Quote:
Originally Posted by ruh roh
I guess my issue is that it's just so paternalistic. Why would they stop at the email issue if they are concerned people can't assess risk for themselves? What about people who talk to friends in a desperate state, friends who might disclose their information to others? Should therapists stop that, too? I guess I have a problem with the therapist overstepping their role. If it's more of a concern that they don't have time, don't want to work for free, or that some issues are worsened through miscommunication via email, then they should say so. Any one of those reasons is fine with me, and also feels more respectful.
|
Sure, they should say the real reason. And it might well be that they don't have time, mistrust the communication value of the medium, etc. Not sure that it's about working for free - I offered to pay the one I had a lengthy administrative e-conversation with, and she declined, saying that the issue we were discussing was part of her job, even over email. I don't know how common that would be though.
(Do any therapists out there charge for emails as they do phone calls when they primarily see the client in person?)
I suppose if I were a therapist I'd want calls from those who would otherwise email; it seems like I could help better that way. But sure, I'd say why.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk