|
|
|||||||||||
Digby Tantam is Clinical Professor of Psychotherapy at the University of Sheffield (Centre for the Study of Conflict and Reconciliation, University of Sheffield School of Health and Related Research, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield S6 6GJ, UK. Email: d.tantam{at}sheffield.ac.uk). He is Co-Director of the Universitys Centre for the Study of Conflict and Reconciliation, Director of the Section of Mental Health within the School of Health and Related Research, and Deputy Director of Teaching for the School. He is also an honorary consultant psychotherapist and psychiatrist in Sheffield Care Trust. His current research interests include the evaluation of internet-based learning and teaching.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| E-therapy |
|---|
|
|
|---|
It has been claimed (Ainsworth, 2002) that the first use of e-therapy was Ask Uncle Ezra, developed in 1986 at Cornell University (http://ezra.cornell.edu/ask.php) and acting as a helpline ever since. This is an asynchronous discussion forum providing advice rather than counselling. Founders of well-known sites such as Ivan Goldberg, who set up Depression Central (http://www.psycom.net/depression.central.html), and John Grohol, who founded Psych Central (http://psychcentral.com), have provided free mental health advice and support, but e-counselling and e-therapy seem to have developed only in the mid-1990s. The Samaritans extended their telephone counselling to email in 1994 (email: jo{at}samaritans.org), and several individual therapists began to use secure internet chat as a medium for therapy, although on a fee-for-service basis, from about the same period.
Some obvious practical problems of e-therapy are considered in Box 1
. As regards security and confidentiality of communication, hacking is probably no more serious than having someone eavesdrop at your office door, and clients can find security procedures off-putting (Tjora et al, 2005). A problem to which there is no easy solution is that of clients who drop out of therapy (see section on Ethics below). This seems particularly common in e-therapy, perhaps because of the anonymity of the process or because the therapist lacks the particular skill necessary to make e-therapy work (Carlbring et al, 2003).
Box 1 Dealing with some practical problems of e-therapy and e-counselling
|
These issues have been discussed in a number of books (e.g. Kraus et al, 2004) and in the excellent guidelines of the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy (Goss et al, 2002). There are also some more principled problems, about ethics, about anonymity and about effectiveness, that affect both e-therapy and e-supervision. They arise from what have become familiar themes in this series of articles disembodiment and the asynchronicity of some internet interactions. The new electronic media pose the same challenges in all areas (e-learning, e-therapy, e-supervision and so on), but for simplicity I concentrate here on how they affect internet-based counselling and psychotherapy.
Asynchronous communication
Asynchronous communication has the advantage that the client can post a message exactly when they feel the pinch, when their problem or difficulty is clearest to them. Having written it, they may go back and edit or amend it (if it is posted on a discussion forum, but not if sent as an email) before it is read by the therapist, enabling second or even third thoughts.
Boundaries
A face-to-face meeting provides both the therapist and the client with considerable information about boundaries. They know when other people are present and can judge whether anyone else is listening. They can gauge whether or not the other is intoxicated, unwell, drowsy, attentive. The therapist in particular will be aware of the passage of time and the intended duration of the session. Virtual interaction has only those boundaries that are contracted between the participants. It may be impossible to know if it is always the same person who is participating in the therapy, if there are witnesses to the therapeutic exchange, or if the client is engaged and attentive, or occupied with some other task, intoxicated or otherwise distracted. Boundary violations are therefore a particular problem.
The main way of getting round this is to spend more time developing the therapeutic relationship and establishing the basis of trust. Negotiating a contract with the client, giving details about what is expected of both parties, before therapy begins is one important way of dealing with this. Selection is probably also more important in e-therapy and e-supervision (Suler, 2001) and there may be an argument for meeting the potential client or supervisee or, at the very least, having a telephone conversation with them.
Ethics
Ethical and legal problems associated with e-therapy have concerned many professionals (Manhal-Baugus, 2001), and clear-cut guidelines have been developed, for example by the International Society for Mental Health Online (2000) and by an increasing number of counselling organisations such as the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy (Goss et al, 2002). Many of these address the risks of impersonation or fraud, but how much of a risk these present is not yet clear. It does seem essential, however, that therapists agree a security protocol with clients, similar to that operated by many online shopping sites, which does as much as possible to ensure that the person who is using the computer at the other end is actually the client.
There may be fewer unique ethical dilemmas in e-therapy and e-supervision than appear. Issues that are often raised, for example efficacy, the risk of side-effects such as positive transference (Gabbard, 2001), informed consent, information about standard operating procedure, what to do in an emergency (Hsiung, 2002) and the dangers of misunderstanding the clients communications, all arise in face-to-face psychotherapy. However, a survey of e-therapy sites conducted a few years ago (Heinlen et al, 2003) concluded that many fell short of standards such as those of the International Society for Mental Health Online (2000) and the American Psychological Association (http://www.apa.org).
Many writers about e-therapy emphasise the importance of training and the potential challenges of e-therapy to inexperienced practitioners. It is my experience that technique does have to be modified, but no more so than working with a client with a sensory impairment or across a cultural divide. Since these obstacles are assumed to be ones that all therapists should expect to be able to negotiate, e-therapy, too, should be well within the range of the average psychotherapists skills.
Perhaps the most challenging ethical requirement is to ensure that the clienttherapist relationship is maintained for an adequate time. E-therapy has a higher level of drop out than face-to-face therapy (Carlbring et al, 2003). Not only can this make it difficult for the therapist to discharge the duty of care that their relationship with the client imposes, whether or not it is mediated electronically, but it can be disturbing for the therapist to lose a client unexpectedly and completely. It is even more disturbing for the client to lose their therapist unexpectedly and it is therefore alarming that Heinlen et al(2003) found that internet therapy services are often unexpectedly discontinued by the service provider.
The lack of presence that I have already discussed in relation to training (this issue, pp. 416426) applies equally to therapy. It is easy to overlook a lack of involvement of clients or supervisees when they are not present in the room, especially when therapy or supervision is being conducted in a group. The therapist must take particular care to ensure that this does not happen. Both client and therapist need to be willing to work to overcome this, and this may make e-therapy as the sole treatment modality suitable only for a minority of clients. It may well be that blended therapy, incorporating both electronic and face-to-face contact, is a better solution than either one or the other.
Box 2
outlines a useful framework for preparing for and preventing possible ethical problems, proposed by Maheu (2003). Her article concludes with a useful informed consent agreement for telehealth.
Box 2 Preparing for and preventing ethical problems
|
| Online support groups |
|---|
|
|
|---|
All of these different factors mean that there are substantial numbers of people who have significant mental health problems but who cannot access services. There may be many reasons for this. The excluded group will include people who may not have been willing or able to engage in the past. Also excluded will be people who have been violent, self-destructive or troublesome in some other way; people whose conditions are deemed refractory to treatment or are outside the treatment priorities; and people who feel exposed or violated by the treatment process itself. Many will have conditions that are stigmatised.
Mental health charities have been the main alternative to conventional treatment, but the growth of the internet is providing another source of support. Websites have been created by people with particular disorders for the benefit of others with the disorder (for a directory see http://www.psychcentral.com/resources). Many of them incorporate discussion forums (e.g. http://p199.ezboard.com/bcopingwithdissociativeidentitydisorder for people with dissociative disorders, and the German-language site for people with eating disorders, http://www.hungrig-online.de). However, it is usenet groups (Tantam, 2006a) that have provided the main source of specialist support networks. Usenet groups are archived on the World Wide Web and can be accessed by a browser, but most exist outside it. Access to them is via a subscription, which is determined by the users internet service provider. This is the seedy side of the net. Many usenet groups distribute pornography or cracks, i.e. passwords to or illegal copies of games or software. But this is where support groups are also to be found. Many are classified under alt.support. Usenet groups may require registration, and some, but not all, may be moderated.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that peer support can be both helpful and unhelpful. There is no systematic evidence (Eysenbach et al, 2004) and it will be important in the future for professionals to become more involved in the provision of information and support, and in their evaluation, to ensure that benefits outweigh harm (Eysenbach et al, 2001).
| Conclusions |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The internet has already been put to use by clients, or potential clients, to exchange information, help and advice, including advice about psychotherapy services. The Royal College of Psychiatrists (http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk) is beginning to make its own contribution to this rich stew of information, but there is considerable potential for individual psychotherapists, practices, clinics and organisations to do a great deal more. This is likely to become an important marketing tool in the future, but it will also be a medium by which clinicians can disseminate information about good practice and about good mental health.
Finally, the impact of e-learning on training is only just beginning to be seen. The collapse of the UK governments e-learning initiative has led some to believe that e-learning itself is a false start. My own experience in the field suggests rather that its rise may be slow, even insidious, but that it will also be irresistible. A new Gutenbergian revolution is in progress.
| Declaration of interest |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| MCQs |
|---|
|
|
|---|
MCQ answers
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Footnotes |
|---|
See pp. 416426, this issue. ![]()
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Carlbring, P., Ekselius, L. & Andersson, G. (2003) Treatment of panic disorder via the Internet: a randomized trial of CBT vs. applied relaxation. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 34, 129140.[CrossRef][Medline]
Castelnuovo, G., Gaggioli, A., Mantovani, F., et al (2003) From psychotherapy to e-therapy: the integration of traditional techniques and new communication tools in clinical settings. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 6, 375382.
Department of Health (1999) National Service Framework for Mental Health: Modern Standards and Service Models. London: Department of Health.
Eysenbach, G., Köhler, C., Yihune, G., et al (2001) A framework for improving the quality of health information on the worldwide-web and bettering public e-health. The MedCERTAIN approach. In Medinfo01, Proceedings of the Tenth World Congress on Medical Informatics (eds R. Haux, V. Patel & A. Hasmann), pp. 14501454. Elsevier.
Eysenbach, G., Powell, J., Englesakis, M., et al (2004) Health related virtual communities and electronic support groups: systematic review of the effects of online peer to peer interactions. BMJ, 328, 1166.
Gabbard, G. O. (2001) Cyberpassion: E-rotic transference on the Internet. Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 70, 719737.[Medline]
Goss, S., Palmer, S., Jamieson, A., et al (2002) Online Counselling Guidelines. Rugby: British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy.
Heinlen, K., Welfel, E., Richmond, E., et al (2003) The nature, scope, and ethics of psychologists e-therapy web sites: what consumers find when surfing the web. Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 40, 112124.
Hsiung, R. (2002) E-therapy : Case Studies, Guiding Principles and the Clinical Potential of the Internet. New York: W. W. Norton.
International Society for Mental Health Online (2000) Suggested Principles for the Online Provision of Mental Health Services. Version 3.11. Foster City, CA: ISMHO. http://www.ismho.org/suggestions.html
Kraus, R., Zack, J. & Stricker, G. (eds) (2004) Online Counseling: A Handbook for Mental Health Professionals. San Diego, CA: Elsevier.
Leiberich, P., Nedoschill, J., Nickel, K., et al (2004) Internet communication: new kind of self-help improves access to psychotherapy for eating disorders. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 56, 614615.
Maheu, M. M. (2003) The online clinical practice management model. Psychotherapy Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 40, 2032.[CrossRef]
Manhal-Baugus, M. (2001) E-therapy: practical, ethical, and legal issues. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 4, 551563.
Murdoch, J. W. & Connor-Greene, P. A. (2000) Enhancing therapeutic impact and therapeutic alliance through electronic mail homework assignments. Journal of Psychotherapy Practice and Research, 9, 232237.
Suler, J. (2001) Assessing a persons suitability for online therapy: the ISMHO clinical case study group. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 4, 675679.
Tantam, D. (1995) Why select? In The Art and Science of Psychotherapy Assessment (ed. C. Mace), pp. 130. London: Routledge.
Tantam, D. (2006a) Computers, the internet and the World Wide Web: an introduction for the e-therapist. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 12, 359367.
Tantam, D. (2006b) Opportunities and risks in e-therapist. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 12, 368374.
Tantam, D., van Deurzen, E. & Osterloh, K. (2002) The Survey of European Psychotherapy Training. 2: Questionnaire data. European Journal of Psychotherapy, Counselling and Health, 4, 379396.
Tjora, A., Tran, T. & Faxvaag, A. (2005) Privacy vs usability: a qualitative exploration of patients experiences with secure internet communication with their general practitioner. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 7, e15.[Medline]
Wood, J. A. V., Miller, T. W. & Hargrove, D. S. (2005) Clinical supervision in rural settings: a telehealth model. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 36, 173179.
Related articles in APT:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| British Journal of Psychiatry | Psychiatric Bulletin | All RCPsych Journals |