about 82% for White females and about 54% for Black males in the United States. That 82% to 54% disparity is not really a function of what medications they’re on or how many clinic visits they have, or even what health insurance they have. That contributes a little bit, we think it accounts for maybe 10% or 20% of that disparity. But most of the disparity in race- and gender-based mortality in this instance is really about your zip code. It’s about your lifestyle, your exposure, your environment. It’s about a lot of other stuff that’s not really in the healthcare system.

I guess the really hard question to ask, and the one that I’ve been thinking a lot about lately since the book came out is, do we need to rethink what we mean by health care? And specifically, do we need to rethink what we mean by mental health care? Is it really just about medication and psychological treatments and maybe some rehabilitative care? Or is there something more essential that has to do with recovery, has to do with thriving, has to do with wellness? Does that need to come into focus, and does that need to be within the scope of what we mean by healthcare?

Making Psychotherapy Better

LR: Within this context of health care, certain models of psychotherapy have been proven empirically to be effective. So why is there such a disparity between what we know and what we do?
TI: I struggled with that in the book. I start from a perspective that psychotherapy is a really powerful intervention and that we have specific, skill-based therapies that have been demonstrated to work. I also understand that outcomes may depend more on the therapist and the therapy, and that’s always a challenge in any kind of randomized clinical trial that one does on these interventions. But the evidence is pretty compelling for both the safety and ultimately the effectiveness, which is quite different from the efficacy of psychotherapy.

we need to look closely at the training of psychotherapists, how we do it, where we do it, and also when we do it
So the question is, with a treatment that’s so powerful, why have we seen this gap, and why has it become so difficult to actually get it delivered in the way that it should be? I think there are a couple of things. One is, we need to look closely at the training of psychotherapists, how we do it, where we do it, and also when we do it. We’ve had this notion that you train, and then you have supervision for a period after graduate school, and then you’re kind of on your own until your next licensure comes up.

I think we want to look more carefully at how we make sure people get the kinds of skills and the feedback to get better and better. I’ve been fascinated by a company with which I have no connection but am really intrigued by, called IESO. It’s not in the United States, it’s just in the UK, but they’ve really focused on, how do we help our therapists who are online to get better and better?

They’ve built this natural language processing engine so that every interaction between therapist and client is captured. It goes through this engine, and they have a dashboard that shows them levels of therapeutic rapport, levels of effectiveness of their comments, and also the state of play for the client; better, worse, what’s the emotional tone in the interaction? It’s really fascinating to watch.

But what’s amazing about it is that by getting this kind of real-time feedback, therapists have gotten better and better. And when you look at outcomes, they went from 49% recovery to 67% recovery just by providing this real-time feedback, not just to patients and clients, but to therapists themselves. It was actually more useful for the therapist than the client. But ultimately, the clients enjoyed that impact.

So I think part of what we need to do is to think about how we help our therapists to navigate and to improve what they do. The other part is we have to ask, what do we pay for? Are we paying for a number of hours spent, or are we paying for outcomes? Basically, are providers being rewarded for how long somebody stays in treatment, or for getting people out of treatment and getting them well? We need to begin to look at the incentives that are built into the system and ask, are we incentivizing for the right things?
LR: Does this IESO program also include biological markers embedded in the therapist/client interaction, like heart rate, blood pressure, and brain wave activities, to get a complete picture of the reciprocal impact of the interaction? Or is it a glorified electronic satisfaction survey?
TI: No, it’s neither. There’s nothing biological here. It’s really taking language and decoding it. If you think about what we do in psychotherapy, it’s listening, it’s observing, it’s communicating. And through that, we hope that there’s understanding and trust and change ultimately through the relationship.

That process of using language to communicate is a process which has really been revolutionized by artificial intelligence and very good data science through this thing called natural language processing, which was created to try to understand how words got glued together and what coherence looks like in language.

But over time, it’s been used to measure sentiment, like mood, and is now being used to measure how well people are connecting and if they’re communicating effectively. This is a multi-billion dollar industry that’s been taken over largely from the call centers. Call centers are now far better than they were five years ago because of the ability in real-time to decode the communication between two people.

Let’s provide objective evidence about how a therapist and client are communicating and relating and actually literally measure things like trust and measure therapeutic alliance
What IESO has done is to take that same kind of effort and said, “Let’s provide objective evidence about how a therapist and client are communicating and relating and actually literally measure things like trust and measure therapeutic alliance.” And they found ways to define that, which I think are really interesting.

It may not be for everybody, but it is fascinating to me that by capturing that kind of data objectively, they have been able to provide a source of feedback that actually helps people do what they’re trying to do, which is create trust, create the therapeutic alliance, build that rapport. Who would have thought that you would actually do that through technology?

And yet, they’ve demonstrated that this can work without any burden on either the provider or the client. It doesn’t take any extra time. It’s kind of like the speedometer in your car, you know, it’s a part of the dashboard, it tells you as you go how fast you’re going and how you’re driving.
LR: There is extensive research on what we call common factors in therapy, those aspects of the therapeutic relationship that contribute to a positive outcome. This process that you’re talking about sounds like it’s algorithmically mediated. Rather than just asking the client, was trust built or how safe did you feel or how effective do you think your therapist was, you’re interjecting elements of AI into it to give more specific data beyond just the self-report of the client.
TI:  It is. I guess I would just push back with the word “just,” because I think we need both. We need both that subjective experience, like, how was this for you? And then, you know, the objective readout of what does the algorithm say? And it may be in the gap between those two that there’s a lot we can learn.

There’s this really interesting new science that is just beginning to shine a light on our behavior, and particularly on our language in a way that I think will revolutionize psychotherapy
There’s this really interesting new science that is just beginning to shine a light on our behavior, and particularly on our language in a way that I think will revolutionize psychotherapy; it will revolutionize the study of mood, behavior, and cognition. I really think we’re just beginning to see that happen.

One kind of untapped example of this, which I’ve been so intrigued by but haven’t yet seen really developed, is that you can use this natural language processing approach to measure the coherence of speech, because every two words have a vector that attaches them. So if I use the word “dog,” it’s not unlikely that the word “bone,” or the word “cat,” or the word “food” would come up in the same phrase, right?

But the word “algorithm” or the word “church” may not be as easily associated as that. And so by measuring what we call semantic coherence, the likelihood that words could come together or maybe wouldn’t be found together, you get a sense of how people are thinking and how things get put together. In contrast, great poetry often has longer vectors, less coherence.

But as people become psychotic, for example, this is a very sensitive way of picking up thought disorder. And you could say, “Well, yeah, but you could just listen to them and know that’s happening.” Maybe, but how helpful would it be to be able to say, “Well, their coherence moved from 0.6 to 0.74.” Or to be able to provide a tool so that a nurse in an emergency room in a rural community, who really isn’t trained to do a lot of the assessment of thought disorder, would be able to say, “Well, according to this tool, this person’s semantic coherence is about 0.68.”

In understanding thought disorder and psychosis, for example, it provides an objectivity that we’ve come to expect for assessing diabetes or hypertension. It gives us a number which is reproducible and which ties back to something that’s truly actionable because based on that number, you might decide “this person is, in fact, currently psychotic and needs to be treated along this pathway,” versus “this person is a very good poet who tends to put ideas together that are very creative and that are different, but this is not necessarily pathological.” So I think we’re at the beginning of a revolution in our ability to add objective measures to what we are currently and have traditionally done just subjectively.
LR: I can see how that can really be useful in working with people with serious mental illness, like schizophrenia and other disorders with psychotic features. But what about with what we might call more garden variety emotional, mental, or behavioral problems, or even subclinical presentations, where the person is not going to necessarily come to the attention of an emergency room clinician or an algorithm?
TI: Actually, the subjective experience may be what really counts or is far more important. But that’s why I brought up the IESO example, because I think there is an opportunity for technology to improve the quality of what we provide in the psychotherapeutic relationship.

there is an opportunity for technology to improve the quality of what we provide in the psychotherapeutic relationship
It may turn out that we don’t need that. But I think the data would suggest that there’s room for improvement. And, to be fair, there are people who are just naturally gifted as clinicians and who just have the ability to do this without a huge amount of training and without needing many years of experience and probably won’t need that kind of a tool.

But there are a lot of us whom I think would benefit from getting that continual feedback in a way that’s passive and ecological, because it’s done within the hour. It’s not, you know, in a supervisory hour. And it gives you a sense of something that is probably fundamental to the treatment process, which is the development of a therapeutic alliance.

People, Place, & Purpose

LR: This focus on strengthening the therapeutic alliance sounds fascinating and important, but I wonder how, in the shadow of the expanding medicalization of mental disorders, these two pathways can work in parallel. Can they coexist?
TI: I think that’s a really key question, and it’s one that I also struggled with in working on the book. I’ve spent four decades making the argument that these emotional and behavioral problems are medical problems. And I ended up in the book saying, yeah, these are medical problems, these are brain problems, and they deserve the same reimbursement, the same rigor, the same science that we would expect for any other medical problem.

But the solutions are much broader and much different. The solutions are relational, they’re environmental, they’re political. We have to really widen the lens here if we want to begin to have the impact that I think all of us care about, particularly at a population level, and the medical model just isn’t really built for that.

the recovery model, to me, is really defined by these three P’s that I talk a lot about in the book: people, place, and purpose
I talk a lot in the book about—and to be fair, you’re right, this is more about serious mental illness—but I talk a lot about recovery. And I have to say, I was not the person pushing the recovery model. I sort of see there’s a medical model and a more recovery relational model. I think we need them both, but the recovery model, to me, is really defined by these three P’s that I talk a lot about in the book: people, place, and purpose.

If we really want to think beyond just symptom relief and we want to see people thrive, we want to see them recover, we want to see them have a life, then we have to be thinking about more than the medical model. We have to be thinking about, how does someone with a mental illness have a shot at getting the things that all of us want? Social support—that’s the people, a safe environment—that’s the place, and a purpose—a reason to recover, something that they wake up for, something that they see as a mission.

We don’t do that in the medical model. That is not what we mean by mental health care in 2022. And what I’m arguing for in the book and in trying to start this kind of new social movement around mental health is that we just take on a broader perspective that says, actually, we should reframe what we mean by care, and the care should include the three P’s, that providers ought to be able to write a prescription for housing, and we ought to expect Medicaid to pay for a clubhouse which provides the three P’s every day for people with serious mental illness.

We need to think about how we get beyond this simple idea that there’s a magic bullet intervention
We need to think about how we get beyond this simple idea that there’s a magic bullet intervention, that if we get just the right pill to just the right molecular target in just the right patient, we’ll solve this problem, because that’s probably not ultimately the way we solve this problem. It’s going to be actually from multiplexing the problem or thinking about people, place, and purpose and providing a much broader range of care, not a more narrow focus on medication.

Best of Both Worlds

LR: So the medical model doesn’t necessarily, in your thinking, preclude interventions that are social and even moral. You can spend money doing research on biomedical markers and the neuroscientific basis of mental disorders, but you can’t let that steer the car to treatment necessarily. Because if you don’t provide people with these three P’s, then it doesn’t matter what part of their brain or what part of their genome has been somehow disrupted. It won’t matter.
TI: I guess the argument is we need both. I think about psychotherapy as learning to play the violin. You’re learning a skill. It takes time, it takes practice, and it often usually takes a really good teacher. But that’s really hard to do if you have a bad tremor. So, I’d start by treating the tremor so somebody has a decent opportunity to be able to actually learn how to play the violin, but I wouldn’t stop with treating the tremor. I think that is a part of it. You need both, and you need to be able to do both over a long period of time.

our field has been, unfortunately, very fragmented between medical approaches and psychological approaches
And I guess what I feel really strongly about is two things. One is that our field has been, unfortunately, very fragmented between medical approaches and psychological approaches. The science says that the two of them together are better than either one alone. And yet in practice, we rarely see them combined in a way that’s most effective for patients or clients. I think that’s something we need to fix.

But the second part of that is, we often don’t pay for this in a way that it merits. There’s a tendency, I think, by both public and private payers to undervalue the treatments. It often is easier to pay for the medication because, by the way, they’re almost all generic, super cheap, it’s easy to write a prescription, and payers are very comfortable with that. It’s harder to require the combination and to be able to pay for the combination.

It’s so funny, I was just in a conversation about the use of psychedelics. And if there’s one area today where everybody is thinking, “Oh, this is the new…” you know, it’s very hyped. “This is the new magic bullet,” that psychedelics are really going to matter. Again, it’s just one more pill that you can take, and you’ll be able to play the violin.

And yet, what’s so interesting is when you talk to people in that space, they talk about psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. It’s so refreshing. It’s the first time in 40 years I’ve heard people committed to combining medical and psychological approaches in a way that’s really thoughtful and potentially very impactful. It’s such a paradox, with all the hype around taking the magic pill. That is actually the place where we may find and understand the importance of combining the two therapies.
LR: You said in your book that the term “psychotherapy” is a misnomer.
TI:
the process of change is also a process of neuroplasticity
I don’t remember saying that, but one of the things that I tried to convey in the book is that the process of change is also a process of neuroplasticity. And the idea that there are medical treatments that affect the brain, and then there’s psychotherapy that affects behavior, is really probably grossly simplifying. It’s very likely that the change that occurs with medical treatments partly relates to opening people up to behaving in different ways and exposing them in new ways.
LR: Which changes the brain.
TI: Which changes the brain. And likewise, that going at this from a psychological perspective also changes the way people think, changes the way they behave, which also changes the brain.

behavior and the brain are inextricably linked together in ways that we can’t often see, but we have to accept
To go back to my violin analogy, when you learn to play the violin, you wire your temporal cortex. There’s no way around that. We have to begin to think a little more mechanistically about what actually happens with behavior change and to realize that behavior and the brain are inextricably linked together in ways that we can’t often see, but we have to accept.
LR: So when we consider both the biomedical bases for and psychosocial treatment of mental illness, the brain inevitably changes, hopefully for the better, which then starts the cycle all over again. Complex, yet simple at the same time.
TI: I like that idea, Lawrence. We have to get out of our sort of tribal approach to this. It’s so frustrating, and I kind of understand it, you know, it’s where people come from, it’s their identity, but what if we flip the narrative and say, “What’s most helpful?” What actually helps a 14-year-old with anxiety or a 24-year-old with psychosis? It’s not about our role. It’s not about our skill set, necessarily. I mean, we have to think much more broadly about putting all of the tools in the toolkit together in a way that serves that person in a way they will want and accept it.

Only about 50% of people who should be in care or could be in care and would benefit are actually buying what we sell
We haven’t been very good at that. I mean, even the very fact that we built a care system that’s really built for payers, to some extent, for providers, but not for the consumer. And it’s one of the reasons why I think we get very low engagement. Only about 50% of people who should be in care or could be in care and would benefit are actually buying what we sell.

Bridging the Divide

I think the next decade is an opportunity to say, “Can we meet them where they are?” Particularly for young people. They’re not likely to show up at a brick-and-mortar office. They are likely to be on TikTok or Discord, or now maybe even Twitch. I mean, there are lots of places where you find them. Is there a way to meet them there? Should we rethink the mental health care that we want to deliver so that it’s much more person-centered, more culturally sensitive and adapted, and begin to understand that what we’ve been doing hasn’t really worked for a lot of what we had hoped it would? Yeah, we have great treatments, we have great skills, we have something that really is useful, but it’s not getting the people in the way they want it. Particularly, I would say, for communities of color, LGBTQ communities, I mean, there are just lots of people who feel on the outside and who see mental health care as we built it as not friendly and not matched to what they’re looking for.

This is a place where I think technology can make a big difference. It can help us to democratize care and give people choices that they haven’t had, particularly people who are in rural areas and underserved communities. People who feel that, for whatever reason, they’re part of a small niche in society that’s been underserved. I think now is the time we can say, can we create a different platform, meet people where they are in the ways that they would want to be engaged, and give them something useful?

I guess in some ways, helping people with mental illness is a little bit like what we learned with COVID, where there was this gap between creating vaccines and delivering vaccinations
I guess in some ways, helping people with mental illness is a little bit like what we learned with COVID, where there was this gap between creating vaccines and delivering vaccinations. I think NIMH and others have done a spectacular job of creating the equivalent of vaccines for psychological treatments, for medical treatments, and for people who struggle with emotional and psychological issues. We haven’t been so good at delivering the vaccination part, actually delivering these in a way that people want them and can use them and can benefit. I think that is the challenge for the next decade.
LR: Some psychotherapists work in private practices while others work in community mental health centers. How can psychotherapists, irrespective of where they’re delivering service, be part of this movement you envision over the next decade?
TI:  I think it’s already happening. In my career, I’ve never seen the kinds of transformations we’re now witnessing—and I don’t think that’s too strong of a word, it really is a transformation of this workforce and care system. You have the aggregation of large numbers of private practice psychotherapists into these massive groups, and there are companies that have gotten very wealthy through doing this. Lifestance and Uplift Health are doing a piece of this in several states. It’s very interesting. It’s changing the culture of how people practice. It ultimately will provide them with resources, as they get in group practices that will make their jobs in some ways more effective and hopefully easier.

You also have the advent of teletherapy on a big scale. Last year $5.1 billion was being invested in mental health startups. How amazing is that? You’ve got hundreds of new companies starting off. Eight of them are already unicorns, meaning they’re valued at over $1 billion. You have a company that I find really interesting, Cerebral, that’s a little more than two years old. It started at the beginning of the pandemic. It’s arguably one of the largest mental health care providers in the United States today. They have many, many thousands of providers. They talk about having served 350,000 clients in the last two years.

So, we’re going through this massive change. I don’t know where it’s going to end up, but I would imagine many of the people who are listening, who are in private practice, are thinking about, should I (and maybe they already do) work for Talkspace or Cerebral or Lyra or Ginger or Modern or Better Help. I mean, there’s so many of them that are hiring. In a way, it’s sort of an invitation to a new economy, a gig economy, just like we saw for Uber. People are having opportunities. They have a lot more possibilities of what they can do and how they can spend their time and work.

I don’t know how this is going to end up, but I guess the question I’m asking myself, again, going back to what does this mean for the 14-year-old with anxiety or the 24-year-old—
LR: The kid of color who’s struggling with sexual or gender identity issues, or the suicidal Native American. We have to reach them.
TI: So, are they better off or worse off at the end of this? Or is there no change? I do know that there are now startups that are just for African American male therapists so that African American male clients who are looking for that can find it.

this whole transformation of mental healthcare delivery is probably a play in five acts, and we’re in Act 1
So I think it’s early. I always say this, Lawrence, this whole transformation of mental healthcare delivery is probably a play in five acts, and we’re in Act 1. In Act 1, we’re getting to see who the main characters are; we’re trying to solve the problem of access. And by the way, we’re starting to address some of the conflicts and some of the problems that are coming up.

I think Act 2 is going to be really interesting. I think it’s going to be more about improving quality and starting to find ways of measuring outcomes and all of that. We’re not there yet. It’ll be really interesting to see how that works out.

But what a fascinating time to be in this field! It’s all changing very quickly. In 2027, you know, five years from now, I think we’ll be having a really different conversation. I think the access issue may be largely fixed through the democratization of care and through the fact that it doesn’t matter where you live or what your race or ethnicity or zip code might be, you’ll be able to find someone who can help or someone who has at least signed on to help who looks and talks and maybe even understands you in a way that might be hard to do today. The question will be, can they teach you to play the violin? Do they have the skills and the experience to be able to do this well?
LR: It seems that in order for this revolution, as you describe it, to take hold, to democratize access to care, to reach people technologically, you’d require funding on a massive scale that only seems possible at the federal level. So do you envision that the NIMH 20 years from now will be dedicating itself to this parallel track of implementing what medical science has told us?
TI: Well, the NIMH in 1970 or 1980 would have done that. But in 1990 or 1991, there was a fissure and the federal government created SAMHSA, the Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Agency, and they said to NIMH, “Going forward, you’re like any other NIH Institute. You’re just like NIAID or NINDS. Your job is science. You’re a research agency. We don’t want you to get involved in service delivery. You shouldn’t be thinking about that. That’s SAMHSA’s job.”

The reality is that SAMHSA is still a fairly small agency. The federal government still, it’s changing a little bit, but largely has delegated to states and counties the provision of mental health services. So what you get for mental health care is going to be very different depending on where you live, what state, which county—
LR:  Politics, huh?
TI:
I look at what we’re doing here in California, with $4.4 billion now dedicated to youth mental health
Yeah, but there’s still a large investment. I look at what we’re doing here in California, with $4.4 billion now dedicated to youth mental health, the transformation of the Medicaid system, the development of the Mental Health Services Act—it’s this millionaire’s tax that pays for mental health care. This year that will generate about $3.7 billion for mental health care in the public sector. There’s a lot of stuff you can do and a lot of stuff that’s happening.

I wouldn’t lay this on NIMH. Really none of this is their job. On top of all that government spending, last year we had $5.1 billion coming from the venture capital industry invested in startups. That’s two and a half times the size of the NIMH budget.

So there’s a lot of investment, a lot of money being pushed into the system right now. We just need to make sure it’s going to the right things and that we’re holding funders and beneficiaries accountable for results. So that it’s not just pouring money in and not actually seeing changes in outcomes, which, at the end of the day, that’s what we care about. We want to make sure that, in fact, the rate of suicide is coming down, the rate of employment is going up, kids are finishing their education. It’s not just measuring PHQ-9s [a depression questionnaire]. It’s actually knowing that people are beginning to recover and function in a way that we haven’t been measuring and we certainly haven’t seen over the last 30 years.
LR: As we close, I’d like to know, if such a thing even exists, what do you want your plaque in the NIMH Hall of Directors to say?
TI: Gosh, I have to think about this for a moment. It probably should say something like, “He Served in the Golden Age,” because this was just an extraordinary moment to be leading this research effort and to see where the science could take us in terms of understanding the brain and health and disease.
LR: Thanks so much for sharing your time, experience, and insights with our readers, Dr. Insel.

Confusion of Tongues

Confusion of Tongues

I’m not surprised when I get an email from Lara, who was my patient nineteen years ago. Lara was only ten years old when her parents suddenly ended her treatment and moved the family to the West Coast. In the years since, I have thought about her often, remembering her unusual story, wondering how she is doing. When I see her name in my inbox it is almost as if I am expecting it.

“I’m writing to see if we could meet,” Lara writes. “I’m twenty-nine years old now and there is so much I would like to talk to you about. Do you even remember me?”

It is hard not to remember Lara. She was one of my first child patients when I opened my private practice in New York City. I saw her for two years and often felt uneasy thinking about her unresolved family situation, which I have revisited in my head over all these years.

Lara’s was one of the most confusing cases of sexual abuse that I have treated, and as time passed and I studied the nature of the intergenerational aspect of sexual abuse, I felt that I was able to make better sense of it. Maybe it was my ongoing desire to share those thoughts with Lara that made me hope that she would contact me.

I was researching the topic of sexual abuse in childhood when I started seeing Lara.

Beatrice Beebe, one of my mentors and an infant researcher at Columbia University, is known for saying “Research is me-search.” By that she means that all psychological research, even when we are not aware of it, is our quest to understand and heal ourselves and the people who raised us.

Starting this research, I was not sure what I was looking for. What was it that I really needed to know about myself and about the world around me? What was my “me-search”?

That is the question I have asked every student I have mentored since, with the genuine belief that deep inside we continuously try to resolve the mysteries of our own minds. Feelings are always the motivations for intellectual investigations, even as we rationalize the world around us. I started my research interested in what the Hungarian psychoanalyst Sándor Ferenczi called “the confusion of tongues.” Borrowing from the biblical story of the Tower of Babel, Ferenczi refers to the confusion between the language of tenderness that children speak and the language of passion that abusers introduce.

The paradox of affection and exploitation is one of the most prevalent confusions related to sexual abuse, one that leaves children bewildered and tormented. Abusers don’t just threaten and scare children; they often provide affection, promise security, and make the child feel special. I focused my research on what children’s play could teach us about their emotional experiences and vulnerabilities, and I was particularly interested in documenting the playing out with children of fairy tales, stories that contain emotional material that carries universal meaning. I chose one fairy tale to research with my young patients: “Little Red Riding Hood.”

About a week after my research proposal was approved, Lara walked into my office. She opened the session by saying, “Today I have an idea of what we could do.”

She and I usually played “family” together. She would ask me to play the daughter so she could be the mother, and through that role-play I not only learned but also felt how painful it was to be a daughter in her family. Playing a daughter who, like herself, lived with her parents, Hanna and Jed, and with her half brother, Ethan, who was nine years older, allowed me to know what no one could tell me in words: that they were all confused and scared and that Lara was holding a family secret for all of them.

“What is your idea?” I asked, and Lara surprised me with the answer: “Can we play Red Riding Hood together?”

I was stunned by the coincidence. How did she know that this was the fairy tale I had chosen for my research and that I had gotten the approval to start only the week before?

The more experience I have with patients, the more I learn how unconsciously connected we are to the people around us. With Lara, it was the first time I’d experienced that, but it wouldn’t be the last. Since then I have had many uncanny coincidences with my patients. Through our dreams, reveries, and synchronicities we realize that we know more about one another than we are aware of.

Lara smiled. “You are the daughter and I am the mother,” she said.

I opened the closet. There were the new puppets I had just gotten: a girl with a red dress, a mother, a grandmother, and a wolf.

“What about the grandmother and the wolf?” I asked. “Who plays them?”

Lara paused. “We don’t need a wolf,” she said. “There are no wolves in our story.”

A few weeks before my first session with Lara, I had met with her parents, Hanna and Jed.

When working with children I always meet first with the parents, to gather information about the child and the family and to discuss the goals and process of therapy. Although the child is the one in therapy, very often it is the parents who need the most help. Children frequently express the reality of the family and become what we call the “identified patient,” which means the one who seems like the “sick” member of the family. Those children usually carry and express the problems of the whole family as a unit. Most families have one member who is unconsciously assigned to carry the symptoms, that is, the family member on whom the family projects the pathology. That person, often one of the children, will be the one sent to therapy. When treating families as a system, we explore the role of the child as the symptom carrier for the family.

Lara was the “identified patient” in her family. She was in second grade and would wake up in the mornings nauseous, holding her stomach and crying that she didn’t want to go to school. Her parents believed she suffered from social anxiety. After meeting with Lara, I understood her anxiety a little differently, realizing that she was worried about her mother, and therefore it was hard for her to separate from her. It wasn’t that Lara didn’t want to go to school, but rather that she wanted to stay home with Hanna, whom she experienced as distressed and felt she needed to protect.

A Frightening and Unusual Story

During that first session, Hanna and Jed told me an unusual and frightening story. They explained that when Lara was only five years old, her grandmother, Hanna’s mother, Masha, filed a complaint against Ethan, Jed’s son from his first marriage, for molesting Lara. Ethan was fourteen years old then, and social services were called to the house to investigate. But no signs of sexual abuse were found and the file was closed. Since then, Masha had filed eight more complaints against Ethan. Each time there was an investigation but no evidence was found and no charges were filed.

“Our family is torn. We don’t know what to do and whom to believe,” Hanna told me during that first session. “I haven’t slept well since it happened.”

Jed looked at Hanna and told me that Hanna was the one who had raised Ethan. Jed’s first wife had died when Ethan was only seven years old, and when Hanna had married Jed, she had become a mother to his son. Hanna loved Ethan.

“Since her mother accused Ethan of molesting Lara, everything in our family has changed,” Jed said. “We all became suspicious of one another, not sure who lies and whom to believe, whom we need to protect and whom to blame.”

Hanna started to cry. “I don’t believe he did it,” she said. “I really don’t believe it. I know him so well and I know my mother; when it comes to these things she can be a little crazy.”

“What are ‘these things’?” I asked.

Jed reached out and held Hanna’s hand. She didn’t answer.

“This situation has created a lot of tension between us,” he said. “Hanna became depressed. She blames herself.”

“What are you blaming yourself for?” I asked.

“I’m her mother,” Hanna said, sobbing. “I’m the one who should know what the truth is.” She grabbed a tissue from the box and looked at me. “I don’t know, maybe I’m wrong and my mother is right and something terrible happened right in front of my eyes. I don’t know how to protect my daughter.”

There was a long silence and then Hanna said, “I realize that maybe it’s my mother that I should protect my daughter from. My own mother, whom I love. But why would she blame him? Why would she do that?”

Hanna and Jed hoped that someone would tell them what had really happened. They yearned for the truth.

“What does Lara know about this situation? Is she aware of anything?” I asked before we ended the session.

Jed looked at Hanna and they were both silent for a long minute.

“About a year ago, my mother came to visit and told Lara that Ethan had sexually abused her.” Hanna sighed.

“She told Lara that all those years she had been trying to help her, ‘to scream her scream’ she called it. But that no one listened to her. She told her that she should never be alone with Ethan.”

Jed nodded. “From then on, Lara didn’t want to go to school anymore. We thought she had become afraid of people and that’s why we decided to bring her to therapy.” The first session ended and my head was spinning. I felt nauseous and realized that those were exactly the symptoms Lara’s parents described Lara as having. I was curious to meet her.

The next day Lara arrived at her first session accompanied by Jed. She held her father’s hand, her long black hair tied in a ponytail, and didn’t look at me. “I like your office,” she said quietly, looking around, a shy smile on her face. I liked Lara from the first moment. In that initial session, Lara told me about her family and described nonchalantly how Ethan was accused of touching her inappropriately.

“My grandmother doesn’t like my brother,” she said. “Maybe she even hates him and she wants him to go to jail.”

Lara talked about these facts without emotion, as if none of this was about her. She turned to look at the dolls in the corner of the room and asked if she could play with them.

For a year, during every session we played while we talked. I observed the play and tried to listen to what she was teaching me about her world, her emotional experience, and her vulnerabilities.

Since it was not clear whether Lara had in fact been sexually abused, I decided not to include her in my research. It was surprising then when she suggested that we play Little Red Riding Hood. “It’s my favorite fairy tale.” She smiled. “Except there are no wolves in our story, remember?”

Years before it was adapted by the Grimm Brothers, “Little Red Riding Hood” made its debut in a version written by Charles Perrault in 1697. Perrault’s story was adapted from the folktale, and in it he described the moment the child met the wolf, referred to as “Mister Wolf,” implying that the wolf stood for a human being.

In Perrault’s version, when Little Red Riding Hood arrives at her grandmother’s house, the wolf is lying in bed and asks her to undress and join him. Little Red Riding Hood is alarmed to see his disrobed body and says, “Grandmother, what long arms you have,” to which the wolf replies, “The better to hug you with.” Perrault’s version ends with the wolf devouring Little Red Riding Hood, followed by a short poem that teaches the moral of the story: that good girls should be cautious when approached by men. As for wolves, he adds, these take on many different forms, and the nice ones are the most dangerous of all, especially those who follow young girls in the streets and into their homes.

Perrault presented his readers with a somewhat refined version of the popular folktale, which was originally filled with sexual seduction, rape, and murder. His version speaks to the deceiving nature of nice wolves, who hurt their victims while pretending to offer something special, presenting sexual perversion as a form of love. It was to become even more highly refined over the years to the point where the sexual innuendo was entirely omitted and the story transformed into a children’s fairy tale.

While fairy tales usually differentiate between good and bad people in ways that help children organize their world and feel safe, “nice wolves” leave children confused, unsure of what is dangerous and what is not. Abused children end up feeling that they themselves are bad, that they have done something wrong. That confusion of tongues between love and perversion will haunt them for years.

“You are Little Red Riding Hood,” Lara says, and hands me the puppet of the girl with the red dress.

“She is going to visit her grandmother,” she says and then whispers, “The girl thinks the grandmother is an old lady but she is actually a wolf.”

“A wolf?” I repeat her words and remember how she kept stating there were to be no wolves in our story.

“You will see.” She smiles as if hiding something. “You will see what I mean soon. The grandmother has a lot of secrets.”

But we don’t find out what the grandmother’s secrets are, nor do we ever get to her house. Instead Lara instructs me, as Red Riding Hood, to sit under a tree and wait for her to come pick me up.

“I will be back soon,” she says firmly.

She turns her back to me and starts playing on her own. I am left to sit there for a long while, knowing that I have been assigned to be the girl that Lara has been, lost alone in the woods, overwhelmed by the secrets of others. Sitting there in silence, waiting for Lara to come back, I feel like the little girl I used to be, when I was left to wait for my parents to come pick me up from the candy store. My “me-search” enters the room and I realize what I am looking for. I suddenly remember what I always knew.

I was seven years old, younger than Lara. I had started second grade in a new school far from our home. During the first week of school my parents had told me that we were planning to move to a new apartment, closer to the new school, but until then I should wait at the candy store after school and they would pick me up from there.

Every day, I walked to the candy store on the corner and waited, exactly as they’d told me to do. Moses, the owner of the store, was a kindly old man with a white mustache and a big smile. I liked him. I believed that he liked me too, and I especially liked that he gave me candy.

As a little girl, there was nothing I loved more than candy. My mother, in an attempt to feed us healthy food, did not allow it in the house. She used to serve us plates with sliced apples and dried fruit. “Candy made by nature,” she called it.

When Moses offered me candy for the first time, I was thrilled and ate it as fast as I could. He looked at me and smiled. “I see that you really love it.”

The following day he offered me ice cream that he kept in a freezer in the back of the store. “What kind do you like?” He had a cone in each hand. “Vanilla or chocolate?”

I pointed to the vanilla one.

“Why did I know you would choose that one?” he teased, and then asked if I wanted to come pick out something from the back of the store.

“I will let you choose whatever you like,” he said.

Moses always smiled, and his kisses were ticklish and wet. Once in a while his wife would come to the store and he would put a little chair for me in the front and ignore me until she left.

When my dad arrived to pick me up, Moses would tell him what a good girl I was and wave goodbye. “See you tomorrow.”

I liked waiting for my parents there, but as time passed I started feeling nauseous.

“Moses gives you too much candy,” my mother would say. “That’s why your stomach hurts.”

But that wasn’t the reason. I wasn’t sure why; I just knew that I didn’t like it when he hugged me so tight. I still liked him even when I didn’t.

In third grade I stopped liking Moses. We moved to our new home and I tried to avoid walking near his store. Only years later was I able to put it all together and understand what had really happened in the first few months of second grade. I never told anyone, and I wasn’t always sure if it had actually happened or if I’d imagined it.

Freud viewed memory as a fluid entity that was constantly changing and being reworked over time. He referred to this dynamic as nachträglichkeit, translated into English as “afterwardness,” which means that early traumatic events are layered with new meanings throughout life. Freud was especially focused on sexual abuse as an event that would be reworked retrospectively as the child got older and reached certain developmental phases. Sexual abuse in childhood isn’t always registered by the child as traumatic. The child is overwhelmed with something they cannot process or even make sense of.

As time passes, the traumatic experience is reprocessed. In every developmental phase the child will revisit the abuse from a different angle and with different understanding. When that abused child becomes a teenager and then an adult, when they have sex for the first time or have children, when their child reaches the age they were when the abuse happened — in each moment the abuse will be reprocessed from a slightly different perspective. The process of mourning keeps changing and accrues new layers of meaning. Time will not necessarily make the memory fade; instead, the memory will appear and reappear in different forms and will be experienced simultaneously as real and unreal.

Nineteen years after I first met Lara, it is a gloomy day in mid-September and I’m about to meet her again. It is also my birthday. In the intervening years, I’ve had three children. I have stopped working with children and am now only seeing adults. My office is in the same neighborhood as it was nineteen years ago, in downtown Manhattan.

I open my door and look at the tall young woman who stands there. I do not recognize her.

“I grew up quite a bit.” She smiles as if reading my mind. “Thank you for answering my email so quickly, and for agreeing to see me.”

She sits on the couch and looks around. “I like your new office.”

I recognize her smile and these first words.

“Those were your exact words when I met you for the first time,” I say, trying to learn something about her from the way she looks: the black T-shirt, the black long silk skirt, her sneakers and blue nail polish, and her long straight hair, which I think used to be curly. I’m trying to read what has happened to her in the years since then. Where has she been? Is she happy? Did she find out what really happened?

“I know it’s your birthday today,” she then says to my surprise.

I nod and smile. Some things don’t change. She still knows more about me than I expect.

“Don’t worry, I can’t read your mind,” she adds as if reading my mind. “When I tried to find you, I googled you, and one of the first things I found on your Wikipedia page was your birthday. I was happy you scheduled our session for today. I really wanted to give you a gift.”

Traditionally, therapists do not accept gifts from patients. The contract with our patients is clear; there is no dual relationship, no exchanges other than our professional services for an hourly fee. Psychoanalyst and patient share a joint goal of trying to explore the unconscious; therefore, it’s interesting to understand when and why a patient brings a gift and what that gift represents. But in reality nothing can make a gift feel unappreciated and dismissed more than analyzing it.

Lara opens her bag and hands me a small puppet. It is a girl wearing a red dress. Our Little Red Riding Hood.

She surprises me again.

“Do you remember?” she asks, and she suddenly sounds like the little girl she used to be.

“Of course I do. I never forgot,” I say.

We look at each other. I like her as much as I did all those years ago, and I wonder what has made her look for me now.

“I came to see you because I need your help.” She answers the question I haven’t yet asked out loud.

We start where we stopped years before. Lara tells me about her family’s move back then to the West Coast. It was sudden; she didn’t even have a chance to say goodbye. “In retrospect maybe we were running away,” she says. “Running away from the unhappiness my family lived in. But the unhappiness followed us and in fact only got worse.” The tension between Lara’s parents, Hanna and Jed, became intolerable, and four years later, they got divorced. Jed lost his job and had to move to work in Denver. Hanna grew even more depressed and was hospitalized. Lara found herself alone, and at the age of fourteen she had to move yet again, this time to live with her grandmother Masha.

Lara talks and I feel sad and worried. How was it for her to move again, to separate from both her parents? To live with her grandmother, whom she used to have mixed feelings about?

“At that point things actually got better,” she continues. “My grandmother was wonderful and my life with her was so much easier. I realized why my mother loved her so much. She supported me and understood how hard this new living situation was for me. She was caring and gave me everything I needed. Once a week we traveled together to visit my mother in the hospital, and once a month we visited my father. At some point, after my mother was discharged, I made the decision to stay and live with my grandmother permanently.”

I listen to Lara and remember the way Hanna used to talk about her mother, defend her, describe how in spite of the fact that she believed her mother was responsible for the break in their family, she loved her and could never fully blame her. When Jed expected Hanna to cut her mother out of their life, she refused. Now Lara expresses the same feelings about her grandmother. Something has changed since her grandmother was our bad wolf.

“My grandmother grew up in Russia with eight siblings,” Lara tells me. “She is the youngest and the only one who is educated. She values education and encouraged me to go to graduate school. In fact, she’ll be paying for my doctoral degree,” Lara says and then smiles shyly. “I decided to study psychology. I was just accepted into a PhD program.” Then she starts giggling. “Maybe I want to be you. I mean, as a child, therapy was the only time I didn’t feel alone. I felt that you really wanted to know me.”

Lara takes a deep breath. She looks tired and I see how hard she tries to be likable, easygoing, not depressed like her mother. She was always tuned in to others, making sure she was not a burden on them and instead taking care of those around her.

“You said you needed my help.” My voice sounds softer than usual as I ask, “Tell me, what brings you here today, Lara?”

Lara stares out the window for a long time.

“Your old office used to have big windows looking at Grace Church, I remember,” she says, still gazing outside. “There was a coffee place across the street and I used to sit there with my father every week after therapy. He would order fresh mint tea and a croissant, and I would get a baguette and use all the chocolate spreads that were on the table. Every week we would sit there silently, eating and not looking at each other. He never asked me how therapy was. Maybe he was too afraid to know. And I didn’t think about anything else but the sweet spreads that my mother didn’t like me to eat and that made the end of a session less bitter. I never liked separations."

“I remember sitting across the street, staring at the entrance of your building, hoping to see you walk out and wave to me. I didn’t want you to meet anyone else after I left. I wanted you just for myself. And I wished that my father would say something, ask me something, it didn’t matter what. Even one question would have been enough, so we wouldn’t have to sit there in silence. I wished that he would wonder out loud if I liked the spreads and which one I liked most. I would point to the hazelnut chocolate, and maybe then I could tell him about Little Red Riding Hood’s basket that we packed just before the end of the session and how I put unhealthy candy in it and nothing else. I wished that he would smile and say that he knew I loved sweets because he noticed that I ordered the spreads after therapy every time. But he didn’t ask anything, and I wasn’t sure that he noticed what I was eating or anything else about me.”


Lara pauses and looks straight into my eyes.

“There are many questions from my childhood that were never asked. There was no grown-up who could know the answers. There is a mystery that I wasn’t able to resolve on my own,” she says, and I know what she is talking about.

Lara and I start meeting again once a week. She begins her doctoral program, trying to find the topic for her dissertation, her “me-search.” Her mind will lead us to the questions that were never asked. Her research question will be born in that void and so will the truth.

It is a winter day when Lara comes in holding an old picture; in it she is thirteen years old, with a backpack on her shoulders. She is wearing gym clothes and is smiling at the camera.

“This is from the time before my parents got divorced,” she says, and I recognize the girl in the picture; she looks very much like the girl I knew. “I will never forget that day; it’s when I got my period for the first time. My mother took this picture and then called my grandmother to tell her that the ‘aunt was visiting’ or something funny like that.” She pauses.

“I heard them fighting for the first time. My mother was crying and yelling at my grandmother. I couldn’t hear what my grandmother was saying but I knew it was bad. I knew she made my mother very upset and I felt terrible. I thought it was all because of me.

“It was the one time I remember asking directly: ‘Mom, what happened?’ “‘It’s nothing; it’s between me and Grandma,’ my mother said, but I didn’t give up. ‘What did she say? Why are you crying?’”

Hanna told Lara that her mother had asked her to cut Lara’s hair short.

“My mother told me that and started crying again. She thought it was the meanest thing one could do to a girl. She thought it was crazy.

She told me that when she was about my age and got her period for the first time, my grandmother took her to the barber and without further explanation had her hair cut short. She remembered looking in the mirror and the tears running down her cheeks. ‘I look like a boy,’ she sobbed.

“‘Why did she do that?’ I asked, but my mother didn’t answer. I asked again, ‘Mom, why did Grandma do that to you when you were my age?’

“‘Sometimes it’s hard to understand Grandma,’ my mother answered. ‘She brought strange traditions from her country, from her own childhood, who knows.’”

Lara and I are silent. I wonder if she has the same thought I have. Does she realize that her grandmother was trying to protect her daughter by making her look like a boy and not a girl? Did she try to protect her daughter, and now her granddaughter, from sexual abuse?

No one wanted to know. No one ever asked.

I remain silent, asking myself if Lara is ready to question her family history.

Our wish to know everything about our parents is a myth. Children are in fact often ambivalent about learning too much about their parents. They don’t want to know about their parents’ sexuality and often try to avoid knowing intimate things from their history.

“I need to know what really happened,” Lara says decisively and points her finger at the girl in the picture.

The girl in the picture smiles a fake smile.

“My grandmother,” she says, touching her long straight hair, “was always so protective of me. She accused Ethan of abusing me, but then after my parents got divorced that was all forgotten. No one talked about it anymore. That was strange.”

Lara looks severe. She suddenly seems much older than her twenty-nine years. She takes a brief glimpse at her watch, calculating how long we have until the end of the session. I know she needs time to think through her history.

“When I lived with my grandmother she used to scare me,” she says. “She used to repeat that I had to be careful. She would tell me strange things, for instance, that I needed to wear underwear to bed, other- worms would get into my vagina. She would whisper it and I remember feeling nauseous. Every time she talked about my body she would start whispering. When it came to sex her boundaries were strange. She talked about inappropriate things as if they were normal and about normal things as if they were perverse. Her whispering made me feel dirty, as if she had dark secrets that came out at night, and then in the morning she would be my loving grandmother again.”

“When you were ten years old and we played Little Red Riding Hood, you told me that the grandmother in the story had a lot of secrets,” I say. ‘You will see,’ you used to repeat, ‘you will see.’ But we never found out what those secrets were. Maybe you are ready now to ask the questions that were never asked.”

Lara travels to meet with her grandmother Masha. She wants to learn about Masha’s childhood and hopes to find her own answers there.

Masha grew up in a chaotic household with very few resources. Her parents went to work early in the morning and came back late at night. Her oldest sister, who was thirteen, became her main caretaker. Masha told Lara that she always felt her mother didn’t want her, that deep inside, her mother regretted having so many children. Masha was a shy girl and a good student. Excelling at school was her way to feel special and worthy.

One night, when Masha was ten years old, she had a bad dream. She often had bad dreams but knew she couldn’t wake her parents up or they would be upset with her. She sneaked into her fifteen-year-old brother’s bed. Her brother was the smartest; he was funny and brave and the one she admired the most.

He kissed her.

From then on her brother came into her bed every few nights. She would make believe she was asleep and wouldn’t make any noise. He would touch her gently and never hurt her. In the morning they behaved as if nothing had happened.

It was when Masha was about thirteen and got her period for the first time that her mother told her in a very matter-of-fact way that she shouldn’t let her brother in her bed anymore.

“Do you mean her mother knew?” I can’t stop myself as I interrupt Lara, who is still shaken by what she learned.

Lara nods. “Yes, but they never talked about it. She never told anyone.”

Unprocessed experiences always find ways to come back to life, to reenact themselves again and again. Masha’s repressed memory came to life in the typical way repressed memories do. It snuck into the mind unexpectedly, triggered by later events. For Masha, Ethan and Lara were a reminder of her and her older brother. That close relationship between a brother and a sister awakened her own repressed memory, and she felt the urge to give Lara the protection she never had, to be the parent she herself had always wanted. Her request that Lara’s hair be cut short was an attempt to protect Lara, in the same way that Masha believed she protected her daughter, Hanna, when she became a woman. Through Lara, Masha relived her own sexual abuse, which she could never fully process.

Sexual abuse is one of the most confusing traumatic experiences that we know. The intergenerational aspect of sexual abuse is unique in the way that each generation overwhelms the next and inflicts on it the drama of their sexual trauma.

The next generation’s world is often sexualized in the same way that the victim was sexualized as a child. They feel flooded by the parent’s unintegrated sexuality and perplexing boundaries. As Lara describes, innocent, trivial things, such as the underwear she wore when she went to sleep, were filled with sexual meanings. The adult — in this case Lara’s grandmother — who tries to make sense of her own feelings often communicates to the child the confusion about what is safe and what isn’t. The original confusion between innocence and perversion is played out through the next generation, with seduction, promiscuity, and prohibition all intermingled. The next generation usually describes growing up with a constant, vague feeling of violation that only later in therapy is understood to be related to the original break of boundaries in their family’s history of sexual abuse.

In her article “Enduring Mothers, Enduring Knowledge: On Rape and History,” Dr. Judith Alpert describes how sexual abuse can present itself in the mind of the next generation. Using her own childhood experience, she discusses the way traumatic thoughts and “memories” can be transmitted from parents and grandparents and present themselves in the child’s mind as their own. That phenomenon leaves everyone, the child and her caretakers, with the confusion that is at the core of sexual abuse. As in Lara’s case, our challenge is to hold all generations in mind — grandmother, mother, and child — as victims of either sexual abuse or the intergenerational inheritance of sexual abuse.

Masha, who was reliving her own unprocessed trauma, devastated her family with the idea that Lara’s brother sexually abused her. Lara became more and more overwhelmed. It was as if she were reliving her grandmother’s repressed feelings. Through the family’s ongoing rumination and the premature introduction of sex, Lara felt the intrusion into her body and thus the scene of sexual abuse was reenacted.

“When I was sitting with my grandmother last week and she told me about her childhood, I cried. She didn’t,” Lara says, and tears drop down her cheeks. “I tried to listen to her the way you listen to me, and to help her understand that she could tell me anything and I wouldn’t judge her, that I really wanted to know her.

“At some point she stopped and said she didn’t want to talk about it anymore. But she kept talking and I didn’t say a word. She started blaming herself, saying it was she who went into his bed first. Then she started to question her memory and said that it all sounded much worse than it actually was, that things were different then.

“Before we went to sleep she made me a cup of tea and served it with a slice of the chocolate cake she had baked for me.

“‘I know how much you like chocolate,’ my grandmother said, and hugged me. Then she held my shoulders, making sure I looked at her. ‘Lara, please don’t take my problems on you,’ she said. ‘I don’t want you to be sad because bad things happened to me. Worse things happen to people. That’s life; my life isn’t so special.’

“‘You had to keep a secret for so many years, Grandma,’ I said, and hugged her as tight as I could. But she just kept nodding. ‘I didn’t keep a secret. It was something I didn’t always remember. The secret kept itself.’”

“I think I found my ‘me-search,’” Lara tells me as she wipes her tears.

       ***

She will go on to study the tormenting and deceptive impact of incest and sexual abuse on the next generation, those aspects that are hard to research, as they are seemingly irrational, puzzling, and unformulated experiences, but that Lara lived through in her own childhood. We both recognize that one way to face that transmission from generation to generation is to process those experiences and help others process and own them, too. Demons tend to vanish when we turn on the lights.

Stefani Goerlich on Becoming a Kink-Affirming Therapist

Defining Our Terms

Lawrence Rubin: Hi, Stefani. Thank you for joining me today. I’m just going to get right into it and ask you—especially for those readers who may not be fully aware—what is kink?
Stefani Goerlich:
kink is nonnormative sexual and relational expression
Kink is a very broad term, but at its most basic, simply means any sort of sexual or relational expression that falls outside of the social norm or mainstream for the people who are engaging in it. What is normal, obviously, varies from culture to culture. But kink is nonnormative sexual and relational expression.
LR: Are there certain standards for normative sexual behavior across cultures that make a place for kink?
SG: When it comes to relational models, polyamory versus monogamy here in the States for example, polyamory is considered a form of kink expression. They’re often sort of rolled in together. But if you go into parts of Europe or the Middle East, polyamory is a cultural norm. On the other hand, things like sadomasochism and sensory exchange tend to be considered somewhat atypical across the board. So there are some things that lend themselves more towards universal kinks and others that are much more culturally contextualized.
LR: For some of our readers unfamiliar with these terms, what are “sadomasochism” and “sensory exchange?”
SG: Within kink, most of what people talk about is BDSM, which actually encompasses several different, smaller sorts of acronyms. It’s a multipurpose concept that includes bondage and discipline, which is an exchange of control. Usually this means control of movement, control of behavior. Then, there’s DS—dominance and submission—which I explain as an exchange of authority between the partners. This may or may not include control of behavior. But often, authority involves decision making sort of power. S&M is sadism and masochism, which we as clinicians think about as pain, giving and receiving pain.

But pain is a very subjective term and varies widely based on the individual. When I’m training other professionals, I talk about sadism and masochism as the exchange of intense sensation. So, within kink relationships, we’ll have one or more of those three—an exchange of control, an exchange of authority, or an exchange of sensation.
LR: So, that exchange of sensation does not necessarily include sexual sensation—direct stimulation of the genitals, which is only one subset of sensory exchange or pain?
SG:
We tend to assume that kink is sexual. But kink, in its most basic, is relational
Absolutely. That’s actually true for all three. We tend to assume that kink is sexual. But kink, in its most basic, is relational. Kink can sometimes be sexual in how it’s expressed. But ultimately, it is a relational form. So you’re right that the exchange of sensation might never involve sexual contact. It could be temperature. It could be impact. It could be electrostimulation. There’s a wide variety of sensations that can be exchanged that never involve removing one’s clothing.

50 Shades of Confusion

LR: How has American pop culture impacted consumers’ (therapists included) understanding of BDSM?
SG:
I think that pop culture has definitely sexualized BDSM
I think that pop culture has definitely sexualized BDSM, but I also think that is true historically. I’m working on a new conference talk and potentially a new journal article that looks at 500 years of how BDSM practices have been portrayed in popular media. And they’ve often been conflated with deviant sexual behavior regardless of whether the people engaging in kink view it as sexual. So that lends itself to this perpetuation of kink stigma. We typically see BDSM signals or cues, like leather or somebody wearing a collar, and immediately sexualize those in a way that they perhaps might not mean for themselves and their relationship.
LR: I go immediately to my only pop culture experience with BDSM, 50 Shades of Grey. Given that therapists are certainly part of the consuming public, did the movie and book help or undermine our understanding of BDSM?
SG:
Unfortunately, the actual relationship the 50 Shades books portray is incredibly abusive
I’m deeply conflicted. I have a conference talk that I offer—or, now, in COVID times, a webinar—called “Kink Affirming Practice: What Your Clients Wish You Knew but Are Afraid You’ll Ask.” And I noticed that my rooms started becoming much fuller after the 50 Shades book and then the movie came out.

On one hand, E. L. James did a great job of bringing kink dynamics into the mainstream, where soccer moms, housewives, and school teachers were reading about this kind of relationship. It was no longer the secreted experience of buying the pulp novel from behind the counter at the adult bookstore. So from that perspective, it was fabulous.

Unfortunately, the actual relationship the 50 Shades books portray is incredibly abusive. It is not a healthy model of kink. And in fact, the only time I mention it in my intro talk is as a case example where I walk people through a case study and offer a few different scenarios. I then ask the participants to tell me if the various scenarios represent consensual kink or domestic violence. At the end, I ask them if they recognize my case study, which is 50 Shades. So, it’s done wonders for normalizing conversations about and knowledge of BDSM. But I think it’s done a lot of harm in terms of how people understand BDSM relationships to actually be.
LR: So 50 Shades sort of limited our understanding of BDSM by grabbing our focus and making it sexual and, as a result, the line that separates BDSM from intimate partner violence was blurred.
SG: And its normalized dominance as a form of coercion, as opposed to dominance as a gift that the submissive gives to their partner.
LR: This may seem like a weird analogy, but when the movie 101 Dalmatians first came out, the breeders were going wild breeding dalmatians. And around Halloween, black cats are oversold and many later abandoned or abused. Did 50 Shades of Gray drive people to the therapists’ office, partners wanting to experiment and their partners not being open to it? Did it increase your practice?
SG: I saw an increase in my conversations with members of the BDSM community who expressed frustration with an influx of people who had read these books and had decided that they wanted to explore kink, but who were coming into it with this unhealthy understanding of what kink should look like. And so a lot of my already kinky clients were very, very frustrated and upset with the sort of change in the zeitgeist of the community, and the way new dominants were expecting submissives to respond or were expecting behaviors to be okay that are not. And newly-identified people who wanted to explore their submissive side seeking out really unhealthy dynamics because they weren’t clear on what healthy kink looks like. So what I saw in my practice was long-time kinksters being very frustrated with the sort of new people that 50 Shades brought into that world.
LR: And I wonder if it also resulted in an influx of clients with already very disturbed patterns of relationships who now wanted to incorporate kink without having a sound, healthy relational foundation. I’d imagine that there needs to be a reasonably healthy pattern of communication and awareness of power dynamics before adding in kink.
SG:
the problem is when people who have never identified as kinky before start to take on a BDSM identity as a way to rationalize or contextualize their already problematic behavior
Absolutely! I think that in general, there is a lot that the BDSM community can teach the vanilla world about negotiation, about consent, about communication, about after-care. But the problem is when people who have never identified as kinky before start to take on a BDSM identity as a way to rationalize or contextualize their already problematic behavior.

When somebody who has struggled to form relationships because they have abusive patterns now decides, “Well, I’m a dominant and so the way I have a relationship with a partner who won’t leave me is to find a partner who likes being mistreated.” That sort of mindset misunderstands what it means to be submissive and also misunderstands what it means to be dominant.
LR: So this kind of person might say, “All these years, the people I’ve dated have called me abusive, but I’m really not. I’m just a dominant. And they’re not understanding. So, I need to find just the right submissive.”
SG: Exactly.

Kink-Affirming Practice

LR: Shifting gears a bit here, Stefani, what exactly is kink-affirming clinical practice?
SG:
Kink-affirming practice understands that kink is its own distinct subculture, with strengths and resources and things that we can use in clinical work with our clients
Kink-affirming practice is the understanding that kink is not just something that we need to know about. Most clinicians that I encounter will say that they are kink-aware. They know what BDSM stands for. They have a general understanding of the idea of kink. But that’s about where their knowledge ends. Kink-affirming practice understands that kink is its own distinct subculture, with strengths and resources and things that we can use in clinical work with our clients, and that we can leverage their kink identities in our treatment planning, in our intervention strategies, and really work with that in the same way that we would use any other aspect of our clients’ identities. So it’s taking it beyond “I understand this” and moving it into “This is a key part of your identity. And we are going to weave this into our work.”
LR: Just as a clinician working with any client is interested in tapping into their resources, you’re saying that a kink-aware therapist uses the person’s kink identity as potential for resources. Can you give me an example of what kind of resources for healthy relationships kink clients bring to you as a therapist?
SG: Sure, but I want to clarify—that’s what I mean when I say, “kink-affirming.” Kink aware therapists understand what kink is, but they might not necessarily have a structure for using that in their work with their clients. They just know enough about it to not cause harm or to stigmatize their clients for being kinky.

In kink-affirming practice, we would look at the use of protocols and rituals to enhance the work that we’re doing with clients perhaps with a trauma history or with a rejection dysphoria. Working daily protocols with their partner into their treatment planning can be really positive for them. If we’re working with somebody with disordered eating, for example, working with their partner—their dominant partner—to help establish rules around that so that they have accountability in their relationship in a way that doesn’t feel focused on their eating but becomes an act of service to complete a meal, can be a really healthy reframing for them.

Another great example for a dominant partner would be—I had a client who struggled with their own med management, blood pressure medication in this case. But they were very busy, and because it wasn’t a huge priority for them, their health was compromised. So we actually worked together to make it an act of service for their partner to remind them of their meds. It became, “Sir, it’s 6:00. It’s time for you to take your medication.” In another context, or one that was not kink-affirming, this reminder could have felt bossy or nagging, controlling. But we played to the strengths of their dynamic and made it something that felt like service to them. Both of these examples reflect a DS context.
LR: These two scenarios are perfect examples of how kink and BDSM are not necessarily about sexual gratification, sexual stimulation, or sexual experiences. It’s about a relational process. One aspect of which might be sexual. You brought up trauma, which is a whole other area. But it made me wonder if it might be a dog whistle to a kink-unaware or non-kink-affirming therapists to search for trauma in the history of these folks who bring their kink identities or practices into therapy?
SG:
One of the biggest misconceptions and biases is that people who identify as kinky are kinky because they have a trauma history
One of the biggest misconceptions and biases is that people who identify as kinky are kinky because they have a trauma history. Actually, when you look at the research and the data, it’s fascinating because people who identify as kinky do not have—they don’t report a trauma history any more than the general population. So trauma within the kink community is on par with trauma in the general community. Where we see a difference is that people within the kink community tend to report higher rates of PTSD than vanilla people. And what that tells me is that you don’t necessarily have more traumatized people who identify as kinky. But what you have is a group of people who have found an outlet and a cathartic modality that works for them who are then coming to kink as a way to further their own healing. So, I can understand why on the surface if you’re working with a heavy population of PTSD, you might make that corollary that, oh, kink is more prevalent in people with trauma. That’s statistically not true. But more likely, people with PTSD may be using kink as an outlet to process those feelings.
LR: What do you mean in your book when you say that consensual BDSM for trauma survivors can be an effective way of processing trauma memories?
SG:
Kink is not, in and of itself, therapy
I want to be really clear. We don’t have enough evidence to say that BDSM play is an intervention. We have some people who are doing that research. But we’re not there yet. Kink is not, in and of itself, therapy. But my background is with sexual assault and trauma survivors, and for a lot of people who have had their control taken away, who have been in situations where they have lost agency, lost autonomy, literally lost physical control over their bodies and their voices, kink can be very powerful. Being able to put themselves in a situation where they can say, “These are my limits. This is what I want. This is what I don’t,” to know with absolute certainty that if they say stop, things will stop. It can be very, very healing to put themselves in situations that offer similar sensory experiences to their trauma in a controlled, safe setting. So it works almost similarly to exposure therapy with a phobia. But it’s self-directed and self-controlled.
LR: When you talk about the healing potential of kink, I think about people who have had chronic health conditions or who have had to undergo medical procedures that have involved involuntary intense pain or submission to painful procedures.
SG:
illness and medical trauma can often be supported and processed through the use of intentional sensory experiences like BDSM
Emma Sheppard is doing some phenomenal work around using kink as an outlet for chronic pain treatment and using intentional chosen pain to offset and to recontextualize pain that perhaps we don’t choose. I know Lee Phillips, in Virginia, does a lot of work around chronic illness and BDSM. So there is a growing sort of small but strong number of voices working on exactly that—on recognizing that illness and medical trauma can often be supported and processed through the use of intentional sensory experiences like BDSM.
LR: If there’s anything I want the readers to take from this interview, it is the importance of that simple finding from research and practice that BDSM and kink in general are not necessarily about sexual gratification, which was the misconception you mentioned earlier. Are there other kink-related myths and misconceptions?
SG: I think there are a number. One of the big ones that I encounter is the idea that people who identify as sadists are intentionally or are diagnostically problematic and that we need to be vigilant around these sadistic clients because they are more likely to be offenders who are sublimating this violent urge into their relationships. Which, on one hand, if that is true for a given client, I would argue that’s exactly what we want them to be doing.

If they have a consenting partner who enjoys receiving the kind of aggressive sensation they want to be giving out, then, yay, we all win, and nobody’s consent is being violated. But we also need to recognize that there is such a thing as prosocial sadism—people who enjoy evoking these reactions in willing people who, in turn, enjoy receiving these sensations. We need to be mindful as clinicians to not assume deeper social or psychological implications here simply because our clients enjoy giving or receiving these intense sensations.
LR: I know that as a clinician, you’re also a certified sex therapist, so would assume that some clients seek you out for sex-therapy related issues, and others do not. What are some of the main concerns that clients bring to you?
SG:
people that perhaps are kink-unaware or kink-uninformed rush to assume that you’re kinky because you’re depressed, or you’re depressed because you’re kinky
I would say that even within my general mental health clients, a sizable number of them come to me because they know that they are kinky and depressed or and anxious or considering divorce. They want to work with somebody who is not going to tie threads that don’t need to be tied. So often—and this comes back to the question you asked about myths—people that perhaps are kink-unaware or kink-uninformed rush to assume that you’re kinky because you’re depressed, or you’re depressed because you’re kinky, or you’re anxious because you’re kinky, or you want to get divorced. Sometimes my clients just need a clinician who understands the way they like to have relationships or the way that they like to have sex, and that this is not necessarily connected with their mental health issues.

Another good chunk of my practice is people who are experiencing desire discrepancy between themselves and their partners, mismatched fetish interests, mismatched kink dynamic interests. I’m starting to look at those sorts of cases more as a mixed-orientation marriage than as a libido issue, because when we look at things as a desire-libido issue, we’re operating from the assumption that one person’s libido needs to be adjusted. When instead we look at it as a mixed-orientation relationship, neither person is wrong. Neither person needs to be fixed or corrected or medicated. We simply need to find the Venn-connection between their common erotic maps. So helping these couples through a mixed-orientation framework has become a big part of my practice.

And the last group is couples and individuals who are newly aware of or newly willing to discuss their interest in kink or polyamory. They’re coming to me for guidance and for a place to talk through and process these new ideas and new experiences as they start to enter into those initial sort of explorations and community engagements.
LR: So a kink-unaware therapist or a therapist who might be conflicted around their own sexuality or relational dynamics might be predisposed to see a red light flashing over the head of a client when kink comes into the room, rather than sort of hold it as just one of the other elements of the person’s identity.
SG: Exactly. There’s also just the resource knowledge. If we have a client who’s struggling with a substance use issue, if we have somebody that’s perhaps overusing alcohol, we can—most of us—have a conversation around several different treatment options for them. We can talk about AA versus Smart Recovery versus Dharma Recovery. We can talk about intensive outpatient versus going to rehab. But if you’re not kink aware or kink affirming, and a client comes to you and says, “I really want to explore this side of me and I don’t know where to start,” most of us are totally unprepared to talk about what conferences are best for somebody who’s curious about pet play versus age play versus BDSM, where somebody can go for educational content without an expectation that there’s going to be any sort of public play component versus somebody who’s interested in polyamory but maybe not swinging. Those are resources our kinky clients need to have access to. And as clinicians, we need to be able to have those conversations with them in the same way we would about any other community resource.
LR: Might there be a profile of the clinician who might be more susceptible to countertransferential responses to a kink client—a kink-practicing client?
SG:
The clinician who is more philosophically conservative and wedded to the sex addiction model is more likely to struggle when working with kinky clients and to pathologize BDSM and kink
I don’t know if I could say there’s an evidence-based profile. I can tell you anecdotally what I’ve encountered. The clinician who is more philosophically conservative and wedded to the sex addiction model is more likely they are to struggle when working with kinky clients and to pathologize BDSM and kink. I have several local colleagues who have told me, verbatim, that I’m the one they send the weird sex stuff to, which is fascinating because the weird sex stuff they send me tends to be masturbation.
LR: Oh, my! Blindness next, right?
SG: I mean I have a lot of conversations with referrals who are sent to me because they’re told they have very problematic sexual behavior. In their intakes, I’m like, “You are well within the margins of normal. Nothing you are telling me is at all concerning to me.” And I’m not saying that as a kink-affirming clinician. I am saying that just as a sex therapist.
LR: One of the things our readers will not be able to appreciate unless they look you up is that you have pink hair, you’re sitting in a pink chair with a statue of Wonder Woman next to you, and that behind you is a beautifully colored floral wreath. I don’t know if it’s macramé.
SG: Embroidered lace I brought back from Romania as we were fleeing Europe ahead of COVID.
LR: So I wonder if a therapist who is not as comfortable in displaying themselves as freely as you or who is struggling in their own relationships is going to have much more difficulty accepting kink clients.
SG:
I try very hard to be very cheerful, very colorful, very approachable, so that I don’t look like what people picture when they picture a kink specialist therapist
It’s interesting that you bring up sort of the color palette of things. Because one of the things I very intentionally try to do in my practice is to be very approachable to avoid that sort of black metal, sleek chrome look—I don’t want my office to look like a dungeon space. I want to look friendly and cheerful and approachable, partly because it’s so important to me to normalize these relationships for my clients, for my colleagues. And a huge part of that is looking normal in the work that I do. I mean the pink hair, I suppose, is maybe a little bit atypical. But I try very hard to be very cheerful, very colorful, very approachable, so that I don’t look like what people picture when they picture a kink specialist therapist.
LR: I wonder if clients who are on the verge of experimenting with or beginning to wonder what kink is, and who approach a therapist who is not particularly approachable—if the relationship will not work.
SG: I will say that every single year, I ask my accountant if I can write my hair dye off as a marketing expense because I hear from so many people that I look friendly and like somebody they could talk to because I had pink hair.
LR: Stefani, I’m going to be presumptuous here and say that I think you need to explore the power dynamics with your accountant. Perhaps you should be telling your accountant what is to be written off and push your accountant into a submissive position when it comes to that. A practice-what-you-preach sort of thing. Sorry, I couldn’t resist that one.
SG: I’ll let her know you said so.
LR: Is the therapist who has not practiced kink at any level capable of working with a client who either is kink practicing or contemplating kink practice or experimentation?
SG:
I don’t think it’s fair to ask our clients to pay us to use their therapeutic hour to teach us what we need to know to do the work with them
I think so. I think that, in the same way that I don’t necessarily have to be gay to work with a gay male couple, I simply need to be willing to educate myself and empathize with them and respect them, that other people can work with kinky clients if they’re willing to do that same work. I actually think it can sometimes be easier because when I’m doing case consultation with peers who themselves are kink-identified, that’s where I see countertransference. That’s where I see, well, the way that their relationship is set up or the way that they’re doing kink isn’t the way I think that kink should be done. And so we have to have conversations around your kinks, not their kink. But that doesn’t make their kink wrong. At times, it might actually be easier to have somebody who is very affirming, but not necessarily kinky themselves, doing that work.

I think that one caveat I would add is we need to be willing to let clients teach us about their dynamic and the way that they do kink. I do not think we should be looking to our clients to educate us about kink in general. We need to be pursuing continuing education. We need to be reading books or watching documentaries or attending conferences written by members of the kink community. We need to be educating ourselves, and then asking our clients, “What does this look like for you?” I don’t think it’s fair to ask our clients to pay us to use their therapeutic hour to teach us what we need to know to do the work with them.

Hard Places and Soft Spots

LR: When should a therapist consider referring a client who may be reconsidering their relationship style and/or sexual practices to include kink practices?
SG: I think, if it’s not something that you’re willing to—if it’s outside your scope of practice and you’re not willing to do the work of learning, then you need to refer. And it’s okay to be uncomfortable with something. I’ve worked with clients whose individual practices or particular fetishes made me uncomfortable. I’ve referred a couple of people out whom I simply know I can’t provide unconditional positive regard to. Not because there’s anything wrong with them. But because I just know where I’m at. So if you are encountering a client you are unprepared to work with and unwilling to educate yourself to do the work with, you have an ethical obligation to them to connect them with somebody who can and who will.
LR: You said that you will refer some clients and you talked about fetishes. Are there some fetishistic behaviors that go beyond your level of moral acceptance? I mean, when would a person’s fetish be such that you would need to refer them, since I’m sure you have seen and heard it all.
SG:
Moral is tricky because my clients, both kinky and non-kinky, engage in all sorts of behavior that I have moral issues with
Moral is tricky because my clients, both kinky and non-kinky, engage in all sorts of behavior that I have moral issues with. If somebody’s stealing from their employer, I have a moral issue with that. I think that we tend to ascribe socially greater moral weight to sexual things than to nonsexual things. But that doesn’t make it any more or less moral. So I don’t know that I want to define it as a moral thing.

But for me, in terms of comfort, really diving into the details of somebody’s experience, where I’m able to sit and hold space for a given narrative, people who are zoophiles—that’s something that I personally struggle with.

Thankfully, I have colleagues I can refer out to. And I do. And again, I’m not necessarily putting a moral weight on that. It’s just I can’t be what they need. I work with people who struggle with pedophilic urges. And I’m comfortable doing that. I’m a member of the Association for the Treatment of Sexual Abusers. I’m comfortable working with non-offending pedophiles. I don’t work with actively offending pedophiles. But for the most part, those are the two big ones for me. I have people that engage in a lot of niche fetishes that some of my peers struggle with, like coprophilia. So, most things I am fully capable of holding space with. For me, really, just in terms of being able to sit and hear the stories and process and be present for, those are the two that I refer out for, personally.
LR: So, like any competent clinician, you have your boundaries. What kinds of concerns around BDSM do you hear from parents who have concerns for their children and teens?
SG:
I have such a soft spot for kinky adolescents because they are completely adrift
I have such a soft spot for kinky adolescents because they are completely adrift. There are very few ethical resources available to young people who identify as kinky. And it’s tricky because when we interview kinky adults, most of them say that they first recognized an interest in kink starting around age 10, if not a little bit earlier. So, most people who are kinky knew they were kinky early.

And we have a huge population of young people who know that this is a part of how they form relationships, how they give and express affection. And yet they can’t attend kink conferences. They can’t go to BDSM events. And absolutely, we have to be aware of predators and of problematic situations. That’s because, when you’re talking about power exchange in young people, you want to make sure that they’re capable of consent. So, there are really no great answers. I think where I focus with parents is on recognizing that BDSM is a healthy relational expression, on normalizing BDSM as something that can be done in a safe, consensual way, on recontextualizing power exchange as not coercive and grooming behavior, but as a future relationship model their children may aspire to. Even though they’re not adequately able to enter into a dynamic like that now.
LR: Research tells us that children who are victimized by sexual and physical abuse are at higher likelihood of becoming abusers themselves. Is kink interest in children and teens a potential risk factor for them? Especially for trans youth, who are at even higher risk for adverse outcomes?
SG:
providing gender-affirming care to young people is so fraught and contentious that we haven’t even gotten as far as people being able to have a conversation around affirming kink identities
I honestly don’t know that I could speak to that. I don’t know that there’s been enough research. And I think right now, the conversation around simply providing gender-affirming care to young people is so fraught and contentious that we haven’t even gotten as far as people being able to have a conversation around affirming kink identities in gender nonconforming young people. I think that might cause heads to explode in ways that are not fair to young people.
LR: I’m wondering if there’s a hierarchy of kink practice and kink fetish that can be ranked in terms of likelihood of bringing ire to parents and people in general?
SG: SG: I think somebody’s gender identity is such a core aspect of who they are that that has to be supported and affirmed before any sort of relational preference or sexual expression could ever be hoped to act on. They can’t have a happy, healthy, consensual power exchange relationship or engage in a happy, healthy, sensory exchange relationship if they’re not happy and healthy in who they are as a human. And so their ability to engage in any sort of relationship model—kinky, vanilla, or otherwise—is really predicated on our first affirming them and their gender identity to start with.
LR: So healthy kink practice requires healthy personality development first.
SG:
I don’t know that we necessarily need to be rushing to include kinky young people in the broader kink community
Absolutely. As you know, the last part of the brain to develop is the area that controls cause and effect thinking, good and ethical decision making, and being able to anticipate outcomes. And all of those skills are necessary in order to truly negotiate with a potential partner and especially when it comes to BDSM and kink—in order to be able to consent to some of the things that kinky people do. So, I think that supporting young people in their identity formation, in affirming their gender identity, in teaching strong consent culture early and often and bodily autonomy and sex positivity—these are all ways that we can support kinky young people. But I don’t know that we necessarily need to be rushing to include kinky young people in the broader kink community. I think that we need to give them space to be able to have the adult conversations that kinky people have around negotiation of scenes and relationships.
LR: What might be the relationship between the age of the therapist and their capacity to embrace broader elements of identity like kink? Or is it more a matter of the developmental level of the therapist rather than their age?
SG: I don’t know that I would want to speak to that. I feel like it might be far more generational. I think that my son’s generation is so much more inclusive and eager to affirm and accept people with diverse identities and experiences in a way that my parents’ generation really struggles with. And I know that as a Gen-Xer, we try really hard to always get it right. So, I don’t know if it’s an age thing so much as it is a generational thing.

Unanticipated Outcomes

LR: That makes a lot of sense. From your own clinical experience, can you share an unanticipated success story and an unanticipated unsuccess story—I won’t call it “failure”—around working in the kink domain?
SG:
it broke my heart a little bit because they deserved to—whatever their identity was—be affirmed in that
When I first went into private practice after leaving agency settings, I was still in sex therapy supervision. And my very first gender nonconforming client was a person who had lived as a heterosexual man their entire life, who had always struggled with thoughts that perhaps they would be happier as a woman and had come to therapy to explore this. Being me, I was very, very, very excited to help explore this. And we had many wonderful conversations and I offered lots of activities and resources. One day, they came in and said, “I don’t want to do it. It’s too hard, and the payoff isn’t worth it. If I were to announce that I am a woman, I would lose my children, I would lose everything I have. I’ve been doing it this long, I can keep doing it. Sure, it would be nice. But, at the end of the day, the reward isn’t worth the risk and having these conversations is just too painful. So, I’m done.”

There was nothing I could say to that. You have to respect everybody’s process. But it broke my heart a little bit because they deserved to—whatever their identity was—be affirmed in that. Whether that was a heterosexual cis-man that just liked wearing dresses every so often, or whether that was a complete reshaping of their gender identity, I wanted them to be loved and accepted for who they were. And after having so many conversations about what it would be like if they could have that, to have them come in and say, “I just decided it’s not worth trying,” was really—it made me very sad for them.
LR: Perhaps it’s the therapist or supervisor in me that says, maybe it wasn’t really a failure. You created a space for the conversation. And they weighed the pros and cons and did what was best for them, even though you would have hoped that they could have done what was better for them, rather than just best. How about another experience from the—you’re glowing—oh, my God—this was wonderful and…
SG:
I am very much—as you might guess—not a kink-shaming person
I had a client who said that she was in a 24/7 DS relationship, but that it didn’t feel comfortable for her and she wanted to work through her feelings because her dominant was telling her that she wasn’t doing DS right. He wanted her to come to therapy to figure out how she could be a better submissive. And I am very much—as you might guess—not a kink-shaming person. But about two months into this, I paused mid-conversation and said, “I want to print something off, and I want to show it to you.” I went to my laptop and printed off the Duluth Model of Domestic Violence Wheel of Power and Control. I said, “I want you to tell me whether or not anything here looks familiar to you.” And she pointed out—I gave her a highlighter—and she started highlighting a whole bunch of things. And she said, “Well, yeah. But this says, ‘Power and Control.’ This is just what DS is.” And I said, “But how much of this did you agree to?”

I then asked her, “How much of this is okay, because not everything on here can be healthy. And sure, there are things on the Wheel of Power and Control that can be negotiated. Absolutely. Name-calling—absolutely. If that’s your thing, go for it. But there are some things like threatening to harm pets or children that are never a part of—and it seems sort of counterintuitive considering the conversation you and I have had.” Looking back on that powerful interchange, I was able to help somebody understand that they had been gaslighted by their partner into thinking that she was just a terrible submissive, and, if she was just a better submissive, they would have a great relationship. She understood at that moment that this was not kink, that this was a really abusive relationship—and that was very hard.

That was the start of about two years’ worth of work. She ended up moving out. He ended up making some threats to me. I had to have security walk me to and from my car for quite a while. And then she terminated. And I was worried about her. But last summer, out of nowhere, I got a text message saying that she had moved across the country and she had gotten her dream job and she had a new dog that she’d always wanted to have that he would never have let her have. It was a very lengthy text message. And she was just living her best life. And she told me that she would never have thought that she was capable of doing that if she hadn’t had me look at her and say, “This isn’t what kink looks like.”
LR: It is wonderful to have those kinds of memories. I could not possibly end this wonderful conversation, Stefani, without asking you the significance of the Wonder Woman action figure on your desk.
SG:
Wonder Woman originally was intended to represent a new vision of womanhood that was intended to challenge patriarchal norms
I love Wonder Woman. William Moulton Marston, the creator of Wonder Woman, not only invented the first lie detector, but he created the DISC personality profile, which is one of the first attempts to actually use the concepts of dominant and submissive. He tried to sort of codify what those personality types looked like. And Wonder Woman originally was intended to represent a new vision of womanhood that was intended to challenge patriarchal norms and to challenge relationship models and to give young people a new vision for what relationship dynamics could look like.
LR: Does Gal Gadot capture the essence of what Marston envisioned?
SG: As a Jewish woman myself, I love having a Jewish Wonder Woman. She is my favorite.
LR: There was an ad in a magazine in the ‘40s that featured Wonder Woman strapped to a lie detector. I wonder if that was a subtle domination image—not so subtle actually.
SG: Not so subtle. Golden Era Wonder Woman had some pretty overt bondage themes. Marston was in a DS relationship with his partners—a DS poly relationship with his partners.
LR: Well, we’ll leave our readers with that, and I thank you, Stefani.

Russell Ramsay on Attending to ADHD in Adulthood

Three Avenues to ADHD

Lawrence Rubin:  Hi, Russell. Can you tell us about the typical clinical presentation of someone who has either been diagnosed with or is a good candidate for the diagnosis of ADHD in adulthood?


Russell Ramsay: Well, there’s a couple of different avenues.

If there is a history of ADHD or suspected ADHD they may think, 'All right, I’d better see somebody about this for managing adult life.'
The first is exemplified by somebody who may have been diagnosed in childhood or adolescence and is seeking out continuity of care in adulthood. They may not have come to us right out of high school but are usually making a transition, when all of a sudden and with increased chronological age, there are increased demands for self-regulation and self-management. Waking up and getting to class in college, managing homework, getting to a job on time, things like that. Usually, these clients will say things like, “You know what? I struggled with the same things over several years as I am right now and I keep starting anew, but I’m not making progress.” If there is a history of ADHD or suspected ADHD, they may think, “All right, I’d better see somebody about this for managing adult life.”

This may sound much more pessimistic than I actually intend, but there’s no end of the school year in adult life. You keep going, unless you're a teacher, whereas for children and adolescents, not that it’s any easy go, but if they can hang on until summer, everything stops. And then they can start over in the fall with a fresh slate—which also keeps some people from getting diagnosed until they move into adulthood. Maybe they can hold it together until the end of the school year when they say something like, “I should probably get an assessment,” followed by, “All right, I got through. It was okay and I started off the new school year okay. So maybe it was just last year.” But that gets repeated, and it becomes a continuity of care issue, with some people saying, “Okay, I had treatment in high school, and now I need some help in college.”

For people who do not come to us until adulthood and weren’t diagnosed in childhood or adolescence, we call them late-identified, not late diagnosis. With a full and thorough evaluation, we can usually confirm that there was emergence of symptoms in childhood or adolescence, even if they weren’t diagnosed at that time. And so people will come to us saying, “I’ve tried to make changes. I’ve made adjustments.” We’ve actually had college students who quit a sports team saying, “I have more time, but I’m not getting any farther ahead.”

a client may present in adulthood with repetitive difficulties managing what previously seemed to be manageable affairs
Or a client may present in adulthood with repetitive difficulties managing what previously seemed to be manageable affairs. And it is not all or nothing. It’s not like, “I never go to class. I never hand in homework.” The frustrating thing is, it’s something within reach, or there’s some documented evidence that “I know I can do this. The admission committee let me in the school. I did well in this class or I did well through midterms, but then I lost it later on.” That consistent inconsistency.

And that sort of drives some of the self-mistrust that can develop within these individuals. So, the second avenue is people saying, “I’m not fulfilling my potential.” We could have a philosophical argument about whether there is such a thing as potential, and if we’re not reaching it, is it reachable? But usually what people mean is, “I’ve done it well, but I don’t sustain it.” There are often college-related difficulties, dropping classes due to falling behind. And it’s not necessarily due to trying to be a physics major, then just finding out you’re not wired for physics.

In managing workplace affairs, even if it’s not a performance improvement plan, people might say, as one of my colleagues so insightfully described, that they’re “working twice as hard for half as much.” Or they might say, “People think I’m so dedicated because I stay late, but that’s how long it takes.” Or they do a lot of extra work on the weekends, which we are all familiar with, but it’s not because they are trying to get ahead so much as they are saying, “No, this is not me going above and beyond. This is me trying to catch up before Monday comes.”

The third avenue, which has recently gotten more clinical and research attention, is people experiencing the effect of ADHD on relationships, be it committed romantic relationships, parenting, or just keeping up with friendships. We see this occurring a lot after college, where people lose touch with people because it takes more maintenance to keep up with friends, as does scheduling and coordination.

We really need to think about ADHD as a problem of self-regulation
From the diagnostic standpoint, ADHD, the name, is probably not going to change. It’s a brand. The A and the H of ADHD are really red herrings. A friend and colleague, Russell Barkley, who is probably a leading, if not the leading figure in ADHD and other matters, has a great line for it. He says, “Calling ADHD an attention problem is like calling Autism eye gaze disorder or saying, ‘Oh, their eye contact seems to be okay, so it’s not autism.’” Some people, whether diagnosed with Autism or ADHD, can perform well in some circumstances. We really need to think about ADHD as a problem of self-regulation. How efficiently do you do what you set out to do?

And without diving too deeply into that, these folks can function pretty well some of the time, but there are enough recurring areas of difficulty. These include difficulties following through, usually towards deferred goals that take sustained effort to reach. And this could be retirement funds, papers for school, organizing behavior across time towards these ends.
LR: So ADHD, whether first recognized as an adult disorder or a continuity of a child/adolescent disorder, is a life management disorder based in part on continuous and pervasive deficits in self-regulation and executive function.
RR:
we’re probably not treating the symptoms of ADHD, we’re treating the life problems associated with ADHD
Right. As psychologists, we understand that medication use is evidence-based and that it can be very helpful, like prescription eyeglasses. And whether we’re speaking of medication or eyeglasses, some people will say that’s all they need. This is just like cognitive therapy for depression. I’m sure this isn’t empirically accurate, but the rule of thirds applies. One-third of people do well with meds only, one-third with therapy only, one-third with combined. A lot of people can do fine with medications alone. But even with a positive medication response, many people will say, “Yeah, but I still procrastinate,” or “I still don’t look forward to reading Beowulf or working on my income taxes, so I still put it off, but I can really pay attention to the sports page or whatever I’m reading.” So we’re probably not treating the symptoms of ADHD, we’re treating the life problems associated with ADHD.

Psychiatric Comorbidities

LR: You say in your writing that psychiatric comorbidity is the rule rather than the exception. What type of psychiatric syndromes or symptoms have you noticed in your work with this population?

RR: Well, both from my noticing it, and also from what has been found in the literature, the top three in ascending order are anxiety, depression, and substance use or addiction problems. And with that, we can probably even bundle in dealing with technology as a distraction.

Now, comorbidities are always interesting because anything could be a comorbidity, really. It makes sense that among these top three, anxiety, which we often see even in subthreshold form, is number one. I think that in the DSM-IV, this particular subthreshold phenomenon was relegated to the “not otherwise specified” domain. Now, in the DSM-5, it’s “other specified” or “unspecified.” In adult-identified ADHD, this anxiety is related to that consistent inconsistency, that uncertainty which is often associated with underlying fear and risk.

uncertainty creates the apprehension, and creating uncertainty is exactly what ADHD does. “I know I can do it, but I don't know if I’m going to be able to make myself
Uncertainty creates the apprehension, and creating uncertainty is exactly what ADHD does. “I know I can do it, but I don't know if I’m going to be able to make myself. I did fine on the midterm exam, but am I going to be able to study and retain and test well enough on the final to get a decent grade or pass the course?” Domains of difficulty can be layered with that uncertainty.

In some ways, anxiety is adaptive because it makes somebody pay attention more and focus on it, like gasoline on fire. But it can also lead to avoidance. And then depression is a sense of loss, so that can lead to disappointment. And that can create a cycle of avoidance, and then comes the self-fulfilling prophecy of, “Oh, you see, it didn’t work out well.” Or, “I tried my therapy and it’s not working, so nothing works for me.” And then comes disengaging.
LR: Hopelessness?
RR: And there’s hopelessness. And then the substance use problem seems to be tied in with the need to self-medicate or self-soothe or, in other cases, it’s maybe related to early initiation due to poor impulse control.
LR: So when you see these comorbidities like anxiety, depression, or substance abuse, is it more helpful for a clinician to conceptualize those as sequelae, with ADHD as the foundational deficit? Or can depression or anxiety or substance abuse lead to symptoms that mimic ADHD? Seems to be a nuanced differential diagnostic issue.
RR: Right. Taking that last point first, absolutely! And even going back to the executive functioning model or that self-regulation model, which addresses the importance of organizing behavior across time towards a delayed goal. We all have executive functions. Going back to Walter Mischel’s marshmallow study, we saw kids who were sitting on their hands during the study so they could earn the second marshmallow—that’s self-regulation. At age eight, sitting on your hands is self-regulation. Just like if those kids had marshmallow issues later on in life, not bringing marshmallows into the house so they weren’t tempted to snack on them would be an example of how this self-regulatory skill followed them forward in life.

So, just like attention problems are ubiquitous in the psychiatric emotional disorders, they’re also a symptom of pretty much every one of the disorders. If you’re in the midst of a major depressive episode, your executive functioning will go down. In the midst of an anxiety disorder, executive functioning goes down. If you have a sleep disorder, executive functioning goes down. In tracking these generally episodic conditions, it becomes important to ask these clients if these executive functioning problems or ADHD predate their emergence?

asking people later on in life which came first, the symptoms of ADHD or the trauma, can be a very difficult discrimination for them to make
One of the tricky ones is when there’s an early childhood trauma. Asking people later on in life which came first, the symptoms of ADHD or the trauma, can be a very difficult discrimination for them to make. Problems with attention and dissociation can both look very ADHD-like. They can also coexist, or the persisting executive functioning problems can exist and endure outside of specific triggering situations or a year with a teacher who might have been abusive and not effective in working with that client when they were younger. Experiences that occurred outside of the triggering situation and outside of any other explanation would warrant further follow-up about the possibility of ADHD.

Then there’s a second conceptualization, where we are simply seeing true coincidental disorders. This would be a clinical scenario where the disorders don’t necessarily or typically overlap, like panic disorder and ADHD, or maybe obsessive-compulsive disorder and ADHD. Social anxiety is another one, because sometimes the ADHD difficulties are very public, like the uncertainty and fear accompanying being called on in class.
LR: When evaluating a client for anxiety, depression, or substance abuse, would a clinician be well advised to also consider some sort of ADHD questionnaire, just to get a sense of executive functioning capacity and the possibility of a more pervasive underlying ADHD?
RR:
there are some good screening scales in the public domain for assessing the components of ADHD
I can be very liberal with heaping more work on some hard-working therapists out there, but there are some good screening scales in the public domain for assessing the components of ADHD. It’s important to remember that screening scales are designed, both for psychological psychology and medical practice, to cast a little bit of a wider net, trying to reduce some false negatives and maybe tolerate some false positives. But in order to identify potential follow-up as a differential diagnosis, sure, they can be helpful.

ADHD as Executive Dysfunction

LR: Okay. Let me drop back a step, Russell, because you’ve used a couple of terms that a lot of therapists out there may be familiar with but haven’t really connected to other disorders. You say that ADHD is an executive dysfunction disorder and a deficit in self-regulation?
RR: Executive functions pretty much are self-regulation, and as an umbrella term within the neuropsychology literature, they generally cluster around one factor. How efficiently do you do what you set out to do? And a lot of this comes right from some of the research of Russ Barkley, Martha Denckla, Tom Brown. There are several executive functioning scales out there, and they generally cluster around goal-focused behavior, referring to goals that we want—we have skin in the game.

Executive functions include task initiation, time management, organization, problem solving, motivation, impulse control, and emotional regulation. We now know that difficulty with emotional regulation within the domain of executive functions is a core feature of ADHD, even if it’s not in the DSM. And it’s not necessarily a mood or anxiety disorder itself. It’s managing the same frustrations and stressors in day-to-day life that we all face, but they just tend to be more disruptive and distracting for individuals with ADHD. And they have a harder time rebounding from them.

I use the example of taking your car in for an oil change, finding out that you need a whole new transmission, and having to decide whether or not to get a new car. Yeah, that’s going to be a little bit distracting, but most people can say, “You know what? When I get home, I’ll talk it over with my partner, and we’ll decide.” While somebody with ADHD may be more prone to say, “I have to look up things now and figure this out now and skip class or lose half a day at work.”
LR: Along these lines of executive dysfunction, which is associated with the frontal lobe, what are the implications of calling ADHD a neurodevelopmental disorder?
RR: I think it draws on evidence, on one of the more consistent findings, that within that particular category, there is a high genetic loading for ADHD. Whether or not genetics are destiny, the unfolding of that predisposition has a lot to do with environmental influences.

there is a high heritability rate in ADHD, which is tied with several interdigitating brain networks, particularly the prefrontal cortex, where the executive functions are housed
We also know there is a high heritability rate in ADHD, which is tied with several interdigitating brain networks, particularly the prefrontal cortex, where the executive functions are housed. It’s not a matter of justifying it one way, as genetic or environmental. I think where we are going with this is that there is going to be a predisposition, and these disorders that emerge in childhood might require some form of lifetime management. This would be similar to the case of diabetes in the medical model, which requires ongoing insulin or paying attention to one’s diet.

We all do that to some degree in the event of more chronic or lifelong conditions, but with ADHD, there might be more specific domains, a little different for each person, that require ongoing, intentional management. Another term in the literature related to this discussion is that ADHD is a quantitative difference, not a qualitative difference, particularly with regard to executive functions. The difference with somebody who, for lack of a better phrase, has intact executive functions is that they have a relatively consistent baseline, while that baseline for someone with ADHD is more variable.

'Well, if you’ve seen one person with ADHD, you’ve seen one person with ADHD.'

It’s almost like the baseline for the ADHD client is a moving target, that consistent inconsistency. And there can be different domains of the executive functions, each of which has its own developmental timing and unfolding. In this sense, different people can have different rabbit holes that can pull them down. One of the lines in my field is, “Well, if you’ve seen one person with ADHD, you’ve seen one person with ADHD.”

Culture and Society

LR: Contemporary clinical practice revolves around an increasingly diverse client base. Does ADHD target any one culture, SES, or race more than it does others?
RR: From the available evidence, it seems like ADHD is equal opportunity. Wherever there are human brains, the risk factor for ADHD is probably around 1 to 3%. Now, what we will see is in terms of identifying ADHD and seeking help specifically for it, that can be where we will hear people of a certain age say, “I grew up in the ‘70s or ‘80s. We didn’t have ADHD back then.” Actually, we did, but it probably just wasn’t as recognized. Or somebody will come from a different country, culture, or family system where they say that mental health issues were not first on people’s minds in terms of looking at what could be helpful.

I think there was an international study conducted around 2001 with college students. They might have found that there were zero Italian women with ADHD, but that was probably more of a cultural difference at that time. They couldn’t determine the differences in prevalence were culturally bound or related to gender. So, I think it would be safe to say that wherever there’s a brain, or a population of people with brains, there’s probably roughly the same prevalence of ADHD. But then there is a difference in rates of help-seeking behavior.
LR: Before we shift into some questions about treatment, Maggie Jackson’s book, Distracted, came to mind. Is the prevalence of ADHD somehow related to the complex, increasingly technology-dependent, fast-moving pace of our society? Or has it always been there, just waiting to come out, as would a previously latent viral threat?
RR:
even though ADHD is not environmentally caused, it is environmentally bound
You know what? It has always been there, because we see early accounts in the literature going back to the early 1700s. Even William James talked about attention and what grabs it. Now that said, even though ADHD is not environmentally caused, it is environmentally bound.

People say, “What about the anxieties and uncertainties in hunter gatherer or farming societies,” like forgetting to close a fence or things like that. When you start looking, there are different manifestations of it. But I would say from a diagnostic standpoint, and in the past 18 months or so of COVID reactions and working from home, there may be more people who are struggling with executive functions now than in the past. And where we rely on environmental scaffolding, like something as simple as going to the office, we can otherwise spend all day not working. But there’s limitations on what we’re going to do. Actually, there’s a term for that. It’s called presenteeism.
LR: Presenteeism?
RR: You’re at work but are nonproductive. This kind of phenomenon might be part of a thorough developmental review of different levels of academic achievement. Whether somebody was valedictorian of their high school class or, on the other hand, struggled with low or mediocre grades, people might have said, “You’re not fulfilling your potential.” You might even hear the class valedictorian say, “Well, my parents had to sit with me every night, even through high school.” Or somebody might have had mediocre grades whose parents said, “You’re not fulfilling your potential,” and they responded with, “No, I can do it. I choose not to. And I can pull it together, and I know what I am doing. And I do enough to stay on my sports team.”

we’re probably going to see some research on how this access to technology affects brain functioning for kids compared with other people
Bringing this back to issues like managing technology and whatnot, you’re right. The advent of digital technology is a unique watershed event in human history, this jump—I mean, humans have always had tools, but nothing like this. And so, that is part of the assessment. And even developmentally, children now have access to smartphones and tablets early on. And I think we’re probably going to see some research on how this access to technology affects brain functioning for kids compared with other people. Going back to self-regulation, there can be a lot of distractions, so it becomes important to ask about screen time and how much they are actually getting done. On the positive side, technology can help us to be more efficient and get more done in less time.

And then, somebody might say, “Yeah, I binge watched the show, I did all this, but when I was at work, I also got all my work done. And I’m on top of things. I clean up the kitchen when I say I’m going to.” It comes down to looking at that executive function. Someone might be struggling, and it could be ADHD that pre-dated COVID. And it’s just that the pandemic kicked it over in terms of their holding it together. But even in that case, they might say things like, “You know what? It was hard enough before. I was staying at work late and all these things. And now that I’m at home and have to make sure my kids are doing classes and things like that, that was the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back.”

Shifting Focus to Treatment

LR: Russell, I’d like to shift gears a bit and chat about treatment by asking, what is it about CBT that lends itself so well to the treatment of ADHD in adulthood?

RR:
the initial and immediate appeal of CBT was its structured orientation and focus on performance and implementation outside of the session
I think the initial and immediate appeal of CBT was its structured orientation and focus on performance and implementation outside of the session. And not that other good therapies don’t do this, but that initial appeal came from the behavioral side and then along the way, seeing the role that cognitions play. And then we found that the emotional part, anxiety or discomfort, for example, were related to that “ugh” feeling. It’s like, “Ugh, I don’t feel like doing the lawn right now.”

It became important to help these clients to put words on the emotion. The cognitive piece plays a role in follow-through and emotional management. So, I think it started with the structure and the focus on behavioral follow through, setting up the environment differently, and then it became more nuanced over the past couple decades, including expanding into focusing on strengths and making the most of those as well.
LR: In what way does CBT specifically address the cognitive and emotional components of ADHD, including cognitive schema?
RR:
From the behavioral side, CBT’s value comes in helping these clients with engagement versus avoidance, because avoidance is probably the number one problem with adult ADHD
From the behavioral side, CBT’s value comes in helping these clients with engagement versus avoidance, because avoidance is probably the number one problem with adult ADHD. It’s not from a lack of caring, but instead they might say things like, “These things are difficult. It’s easy not to do them.” Their challenges can come from feeling overwhelmed or mismanaging time. There are a lot of ways that we don’t budget ourselves and end up spreading ourselves out.

From the emotional side, there is no single theme, but I think the main emotional task is avoidance and managing discomfort. The “ugh” feeling. Addressing the discomfort is very similar to progressive exposure for anxiety. We ask them, “How can you handle the discomfort by changing your relationship with it?” And we remind them that the discomfort doesn’t have to stop them and that they can then follow through with a plan for engagement and, by engaging, have the discomfort diminish. This is the proverbial, “Once I get started, it’s not as bad.” And then, hopefully, they can access their skills.

It’s not that they can simply think themselves into it. So much of it is about things we want to do and achieve, even if it’s stuff like homework that we just want to get out of the way so we don’t have to think about it anymore. But it can also be things that we want to do, like following through on an exercise plan or being able to play a sport.

it is important to remind them that even if ADHD is not their fault, it is their responsibility
If ADHD gets in the way of these goals, it may lead to disappointments and frustrations, and those then get turned back on the self in the form of negative self-talk and low self-esteem. One of the early popular books on adult ADHD was called You Mean I’m Not Stupid, Lazy, or Crazy? I think that’s very often the attribution that people have. While it is important to help these people with this negative attribution, it is important to remind them that even if ADHD is not their fault, it is their responsibility.

So we look towards coping strategies for ADHD that include reframing the mindset. That involves an understanding of ADHD, why things were difficult, and why some of the setbacks happened, and trying to set up systems and expectations moving ahead so that people feel more efficacious. I use that term decidedly because within cognitive therapy, different disorders have different themes. In depression, the cognitive theme centers around loss—loss of esteem, loss of opportunity. With anxiety, it’s dealing with uncertainty and the threat or risk that comes from that.

I landed on the recently-deceased Albert Bandura’s notion of self efficacy, which initially seemed too general. But in going through some of his writings, I came across the concept of “self-regulatory efficacy,” which is about one’s ability to stick through with all the dirty work that you have to do for those outcomes. I’ve got to sit down, I’ve got to study. I’ve got to write the paper. I’ve got to do something I don’t feel like, and that sort of gets to that emotional “ugh” feeling. It was virtually a rewording of the executive functions, without ever using that word.

And my sense of Bandura’s writings was that this capacity is assumed to be intact for most people. If somebody’s depressed and they have problems with efficacy, it’s more at the depression level. But I saw that as more of a fundamental feature for folks with ADHD. They know at some level that “I know I can do it, but I’m not sure I can get myself to do it when I have to do it.” And I think that’s what goes into the thoughts of procrastination: “I’ll do it later, and hopefully, at that time, then I’ll be ready to do it.” Interestingly, some of my colleagues have developed an ADHD cognition scale that actually includes distorted positive thoughts which lead to avoidance.
LR: Distorted positive thoughts?!
RR: They are permission-giving beliefs. A non-ADHD example is, “You know what? I’m going to have a second scoop of ice cream, and I’ll work out twice as hard tomorrow.” And if they do it, that’s fine. But these distorted permission-giving beliefs are things like, “I know this usually sucks me in, but I’ll just do it for a minute. Being impulsive is a big part of who I am. I work best waiting until the last minute.” Or these self-justifications for not now, later. And I think it is coming from that point of, “All right, I’m not feeling up to this now, but maybe I will be later.” But later then becomes now. What did George Carlin say, “‘Now’ is the only word in the English dictionary that changes definition every time it’s used?” But there’s always that “I’ll do it a little later, a little later, a little later” that then comes back to bite them.

Intention to Action

LR: Is this why you say that one of the core elements of CBT treatment with ADHD adults is converting attention into action?
RR:
we CBT psychologists are pretty good at helping people understand how they don’t do things
People say, “I know what I need to do, but I just don’t do it.” And there’s no trade secret about the strategies. I mean, it’s useful having different reframes or different ways to approach it, but we generally know what we need to do. And so, people say, “I know exactly what I need to do. If I could do all these things, I wouldn’t need you, psychologist. So what good is talking with you going to do about it?” And my answer to that is that we CBT psychologists are pretty good at helping people understand how they don’t do things.

Almost like a reverse engineering of the executive function. If we’re talking about procrastination, I’ll tell my clients, “You know what? You really need to start earlier.” Please, sue me for malpractice. But if we look at situations, and this is cognitive behavioral therapy in general, “Let’s reverse engineer it to understand how you procrastinated, because it could be a planning issue.”

If they say, “All right, I knew I had to do it, but I never made an appointment or told myself, ‘I really should do this Saturday at 10:00,’” in this instance, it could be organization. If they say, “I had the plan, but I lost it or didn’t check it,” it could be that they had the plan but didn’t feel up to it at the time and thought themselves out of executing it. The “ugh” feeling. Or they may say, “I just didn’t feel right, it was too uncomfortable or overwhelming,” or “I saw something else that needed to be done. Tell you what, let me clean up the kitchen, then I’ll be in the mood to work on taxes.” In actuality, they probably weren’t. If they were, that’s great.

I’m a big believer in the idea that there are multiple ways to do things well, which is what I mean by helping these clients to convert intention into action
I’m a big believer in the idea that there are multiple ways to do things well, which is what I mean by helping these clients to convert intention into action, by following our grandmothers’ rule of breaking it down into manageable tasks. But it is also sitting with somebody and being able to work through it. Like, how do I do that with this task to get to the point that they can say, “I can get started with that. This is manageable. It’s some sort of bounded task. I can see the end point and then I can work from there, reach the next end point, and then do it again and again.”
LR: Is this self-regulatory efficacy or lack of self-regulatory efficacy what you might consider a core schema underlying ADHD? And how do you address such an embedded belief system that is so potentially debilitating?
RR:

Core ADHD Schema

Right—that is my clinically informed hypothesis. And with that theme, within cognitive behavioral therapy, there’s the automatic thought, so we might ask the client, “What thought went through your mind at 10:00 on Saturday that led you to go mow the lawn rather than work on homework, or whatever it may be?” That’s like Freud’s notion of the preconscious, which is that there is a flow of thoughts or self-talk that we have going through our head. And if we pay attention to it—and that was one of Aaron Beck’s revolutionary ideas—then people can catch themselves thinking in this way and change it. You know, sort of promoting efficacy.

As the field of cognitive therapy for depression went forward and we saw that some people did really well, while others who didn’t had these core beliefs, it became clear that these nonconscious beliefs were probably being encoded emotionally. We could help people to become more aware of this process and catch themselves. This might sound something like, “You know what? If I feel okay, if it feels good, I can do it. Or if it’s interesting, I can do it.” This is the conditional rule. Or another version of that rule might be, “But if it doesn’t feel good, it must be bad, or I don’t do this.”

What we’re really doing is putting words on emotions. At the level of automatic thought, it becomes more about semantics. If we say the person has self-distrust thoughts, then it is a more localized process, as opposed to the embedded schema or global belief system around the notion of self-mistrust, which is more pervasive. They are related to each other.

in two studies of schema in adult ADHD, failure was the number one schema endorsed in both
In the case of ADHD, some people may say, “Hey, I know I’m good. I know I can do it, but it’s just, I really struggle in this specific domain at work.” Here, it’s relatively circumscribed, while for others, it extends beyond the workplace and is more pervasive. These people might believe, “I’m a failure. I’m no good.” Actually, in two studies of schema in adult ADHD, failure was the number one schema endorsed in both.

This makes sense, tying in with the efficacy. All the have-tos and many of the want-tos in adult life feel like, “I haven’t achieved as I ‘should.’” But when dealing with schema, we’re recognizing them—“All right, let’s put words on the old belief or the old frame.” And very often, it could be a failure belief of, “I haven’t done, and I can’t do, what I need to do, and nothing is ever going to work out.” That may be so, but it’s only one view.

Is there evidence to the contrary? And even if you say, “Well, no, I dropped out of school, did whatever”—all right, well, what do you want to do now? With getting treatments, medications, whatever it is for ADHD, what would you like to re-approach? And is there a different view you can have that’s like, “Okay, this has been difficult for me before, but I can at least give it a try and maybe put forth a better effort now that I have these supports and see what happens.” There may not be any guarantees, but it’s worth the try.

The Power of Framing

RR: There is support for this thinking from research on the power of framing. Just having a counterpoint of, “Is there something else I’m working towards or a different way of looking at this?” Even if we don’t buy it yet. It can feel like being an actor learning lines when the other ones had a head start. But at least now you doubled your options. There’s the, if you will, the failure outcome of this. But let’s come with at least, at the very least, the possibility view and consider how to manifest that. And then, nothing convinces like experience. Emotional, cognitive, behavioral—and each of them can change the other two.
LR: I can imagine, then, that a clinician can also draw on some of the techniques of Solution Focused Brief Therapy and Narrative Therapy to help a person draw out success experiences that they’ve had as a foundation for building future successes. How did you get yourself to class? How did you get that work done?
RR:
that’s the insidious thing about ADHD. It can overgeneralize and contaminate everything
Robert Brooks and Sam Goldstein talk about islands of competence. Sometimes, that’s the insidious thing about ADHD. It can overgeneralize and contaminate everything. It might be helpful to ask somebody who is really good at getting to the gym or really good at a sport, “How do you practice all the time?” or “How do you get yourself at the gym?” Or you might point out to them, “There’s got to be plenty of days you don’t feel like doing it. Is there any way you can translate that into getting started on whatever chore it is or homework? Just as an analogy, just have that mode that you go to.” And they may respond with, “All right, here’s something I can try, and this can be like the first 10 minutes on the treadmill. Where it’s like, okay, it’s not my workout yet, but I need to break a sweat. So, I can give myself 10 minutes to break a sweat on homework or something like that.” I think the restorying that happens with narrative therapy is relevant here.

As an aside, I did my doctoral dissertation on personal narratives, so that’s near and dear to my heart. The thing about editing a story in the here-and-now is equivalent to saying, “Okay, this is sort of like there’s been a plot change, with the diagnosis of ADHD. What do I want to do with my character now?” It can be very useful to build on positives and things that might have gotten short shrift, either projects or wishes, or passions abandoned prematurely at the first sign of trouble, before the knowledge of ADHD was there. Or maybe it’s about things that somebody previously said “I can’t do.” And I might offer something like, “You know what? I can’t guarantee anything. That might be true, but is that something you’re willing to give a chance or give a try? And what does that look like, and how can you do it differently now?”
LR: As we wind down, Russ, I wonder if some of the symptomatology—the behavioral, emotional, and cognitive patterns that you described in folks with ADHD—also complicate treatment by leading to treatment resistance or avoidance or not following through outside of session?
RR:
therapeutic alliance plays a big part, because the therapist who is familiar with ADHD can validate the difficulties and setbacks, but also the successes
I think this is why we try to set up early success experiences, which also comes from the change literature and specifically the stages of change model. It’s sort of like building up momentum or getting a running start. If somebody has some big issues, like a performance improvement plan at work or getting ready for a final exam, there may be smaller examples from their day-to-day lives, like unloading a dishwasher or submitting their room application for next semester, that also have to be done. In these instances, my line for that is, “We procrastinate on the small stuff the same way we do the big stuff.” So it’s not like we have to go through every single thing, like, “Okay, here’s how you procrastinate on income taxes. Let’s talk about how you procrastinate on your local taxes.” No, we can take some of those elements and then adapt them, they can generalize to other things. And that’s similar to what we were talking about before, the solution focused, “All right, what can you use here over there for help?” So we try to have some success experiences. I think this is where the therapeutic alliance plays a big part, because the therapist who is familiar with ADHD can validate the difficulties and setbacks, but also the successes.

And it’s important that the clinician focus on normalizing by saying, for instance, “You know what? As we move ahead, there will be areas of difficulty. But that’s the name of the game.” So two things are at play which go back to the cognitions. People with ADHD tend to compare themselves unfavorably to others, thinking that everybody else has it so much easier. It becomes therapeutically important to validate that taxes and homework, especially writing assignments, can be very challenging.
LR: For everybody.
RR: Actually, writing assignments among college students, ADHD or not, are the number one procrastination target. People procrastinate on writing assignments because writing is hard. And even that reframe of, “Okay, this is hard for everybody” can be empowering, because we know that misery loves company, and we can point out that it’s a matter of degree. ADHD makes it harder, but can we get in there and then, you know, tolerate the discomfort that may be associated with that?

most people just want a clearer, more consistent sense of cause and effect. 'If I put in the effort and the time, then I’ll be able…'
And there can be this overgeneralization. “If I can’t do this, then there are other things I can’t do.” We want to ask, ”Let’s find out what you can do. And can you do this better? And it still may be difficult.” Most often, people say, “If I can just get the assignment done, if I get a B, I’ll take it.” And it gets back to that notion of efficacy, in that most people just want a clearer, more consistent sense of cause and effect. “If I put in the effort and the time, then I’ll be able…” to submit the homework, finish my classes by the end of the semester, whatever it is. It may not be “I have to be the CEO of some Fortune 500 company.”

But it’s just attending to the more immediate cause-effect relationships, like, “Okay, I did the work and I got the outcome, and now it’s gone. I did it. Now I don’t have to worry about it anymore.” And that’s just a nice starting foundation for people finding out that they can do the things that they want to do, and then maybe even start to expand beyond that more.

We can almost look at this process through a medical lens. There’s “rehabilitation,” and that is getting back to a baseline, such as rehabilitating a knee. Then there is “habilitation,” which is making the most of it with whatever resources we have. Here, someone might say, “I don’t have dyslexia or anything, but I’m just a slow reader. I have to read things a couple times.” Whatever it may be. It’s like, okay, how are you going to work with that?

So there are ways that you can play to their strengths and things like that. And my own cutesy line is “abilitation.” Like, after you take care of managing the problems with ADHD, are there some things, maybe some newfound directions that you can go in?

It’s like, “Hey, maybe I can try this.” It could be going back to school. It could be trying a new endeavor. It could be somebody saying, “No, I don’t want to go back to school and read textbooks. But if I read a biography of my favorite athlete, maybe I can get back to pleasure reading.” Whatever, however people define it. And that’s how newfound avenues get unlocked.
LR: I think that’s a good note to stop on. I want to thank you so much, Russell, for sharing your wisdom and your experience with our readers who may be struggling to succeed with their adult ADHD clients.
RR: Sure thing. You’re welcome.

Jude Austin on Wisdom for Counseling Students and Educators

Into the Wilderness

Lawrence Rubin: Why did you entitle your latest book “Surviving and Thriving in Your Counseling Program?” It sounds like you’re sending them out into the wilderness with a backpack and a knife and saying, “Good luck. Let me know how you’re doing in three years.”
Jude Austin: When my brother Julius, who is also my writing partner, and I were thinking about the title for this book, that’s the image we had in our minds. You get equipped in graduate school with these different tools, skills, and attitudes and then go off and get your Ph.D., and you think you’re prepared.

But when you’re sitting in that first session unsupervised, you just feel this sense of, “I need an adult and a Swiss Army knife of some type.” So, that’s kind of what we wanted this book to be—a Swiss Army knife for counseling students and counselor educators who were reading it and feeling out of touch with their students like, “Hey, this is what they’re going through!" So yeah, we wanted it to come across as if this was your guide to surviving but also thriving in your counseling program.
LR: Sort of a field guide to counselor educators and counseling students and an army knife with different utilities. Can graduate counseling programs ever adequately prepare students for what’s to come?
JA:  
when you’re sitting in that first session unsupervised, you just feel this sense of, “I need an adult
That’s the million-dollar question. It depends on the type of program—and there are different types. You have programs that train clinicians, and then you have programs that train people who become clinicians. The counseling program that I teach in at the University of Mary Hardin Baylor focuses on the person of the therapist.

When beginning therapists (interns) are out there in the clinical wilderness, and all their practiced techniques fail, we want them to fall back on themselves as the tool. If a counseling program focuses on developing the person, their attitudes, awareness, and then helps them to develop some skills along the way, then I think that person has something solid to fall back on.
LR: What happens when you have a counselor educator who understands the importance of building self, self-esteem, and relational, not just technical, skills, paired with a student who thinks that they’re the finished product? Or perhaps an older student whose cup is already too full or a younger one who hasn’t yet been put in a position where they’ve been tested either interpersonally or emotionally?
JA: I struggle with that sometimes. We get students who come in with already-filled cups because they’ve had a successful career or currently have many competing obligations including family. They may feel like, “I know this. All I really need is for you to give me that paper at the end of this, and I’ll be fine.

I see that as an invitation to build a relationship with that student so that we can model the relationship we want them to have with clients
I see that as an invitation to build a relationship with that student so that we can model the relationship we want them to have with clients. I don’t see that confidence or arrogance as a threat, and I don’t want to humble them. I feel like that’s what a lot of counselor educators tend to do anyway; something like “We’ve got to do something that will break them down.”
LR: Drop them to their knees.
JA: Yeah, drop them to their knees! I feel like a better approach—or at least one that’s helpful for me, is to help that student understand what they do know and what they don’t know. It’s not about bringing them down to where they can sit humbly with a client. It’s about saying, “Okay, what do you have that works for you? And what do you have that doesn’t work? And how can we work around that and use it to build a better counselor?”

Getting What They Need

LR: Have you encountered such students or those who are clearly trying to work through their own issues either early on in training or while they are actually providing therapy?
JA: That’s OK, because it gives us an opportunity to help the student learn boundaries, because counseling is like that. I mean we get the clients we need, and so this isn’t going to be the first time they’re going through these kinds of issues and those issues come up. So, our job, or my job as the counselor educator, is to help that student understand that boundary.

That counseling student is actually in a good position to use the issues that they have experienced or are currently experiencing to build a better relationship with a client. And when the student is at that boundary and it is hindering the therapeutic relationship, the teaching moment is right there in front of them, as is the teaching tool for their supervisor. What you don’t want to do is set the stage where a student feels like, “I’ve got to get my shit together, or I can’t do this.” That’s just not sustainable.
LR: I like the idea that we help students understand that sometimes they get the clients they need. Try as I might to selectively place interns in facilities where they’re not going to be thrown to the lions, they invariably end up not only with clients they need but also with those who are very complex and well-beyond their skill and experience levels.
JA:
what you don’t want to do is set the stage where a student feels like, “I’ve got to get my shit together, or I can’t do this”
As far as I do it in supervision, it’s really just helping them navigate those multiple and often complex relationships. I try to do my best to encourage students to chew on things before they swallow it. We start them in practicum at our free, university-based community clinic before sending them on to internship at an outside site.

During internship, we tell them something like, “Hey, you’re going to be hearing some stuff and be asked to do some things at the site that may run counter to what we said or what we’ve trained you to do. And so, you’re out there in the world.” And so, they begin to learn, “How do I integrate some of the things I learned in school with what I’ll learn here and not allow it to negatively impact my development as a counselor?” I think the key is helping students recognize and take ownership over their own development, so they can’t be manipulated or pushed or pulled when a supervisor asks them to do something different from what they have been taught or experienced while in school.
I’ve seen many a student who goes off into a site with a supervisor who is overwhelmed or unprepared or not trained to be a supervisor because they are first and foremost a clinician. And so, students lose confidence and get set back. We as clinical educators have to help them take ownership over and protect their own personal and professional development.
LR: And we have to protect students from supervisors who might be overwhelmed, overwhelming, and/or incompetent.
JA:
we as clinical educators have to help them take ownership over and protect their own personal and professional development
Up to a point, I don’t want to rob them of the learning experience of being next to somebody who may be incompetent, unavailable, unhealthy, or who may be just not be a good role model. I want them to learn that. It’s kind of like when my son is climbing up stairs for the first time, I don’t want to be next to him and holding his hand. I want him to struggle and wait for him to ask for help.

Similarly, it’s about teaching that student when they need to come and tell me that something is beyond their capabilities, especially when they’re in internship. Because when they’re in internship, we need to make sure that they know how to strike that balance between knowing when it is necessary to ask for help and when it is not. Otherwise, they won’t build strong roots.
LR: They have to have their own immune system.
JA: Yeah, exactly.
LR: So, being a clinical educator/supervisor requires that we also strike a balance; between protecting and…
JA: …letting them struggle.
LR: Just like the APA Code of Ethics says…promoting autonomy while also making sure that they’re not a danger to themselves or others.
JA: I’ve had many supervision sessions where we’re just like, “This sucks.” You also have to build a relationship with their site supervisor. Sort of like co-parenting.

Rising or Falling

LR: If you were called on by the ACA to write a formula for predicting failure of a graduate counseling student, what would go into that equation?
JA: I had two thoughts but will share my second one first, which is about counselor educators. I’m a big believer that oftentimes our limitations as counselor educators can then become our student’s limitations. And so, if a student is failing—or failing to thrive—for some reason, then I merely have to look inward and be congruent and be healthy about the responsibility I take in that student’s failure and think, “Wow, is this a support issue? Maybe I didn’t prepare them enough. Maybe we didn’t have a big enough informed consent around what this would mean for them,” right?
LR: So, the second part of your answer, which comes first, is that if a student is on a track to fail or is failing to thrive, then it is the counselor educator’s job to look within to ask, as a parent might, “How have I failed to support this student’s thriving?”
JA:
our limitations as counselor educators can then become our student’s limitations
Yes. What are my limitations here?
LR: What’s the other part of your answer?
JA: I think sometimes they can’t be helped. And sometimes students come in not expecting how challenging the program is, not giving the challenge of this enough respect. If I were to create a formula for predicting a counseling student’s failure, I would probably say it has something to do with lack of awareness or acknowledgement of how challenging this program is, plus maybe a lack of support. They know it’s going to be hard, because it’s graduate school. But I don’t think they know how hard graduate counseling is, graduate psychology is. It asks a bunch of questions of you that, if you aren’t prepared to answer, it can have a domino effect in your relationships and your mental health and your ability to process things.
LR: Conversely, what do you think are some of the characteristics of the counseling graduate student who will thrive not only in graduate school but in their career, in their personhood, in their lives?
JA: The #1 characteristic for me is humility.
LR: Yeah, amen.
JA: And not just humility in the sense of self-deprecation. I mean this humbleness around the idea that maybe their reality isn’t the correct reality, and their willingness to allow their client’s reality to be correct for that client. It’s about cultural humility, to be able to come in and say, “Oh, man. There are some things that I don’t know. There are some things that I don’t perceive about the world like everyone else does, but I’m willing to learn.”

it’s not like people who are wounded or hurting can’t do this work. It’s just they have to work on the stuff that they need to work on
I think that’s the humility that I’m talking about, to be able to say, “Okay. Here’s my stuff. I’m going to work on my stuff.” And I think that’s the clear thing. It’s not like people who are wounded or hurting can’t do this work. It’s just they have to work on the stuff that they need to work on. And when students are aware of that and they’re doing that parallel kind of process, then it’s a beautiful thing. I feel like that’s when students can be successful.

So humility, for me, is the thing that we’re trying to foster in counseling students. And to be honest with you, a lot of the students that we accept are already good at this. We just give them skills and tools in the hopes that when they get to internship, they’ll remember who they were when they first started the program. And then when they remember that person, they can be that person with some skills and attitudes and knowledge. And so, if you can go through that process humbly, I feel like you can stay grounded and remember who you are. That’s kind of my perspective.
LR: So, it’s the counselor educator’s job to teach counseling students to hold onto who they are and maybe shave off or trim those parts of themselves that are going to get in the way, so they can become more psychologically lean but hopefully learn to become the person who is a counselor, not a counselor who is not sure who they are as a person.
JA: Yeah. Now, that sounds easier said than done. And I think that also means that as counselor educators, we have to do that too. We have to model that for students. We have to let them into our experience and our journey of becoming, step-by-step, more and more ourselves in supervision, in class. Let them into that process and show appreciation. One of the things that I say after each class is, “Thank you for letting me be myself.” And I invite students to do the same. When I mess up, when I forget my keys and I have to walk back to my car or when it’s just like it’s not a good lecture, owning that and showing them that this is what we want you to do in session.

Healer, Heal Thyself

LR: In the context of this piece of the conversation, what are your thoughts about counseling as a mandatory part of counseling training?
JA: You know, it’s strongly suggested in our program, strongly suggested. I feel like we build a culture of support in the sense that we have alumni who are now working in the field who kind of understand a little bit of what students are going through. And so we try our best to refer them out to clinicians in the area that can help. But mandatory? If I could make it mandatory, I think I would be at least a couple sessions. Just so you can see how it feels.

But making it mandatory? I feel it could be detrimental for students who aren’t ready to process their stuff. I mean if they’re not ready, it doesn’t mean that they can’t be good counselors, but here’s the thing. If you’re not working on your stuff, if you don’t go to counseling, you may become a really good technician but not a clinician. You can go and do skills, you can go and do theories, you can go in and do techniques and activities. But can you really connect with somebody? Can you have a therapeutic presence that allows that client to feel pulled toward you and can you evoke your client’s awareness? I don’t know if you can do that without working.

one of the things that I say after each class is, “Thank you for letting me be myself.” And I invite students to do the same
Yeah, it’s a dilemma. In a lot of ways, it’s safer to do rather than be, right? How can you cultivate a therapeutic environment where you feel safe enough to be? Most counseling students are going to graduate and feel like, “I know some stuff now.” But I think what makes our program special is that we really focus on training students to be, but not every student is ready for that, and that, too, is a dilemma. I notice it sometimes in clients with whom I am trying to connect on a deeper level, and they don’t want it.

They want… “Give me the coping skills. I don’t want to talk about…” And so, you have to meet that client where they are. And it’s the same thing with students and the same thing with the field, like allowing students to hear, “Hey. This is where the field is. This is what we’re trying to get you to do. We’re trying to find a balance between doing and being.”
LR: So if a student is not ready for internship for emotional, psychological reasons, what do they do instead? How do you work with a student who just is not ready for internship by all your standards but is insistent or demanding or even litigious about it?
JA: We go through this a lot. We have a couple of different options. This is not like a plug for our program, because I think most programs have this. By the time they get to internship, we want them to have a really good idea about how we feel about their potential to succeed or fail. We don’t want it to be a surprise. And so, by the time they get to internship, we’ve had that conversation where it’s like, “Hey. There’s a lot of things that you… There’s a lot of hang-ups. There’s a lot of things that could limit your success there. If you want to do it, we can’t stop you, but it may behoove you to take some time and then come back and start internship.” And if students are like, “No. I’m good. I want to do internship,” then we help them find an internship and a supervisor that could support that student’s limitations.

So, sometimes we’ll have students who are veterans, and maybe they experienced a TBI and they struggle with death work. And they acknowledge it, they know it. And so, we work with them to say, “Okay. What kind of work can you do? Where can you serve your community?" And so we try to guide them into the place where they could be most successful. But sometimes, rarely perhaps, I have students who are not ready to integrate it, and we just have to kind of let them survive… or not, you know? And when they don’t, we’re there to support them.

The Right to Fail

LR: I had a supervisor once, a very wise older woman who loved the metaphor of a safari guide. Her idea was that “As we walk through the terrain, I’ll point out the quicksand. I’ll point out the thickets and the brambles. If you choose to go into the quicksand, I’ll be waiting on the edge if I can help you.”
JA: Absolutely. And students have a right to fail. They very much have a right. And I think that’s the thing that we try to get students to understand. It’s like they’re not paying for this degree, they’re paying for an opportunity to get a degree. And if they destroy that opportunity because they go into an internship site when they’re not prepared to do so, there’s nothing that we can do about it. Those internship sites can hire you and fire you. If you get fired, there’s consequences. We’re very open about that.
LR: Do you ever experience transference/countertransference relationships with your students?
JA: I think I can answer this question in a way that’s most favorable for me [smiling]. I just genuinely care about the students and their success. When we accept a student into our program, when I’m working with a student, I see the impact they can have in their community, the ripple effect that they can have. And all I want for them is to be successful.

watching them struggle is the hardest part
And so it’s triggering because it’s like watching someone doing something that is going to hurt them but allowing them to get hurt so they learn the lesson. I think that’s the hardest part about being a counselor educator. I think that’s the countertransference, especially because I’m a relatively new dad of a two-year-old and a four-month-old. It’s like that same process of watching them go through it and identifying with that struggle.

So you just have this sense of ownership over that person’s development. And then when they get to internship, you’re letting it go and that ownership transitions to someone else—their site supervisor. And so, watching them struggle is the hardest part. And we go through that every year, because there isn’t an internship cohort that doesn’t have one or two students who is realizing at that moment like, “Oh, crap,” as they fall behind. It’s brutal because they have to watch their cohort members move forward.
LR: You clearly have a heart for your students and want them to succeed, but I want to push you on this one. What about those counseling students that you don’t like? You know, the ones that burrow under your skin or those that you simply don’t care about or like?
JA: I just try to put obstacles in their way, which means that I have to have that conversation that I don’t want to have but I know I need to have with that student earlier than other students. Like with that student that is burrowing under your skin, I very much experience a parallel process where I’m saying, “If this person is affecting me this way, they’re probably going to affect clients this way as well.”

that’s what I mean by obstacles, like slowing down their process so that they can gain awareness of how they affect other people
And so, before they even get to apply techniques, which is the second semester where they first learn how to do mock sessions, we need to have a conversation. We need to have that talk like, “Hey, you know that thing that you do in class? That’s annoying, man.” And what I try to do is say, “Whenever you…” Like if a student has a loud laugh, that’s saying like, “Pay attention to me,” right? What I try to get them to do is, “When you laugh, pay attention to everyone else’s reaction. Pay attention. Feel how you affect other people.” That’s what I mean by obstacles, like slowing down their process so that they can gain awareness of how they affect other people. Because if they’re affecting me, they’re going to affect other people.
LR: So, what you’re trying to do is not simply model empathy or pray to God that they sort it out through osmosis or some other way. Sometimes, you have to really just actively teach them what it means to be empathetic because in therapy, the audience is watching. The audience is listening
JA: Worst-case scenario, you’re doing it live in class and the student does something and you have to say, “Hey, pay attention to how everyone is feeling around you. Would anybody like to share how this person is affecting you right now?" And then sometimes I may say something like, “This is how I’m experiencing you right now. You don’t have to respond to it. This is just how I’m experiencing it. Do you want to be experienced in that way? Is that what you’re trying to get me to experience you?" And I think that’s kind of the learning that we need them to get.
LR: So, counselor educators need to manage their triggers so they can be most present for their counseling students, just as we ask counseling students to have those qualities with their clients.
JA: Exactly.

Straddling Two Worlds

LR: How do you balance on that tightrope separating the supervisory and therapeutic aspects of your role as a counselor educator?
JA: I straddle that line as carefully as possible, because that’s probably one of the most unexpected challenges my doctoral program prepared me for. And they can’t really prepare you for that. So, the way that I keep a boundary around it is that when I’m with a student, I’m always thinking about learning opportunities. I’m always thinking about teachable moments. And so, there’s times when I go there with a student, especially when we’re processing deep stuff. But there is a stopping point when it gets to, “Okay. We’ve got to stop because I feel like this is what you need to process in therapy. This is what’s affecting the client, that you need to process that in therapy.”

I’m always thinking about teachable moments
But when I can cultivate a relationship with the student or supervisee that is safe, then sometimes in supervision I may feel like being open about, “Okay. We need to work through this so that you can better work with clients,” then, “Here’s where we’re going to work, and here’s where we’re going to stop.” Does that make sense? It’s almost like an instinctual knowing of when I’m going too far, when we’re getting too deep. And I can feel that with students. I may see them becoming uncomfortable. So, I want it to be a wisdom-based engine, and I don’t want that engine to spoil over into fear, because then they’ll push away.
LR: In this context, many counselor educators are also practicing clinicians, and I wonder if that is beneficial or detrimental.
JA: I have a small private practice here in Temple, and I don’t know how I would be able to do this job without seeing a client or two a week. And it’s mainly because sometimes when I haven’t worked with clients and I’m in front of the class with the alphabet behind my name, I feel like I am The Guy. And then I go into a session, and I’m humbled and reminded, “Oh, yeah. I don’t know what the hell I’m doing,” or, “This session got away from me.”

I feel like it becomes hard to manage whenever my practice hinders my health, when I’m scheduling, managing things when it’s overwhelming, when I’m burnt out, and my students become a secondary priority. That’s when I know, okay, something’s going on. But, yeah, I work with individuals, couples, families. And I usually have about four or five clients that I’m seeing in a semester.

Lifespan Issues

LR: How, as a parent to young children and also in a sense a parent to young, evolving clinicians, do you teach them about the uncertainty and our limited ability to influence others?
JA: I think you put them in situations intentionally where it’s grey and uncertain and watch them go through it. What we try to do is have a healthy balance between safety and ambiguity. We want clinical trainees to feel safe enough to be able to feel okay floating in the wilderness somewhere. We know where they’re at. They may not know where they’re at, but we want them to feel safe to be lost a little bit.

we want clinical trainees to feel safe enough to be able to feel okay floating in the wilderness somewhere
And so, I think that’s how you train them. It’s like you intentionally scaffold and build into your program situations, places, activities where students can get a healthy dose of “I’m just going to go with it, and I’m okay because I know I have a healthy attachment to my faculty.” It’s the same thing as a new parent. It’s like I know my relationship is strong when my son can play independently and then come back and check in and then play independently and then come back and check in.

It’s like he knows that he can wander and it’s safe to come back. Same thing with students, right? We want them to go off and explore a theory, a technique or try this out or bring this into session or bring this into practice and then come back and say, “I don’t know what I did.” You know what I mean? So yeah, building that in intentionally.
LR: You’re in a unique position, Jude, because you’re learning what it means to be a parent while you are shepherding counseling students into their professional identities. It makes me wonder—what are some of the challenges that clinical educators have who are later on in their life, who are no longer dealing with raising young children but perhaps launching teenagers, or have children who are getting married, or are dealing with their own mortality? How do counselor educators separate or merge the challenges in their own personal lives with what it is their students need in theirs?
JA: I feel like the challenges that the more-experienced clinician or the counselor educator may have are the same issues that the students may have who come in as they begin a second career. It’s arrogance, you know? It’s that idea that you know everything. You don’t see yourself as a student anymore. And I think that is the downfall of a good counselor educator, is when they feel like they know all there is to know.

I think the way that they can combat that is integrating the experiences that they have but not relying solely on those experiences. I think that’s the difference—if you’re integrating them, you say, “Gosh. I remember what it was like when my kid was two or when my kid was four. I remember when my kid was 13.” That’s the emotional age of some of these students. What did I do when my kid was 13, and what did I want to do that I didn’t do that I wish I could’ve done and I can do now with this student? I feel like those are the ways that you can kind of integrate those experiences into raising students.
LR: So, it goes back to sort of a thread that’s woven its way through this interview, which is that we as counselor educators/clinicians have to continue to evolve, to look inside. We have to impose that challenge on our counseling students. We can expect no less from our counseling students than we can for ourselves.
JA:
we as counselor educators/clinicians have to continue to evolve, to look inside
And we’ve got to have the courage to let them into our journey with that. You know, we’ve got to have the courage to say, “This is life. I’m tired. I’m exhausted.” We don’t have to put on that front. Because then students will do that, and then the clients will do that, and there’d be that butterfly effect where nobody’s really being themselves.
LR: Do clinical educators get the students they need?
JA: It’s that butterfly effect, right? It’s like this parallel process where my relationship to my supervisee will impact my supervisee’s relationship to their client, which will then impact that client’s relationship to their environment. And so, a lot of the times when I’m in supervision and we’re having that come-to-Jesus moment like, “Why do you have this client,” I also have to ask myself, “Why do I need this supervisee to have that client?”

And then I may start thinking, “What do I need to do in my life in order to be able to better support this student so that they can better support this client?” That becomes the question, right? But then the beauty of supervision is that you can outwardly process that with a student so that they can learn how to do that for themselves with a client. You can say, “Gosh, man. When you’re working with this client, this is what it brings up for me. This is my hang-up, and this is where I struggle to support you. Where in your life do you feel like this client is kind of poking?" This processing and processing is a beautiful thing when it’s done right. In a lot of ways, it can feel like inception. Sometimes you’re in supervision like trying to spin a top asking, “Are we in reality, or is this a dream?”

True Cultural Awareness

LR: This next question could probably stand as its own interview, but I can’t help but ask. What are the challenges that counselor educators face in really effectively teaching these students what cultural awareness means?
JA: The first thing that comes to my mind is that we’ve got to be mindful of our fragility as counselor educators and be willing to address things that make us uncomfortable talking about, things that make us squeamish. I feel like we’ve got to be aware of that. We’ve got to be aware of our political stances and how that influences our work and how it influences our teaching. We’ve got to be aware of our perspective, our biases, our thoughts, our perceptions of individuals who don’t look like us, don’t like the same people we like, don’t pray like we pray.

we’ve got to be mindful of our fragility as counselor educators
I think the key to fostering culturally humble students and clinicians is for us as counselor educators to be humble, to be mindful of our fragility, and be courageous enough to have those conversations in class. Each diversity class that I teach feels like Thanksgiving, because a lot of people’s families are uncomfortable around that Thanksgiving table. That’s what diversity class feels like.

I feel like what we have to do is to foster this atmosphere of openness around these discussions and safety in the classrooms. What we don’t want is for students to feel the tension or the discomfort, and that hinders their ability to go there. We need them to go there. And so, we have to be aware. We have to be humble. We have to be courageous. I think those three qualities can really help develop culturally-competent students.
LR: We recently released a three-video series, Counseling African American Men, featuring Darrick Tovar-Murray from DePaul University. In the conversations between Darrick and Victor Yalom, Psychotherapy.net’s founder, the idea came up that counselors need to learn to be comfortable with discomfort, which sounds like exactly what you’re talking about.
JA: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We’ve got it steeped in our program. We’ve got it steeped in security and safety with a little bit of ambiguity and discomfort. It has to be equal measures. We have to steep the students in there for two years and two semesters, you know?
LR: I’ve heard of the notion of “White Fragility.” What did you mean by fragility?
JA: You know, like those developmental stages. Like whether or not you’re in the early stages of identity development. Then you’re experiencing a lot of anger, right? Because that’s fragility too, right? We talk about this in diversity class. Sometimes, as a man of color, as an African American male, I have anger toward White men, White people, especially when I feel unsafe.

sometimes we can give off the impression as counselor educators that if you are a White counselor, then you can’t do culturally sensitive work
And so, when clients come in, sometimes that anger leeches into the therapeutic relationship. And I think that’s what I mean by fragility. It’s not that you can’t be angry. It’s that you have to be mindful of “How is this going to impact my therapeutic relationship, my work, my relationship with my peers, my relationship with my supervisor? What do I need to do to work through that?
LR: When I started at the university 32 years ago, the student body was White, and I have learned to be more aware of the privilege that comes with whiteness. And I have been put in very uncomfortable situations with my students. So, this idea of a counselor educator being comfortable with discomfort and modeling it is very important.
JA: Absolutely! And a lot of that has to do with just acknowledging when “This is uncomfortable.” Like, look around the room. What have we done as a program, as an organization? What have you done individually as a student to perpetuate this sameness? Let’s have that discussion. Because I think sometimes we can give off the impression as counselor educators that if you are a White counselor, then you can’t do culturally sensitive work.

I feel like that impression is dangerous, especially for White students. There’s so much opportunity for corrective emotional experiences for clients. If we train White counselor educators well, they can go out into their communities into the field and build strong relationships and repair relationships with clients. I mean, speaking for myself as a supervisor, it meant a lot to me to work with a supervisor, like when I was a student, who was White but who came into the relationship humble, aware, willing to acknowledge things. It was kind of like, oh, okay. Okay, we can do this. And it was even more impactful sometimes when that happened.
LR: Yeah. Do you think there’s an implicit expectation that, because you are a Black man, that you have a deeper sensitivity to cultural oppression and unfairness?
JA: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. That’s the work we don’t get paid for. That’s fine with me, you know? That’s the stuff that they don’t add to the tenure packet. They don’t have a box for that on your year-end evaluation. It’s how many times you’re stopped in the hall and, “Hey. I’m trying to do this diversity thing.” It’s like, I’m going to Google it just as you, just as much as you.

sometimes it’s just hard. It’s like, “Man, I don’t have the bandwidth to do this when I also have to do other things”
You know, it’s that extra work that you do to support a community, the calls you get, the students that you’re supporting, the organizations you’re connected with. Sometimes you do have a deeper understanding of these diversity issues, because you have to. But sometimes it’s just hard. It’s like, “Man, I don’t have the bandwidth to do this when I also have to do other things.”

I feel like what I love the most about my faculty is that we all take equal responsibility in having those conversations. So, it doesn’t just feel like it relies on one person. But I’m blessed. My program is diverse. We have two White men, and the rest of the faculty are people of color, women of color.
We very much match our student population demographics. But, yeah, that’s the stuff you don’t get paid for. And that expectation gets you voluntold to be on committees. And I’m just like, “Gosh, man. I’m struggling too, you know?”
LR: I think we’ll stop there Jude. I want to thank you so much for sharing your wisdom and experiences from the trenches of graduate school.
JA: I hope this was meaningful for students or for whoever’s reading it.