Yes, sadly, there is no established method yet that is proven to be safe and effective. I think, ways to make therapy safer (not 100%) safe are possible to find, but that will require to make a drastic shift into a completely new system and new type of training.

For once, I believe, the role of the community has to be strengthened. Private meetings between two people (therapist and client) in full isolation from the real world is a recipe for a disaster IMO no matter how "good" the therapist may be. It's very unhealthy for both and it has no transparency and, subsequently, accountability is greatly diminished.

I am not saying that all private therapy should be banned. Certainly, it is safer to talk to a therapist privately every now and then, but, I believe, the process is safer when a therapist is a part of some clinic that has many therapists on payroll, so if problems arise, they are resolved immediately through talking to a therapist's supervisor, clinical and executive directors, administration and switching to a different therapist within the same clinic if necessary. This type of a clinic should also have a 24 hr hot line for clients who are in crisis and who can't wait until the next session and need to talk to someone immediately. People would feel much more comfortable calling the hotline in their own clinic where they know many people and where their therapist works than calling some unknown crisis or suicidal hotline where no one knows them and no one gives a damn, frankly. In addition, the clinic should offer different types of support groups so people wouldn't feel like a therapist is the only one who "gets" them. It should also have connections with other communal resources like social and legal services (many clients struggle with economic and legal issues) and collaborate with other health care centers and providers. This is one version of how a comprehensive, communal type of care can be implemented. This approach, unlike private meetings with one therapist only, doesn't leave people high and dry and makes them feel connected to the world and supported by the world, at least in some ways. It also doesn't put the whole burden of "healing" someone on a therapist alone. In my view, it's a win-win for all.

Secondly, I also believe that a long term therapy with one therapist, the one that goes on for years, should be completely abandoned as a modality. While healing is a lifetime process, one individual practitioner or one method or one organization won't be able to do it all for anyone. If I were to do therapy again, I would only do a short-term brief counseling that deals with specific questions that people are trying to answer at the moment. I would put a limit on a number of sessions and would keep the focus sharp on the specific issues they want to resolve. There would be no place for "intimacy" and "relationship" stuff in this model (sorry "relationship" lovers ). Once the "course" is complete (most of the time, it'd be just a few sessions) they could see me again may be a year later, but not earlier than that. Surely, this type of counseling wouldn't go deeply into every single emotion, but I don't think it's necessary to go that deep with a professional. What you'd get from that kind of counseling is a specific insight/information that you can later discuss deeply on the emotional level with those who are close to you (family and close friends) or journal about it or talk in some support group about it. That, I think, would be much healthier than creating the inappropriate "intimacy" with the therapist.