Zoom Psychotherapy is Good, Better in Person

COVID-19 Zoom introduced its online technology to the world psychotherapy. At a time when we were all suddenly isolated in our individual space capsules, this marvel of technology prevented the breakdown of therapeutic relationships and enabled therapists to accept new patients. stressful due to the pandemic. Suddenly therapists were able to serve more remote populations. Rural communities had access to urban-based therapists. The many benefits of Zoom were obvious to everyone.

The pandemic eventually subsided, and we discovered that Zoom-based psychotherapy was deeply ingrained in many therapists’ practices. Patients no longer had to split their days with trips to and from their therapist’s office, and many therapists enjoyed working from home. Not needing a separate office anymore was like getting a raise. Being able to travel freely while practicing was also a welcome advantage.

I would like to present an argument that face-to-face psychotherapy should still be considered the gold standard whenever possible. I know online therapy sessions are more convenient for both therapists and patients. But psychotherapy is not intended to be useful. Zoom sessions require three missing investments: time, presence, and a level of interpersonal risk that is not present to the same degree on screens.

Time spent traveling to and from the therapist’s office provides a break in the day to anticipate the session, remember the last session, and consider what needs to be discussed. And time to return from a therapy session provides an opportunity to reflect on what has just happened. The emotions evoked can be experienced and understood. Any insights can be examined and integrated. All of this time is part of therapy and contrasts sharply with interrupting your schedule at home or work for a therapy session and then immediately returning to the interrupted work.

Presence is more versatile in person than online. I usually greet patients of both genders with a handshake. We make brief but meaningful physical contact before the patient even sits down. I can gauge the variety of emotions conveyed by the eagerness, hesitation, warmth, moistness, or coolness of their touch. Making direct eye contact is qualitatively different from looking at an image on a screen. Direct eye contact is even more intimate than shaking hands and is often difficult to bear. There is much less intimacy with screens compared to eye-to-eye contact alone in the same room. It’s also much easier to pick up on subtle nonverbal cues in person.

Interpersonal risk is an important part of psychotherapy. The hope is that patients take risks on an emotional level. sincerity with a trusted therapist who had been turned off early in his life due to disappointment or perceived betrayal. At a time when emotions are intense, the patient may suddenly leave the office, break a lamp, or even attack when offended. Face-to-face therapy involves a tangible layer of intimacy that is more difficult to achieve online. Fear of discovery sexual Emotions towards a therapist are much riskier for both the patient and the therapist personally. Such emotions could not be evoked through a screen. Face-to-face psychotherapy provides the best opportunity to learn how to tolerate the negative situation. anxiety intense emotional interpersonal reality.

I am confident that many patients benefit greatly from online therapy and that some would not have access to treatment without it. I am simply expressing my personal opinion without reference to official data. Lived experiences are the only source of my opinion. I take the time to express this view because I worry that the trend toward online psychotherapy may leave many patients and some therapists never experiencing what seems to me to be the gold standard.

If people disagree with me, I hope my thoughts will spark useful discussion.