Mindful Musings

My Mindful Musings about mental health issues and other therapy-related things. If there is something you’d like me to blog about, send me an email and let me know. And I very much enjoy receiving comments on my posts.

Articles For Clients is a compilation of my posts for consumers of psychotherapy services.

Articles For Clinicians Using Social Media is a compilation of my posts for mental health professions on the Internet.

Subscribe to Mindful Musings by Dr. Keely Kolmes by Email

 Subscribe to this blog

Wickr: HIPAA-Compliant SMS App Tested by Two Psychologists

By Keely Kolmes, Psy.D. and Kristina Monroe, Psy.D.

Dr. Monroe is a licensed psychologist who has private practice offices in Beverly Hills and South Pasadena, CA. She maintains a general psychotherapy practice but also specializes in serious mental illness as well as psychological assessment.

We know one another from APA Division 42′s listserv, and we decided to test out the Wickr App together.

KK: I don’t engage in text messaging with clients for a number of reasons, including concerns about the assumed immediacy of messaging, client confidentiality, and the documentation of these messages. But Dr. Monroe and I were both very curious about Wickr’s promises of military grade encryption, privacy, and the ability to set messages to self-destruct within a designated period of time (from seconds after it is viewed and up to six days). We agreed to give it a test run.

Click on images to view them in large size. 

wickrlogin wickrabout











KM: I was excited to try out Wickr as a licensed psychologist who strives to adhere to the highest level of client confidentiality. This isn’t always simple in the era of ever-growing technology, particularly when many of my clients prefer text messaging over a telephone call. I was intrigued when reading that Wickr is a text messaging service that is HIPAA-compliant.

KK: Wickr allows you to fine-tune its shredder settings as seen below. You can also modify how notifications are received and set default message destruction times, but this can also be set for each message, as we’ll show you later on.

secureshredder wickrsettings

KK: One of the first things I appreciated was that Wickr can be set to let you know you have a text message without identifying who has sent it. The app also has the ability to require you to login to receive your text messages so someone picking up your phone doesn’t automatically have access. It seems that Dr. Monroe also liked these features. We both would recommend disabling the auto-login feature for enhanced security.

KM: In testing it out with Dr. Kolmes I found several features that I liked. First, I liked that a user can choose any user name and it is not displayed when push notifications are on (as shown below). Furthermore, one has to log in with a password to access the message (also seen below). This feature can be adjusted as to how long the app is closed before a password is required.

KK: I’d add here that it might make sense to encourage clients to use a nickname or other pseudonym with their Wickr account, for enhanced privacy. Clinicians may opt for the same.

lockscreen photo

KM: It is also nice that each message can be sent with a different time to destruction (i.e. the time it takes before a message is permanently deleted from both the sender’s and receiver’s device). We experimented with different time settings.

KK: You can see the red text, below, indicating the time until a message self-destructs. I also like that there is a padlock you have to click on in order to unlock each message. This is just one extra step to ensure nobody is looking over your shoulder. I also like that from the texting screen, you can click on various red round buttons to change the self-destruct time for each message (from seconds to six days), to activate the camera to take and attach a photo, to access your photo album and choose a photo, to activate your microphone to record and send sound file, or to attach and send other attachment from dropbox or Google Drive.



KM: On the contrary, one noticeable weakness is the ability to take a screen shot of both text and photos. Therefore, it is possible for one to retain a copy of messages exchanged before they destruct.

KK: Yes, obviously, as our photo essay demonstrates, these messages can be saved via screen shot, which in some ways entirely defeats the whole purpose of the app. Although it would allow a clinician to save and print a message later, if necessary.

KM: I would, nevertheless, only use the app to communicate about appointment times and changes, not clinical information. Lastly, the client does need a smartphone with the app as a Wickr user cannot text a general cellphone number. Overall, Wickr appears to be a nice upgrade from the average text service that can be used at the clinician and client’s discretion following informed consent.

KK: I am still not likely to use text messaging with my patients. However, many clinicians do like to offer this mode of communication for various reasons and it makes sense for the populations they serve. Wickr is definitely a step above the typical text messaging done on a cellphone. I will likely mention it in my upcoming courses on digital ethics. I only wish the app disabled the ability to take screen shots so that it could truly be SMS “without a trace,” as advertised*.

*Note added February 24th: Of course we realize that encryption refers to how messages are protected during transmission and delivery. There are other encrypted means of message delivery, including email, which also allow for printing or taking screen shots. What people do with phone messages, emails, and even text messages once delivered is beyond the control of the service that attempts to create higher security and beyond the control of the practitioner. This again speaks to the need to be judicious in what we send to people whose confidentiality we have a primary duty to protect.

What You Need to Know About Telemental Health Technology: A Guest Post by Roy Huggins

The following is a guest post by Roy Huggins, MS NCC.

Roy Huggins, MS NCC is a counselor in private practice and former professional Web developer who also operates Person-Centered Tech, his tech-consulting firm that serves the mental health community. You can find him online at www.personcenteredtech.com.

With the growing popularity of telemental health (sometimes called “Skype therapy”), it’s a wonder that it isn’t easier to identify which software we should use to perform these services. Here I will try to provide some clarity on that subject.

Types and Mediums of Telehealth

The classic telemedicine model is what I call a “clinic-clinic” model, wherein the client would be in a clinical setting, surrounded by health care professionals, using a special setup of cameras and software that are designed specifically for telehealth. Many of us are more interested in what I call a “clinic-home” model, wherein the client is in their home, handling their own local technical needs and, potentially, clinical needs that can be provided remotely. This article will focus on that model.

There are several mediums for telehealth in use. The two most popular I know of are email and videoconferencing. When we speak of “Skype Therapy,” we are referring to telehealth service by videoconferencing software. Since most of us are interested in video, that is what I will focus on.

Some mediums may be restricted for some clinicians. For example, social workers in Louisiana are not permitted to perform email therapy or to use any therapy medium that is “conducted through the exchange of typed or printed data, E-mails or instant messages” (Louisiana State Board of Social Work Examiners, 2009). I suggest you investigate your applicable laws and rules before settling on a medium.

Professional guidelines covering telehealth ask us to develop, as the American Psychological Association’s (APA) telepsychology guidelines put it, our “professional and technical competence” regarding both our chosen telehealth medium and the process of telehealth therapy itself (American Psychological Association, 2013). The NBCC guidelines and NASW/ASWB guidelines also ask us to do this (NASW, 2005; ASWB, 2005; National Board for Certified Counselors [NBCC], 2012).

What Video Software Should I Use?

When choosing software, we need to consider if it is secure enough to meet ethical and legal standards, if it plays well with the HIPAA Business Associate rule, and if it has the features we need.

This may be a little more complicated than it seems. Skype and Facetime have fallen out of favor, especially due to recent changes in the HIPAA Business Associate rule. Luckily, easy replacements are available. Also, your specific software needs can change depending on the population you serve.

“HIPAA Nothin’!”: Our Ethics Codes Have Plenty To Say About Electronic Security

When we think about mandates around “digital confidentiality,” as I like to call it, we tend to think of HIPAA. However, this is as much an ethical issue as a legal one. All the major professional ethics codes ask us to use security measures when dealing with electronic client data. National ethics codes that call for protection specifically of electronic info include the AAMFT, ACA, APA, NASW and NBCC codes.

The HIPAA Security Rule also contains a basic mandate that we must secure our “electronic protected health information.” Specifically, The HIPAA Security Rule defines a standard called the Transmission Security standard:

[Covered entities must] Implement technical security measures to guard against unauthorized access to electronic protected health information that is being transmitted over an electronic communications network.
(US Dept. of Health and Human Services, 2006) Emphasis mine

I emphasized the word “technical.” “Technical” security measures would be stuff you do with software or hardware to protect sensitive information. In the case of videoconferencing software, we’re looking at needing software that encrypts the calls and that requires that everyone involved in the call authenticate themselves – “authenticate” is a fancy way of saying that they have to prove they are who they claim to be. Generally, we do this by entering a username and password. The other advantage of video software is that we can additionally authenticate clients simply by seeing their faces on the screen.

When HIPAA Does and Doesn’t Matter

Alert readers may have noticed in the above HIPAA quote the words, “covered entity.” That is a piece of HIPAA jargon that refers to any person or group that is legally required to comply with HIPAA. Many of us are starting to learn that simply being a health care professional does not automatically make one a HIPAA covered entity. For more information, see my article on HIPAA covered entity status.

HIPAA doesn’t always rule the roost, however. For example, the 2013 HIPAA Omnibus Rule clarified that if clients wish to receive emails that contain their protected health information, are subsequently informed of the risks of email, and still wish to receive them despite the risks, they may consent to the use of unsecured email to send them protected health information. (Huggins, 2013). However, all the professional guidelines regarding telehealth ask us to use secure communications for therapeutic exchanges regardless of client consent (APA, 2013; NASW & ASWB, 2005; NBCC, 2012). Licensing boards often have something to say on the issue, as well. For example, my licensing board specifically requires encryption for therapeutic exchanges in their rules regarding Distance Counseling. (Oregon Board of Licensed Professional Counselors and Therapists, 2011)

This means that even though HIPAA’s love of client autonomy may imply that non-secure video software could be used if the client consents to it (assuming there is no Business Associate relationship – more below), ethics codes, professional guidelines, and in many cases state laws and licensing boards would disagree that non-secure software is appropriate for us to use when performing telehealth services.

HIPAA Business Associates: Where Things Get Rigid

When we apply HIPAA’s standards to our security planning, we get a rather flexible paradigm of reducing risks to reasonable levels. That is, except for when the Business Associate rule gets involved.

In short, HIPAA Business Associates are persons or companies who provide services for your practice wherein they handle your protected health information. HIPAA requires us to get a Business Associate contract with such folks in order to be in compliance. For details, see What is a HIPAA Business Associate Agreement?. The 2013 HIPAA Omnibus Final Rule made the Business Associate rule tighter and gave Business Associates greater responsibilities. As a result, we have fewer options around which “cloud”-based services we can use and still remain HIPAA compliant. This is a deep issue, and if you wish to know more, see Online Data Backups and HIPAA Compliant Practice: A Government-Produced Monkey Wrench.

An important part of the BA rule is the “conduit” exception. This allows companies that only move your protected health information from one place to another to perform this service without taking on a BA relationship with you. The classic examples are the USPS and other courier services as well as Internet Service Providers – the companies that provide your Internet connection. Because of the conduit exception, none of these groups are HIPAA Business Associates.

The 2013 Omnibus Rule tightened the conduit exception. The Office of Civil Rights (the federal government’s “HIPAA people”) made it clear that just moving info from one place to another is not enough to make a service qualify as a conduit (and thus not qualify as a BA.) They have to also be unable to look at the data as they move it. In other words, the info has to be encrypted and the company has to be unable to unlock the encryption. (Reinhardt, 2013) This is why Skype and Facetime are no longer viable for telehealth under HIPAA.

Wait, Skype and Facetime Aren’t HIPAA Compliant?

It’s important to remember that products cannot be HIPAA compliant or non-compliant. Only people can be HIPAA compliant (or non-compliant.) The proper question is, “Can we use Skype or Facetime and stay HIPAA compliant?”

Skype’s security has been roundly criticized by some as insufficient for our compliance needs, (Maheu & Mcmenamin, 2013) but others have argued that steps can be taken to reduce the security risks of Skype to acceptable levels (Sleeman, 2011). Facetime is similar to Skype but only works on Apple products. Apple is notoriously tight-lipped about the security schemes their products use, but it is certain that Facetime uses encryption to protect calls.

However, both of these pieces of software allow their owner companies (Microsoft for Skype and Apple for Facetime) to unlock the encryption and see and hear the calls they transmit. We know this is true with Skype because law enforcement officials have stated that they can get access to Skype calls when they need to. For Facetime, the underlying architecture of it makes it extremely likely that Apple could monitor calls if they chose to. These simple facts cause these services to not be “conduits” and thus they become BAs. Because neither company will supply us with a Business Associate contract when we use their products for telehealth, we would be in violation of HIPAA to use them for telehealth services.

Remember that Business Associate relationships are between clinicians and the companies that qualify as our BAs. The client is not a part of this equation. Thus, client consent has no bearing on whether or not we’re required to get a Business Associate contract with a given company. This is why I say that the Business Associate rule is highly rigid.

Do I Have to Use Expensive Software to Do Telehealth, Then?


I often recommend, as an alternative to Skype and Facetime, VSee (www.vsee.com). VSee is simple, free (or cheap) and easily downloaded and installed, just like Skype and Facetime. However, it is friendly not only with HIPAA but also with the American Telemedicine Association’s guidelines for video software in telemental health. For further info, see my article on both VSee and the problems with Skype and Business Associate rules.

VSee is not the only option, however. There are many platforms for doing telehealth that are as inexpensive as $40/mo. You often also get extra features such as secure billing, secure messaging with clients, and – very importantly – Business Associate contracts. These platforms can be a good investment in creating a solid telehealth practice. For browsing available platforms, I generally recommend Jay Ostrowski’s Telemental Health Comparisons website.

What Features Do I Need In Video Software?

The American Telemedicine Association has published guidelines on what video software should be able to do, where possible, when used for telemental health. Several of the features they describe require that there be special hardware on the client’s side of things. Generally, we would need to be doing clinic-clinic telehealth for that to be possible. Many of the ATA’s other recommendations can be met by software for clinic-home sessions, however, and thus we can look for those features in our software. Here is a sampling of the more important features to look for according to American Telemedicine Association, 2009). Comments in red are mine:

  1. View and share a computer desktop or applications. This means the software can allow call participants to selectively show each other what is currently on their computers. I often use this to collaboratively make notes or do exercises with clients. A lot of programs, including Skype, can do this.
  2. Record meetings when clinically appropriate and with patient permission. Depending on your needs as a clinician, this can be a deal-breaker. Most clinicians under supervision, for example, need to be able to record sessions.
  3. Share information on a common white board or via computer files. Once again, many programs accomplish this through interactive screen sharing (item 1.)
  4. Ease of use with minimum operator training. This is a must not just for clinicians, but also for clients. Even if your technical proficiency is high, delivery to the home means the client must handle many of their own technical needs. For this reason, quite a few clinicians only use video software services that offer live, 24-hour tech support. All the online group therapists I know of see technical support as a must-have. Note that only non-free services will offer technical support. In other words, you won’t get it from Skype, Facetime, or VSee.
  5. On screen messages to notify the user of such conditions as loss of far end video, incomplete or dropped connections, mute/unmute etc. This feature allows both clinician and client to know the current conditions of the call, especially if the Internet connection is going bad. Bad connections can mean choppy video or audio or even a dropped call. I am careful to avoid delicate clinical interventions when my software’s indicator is telling me that the call connection is going through a rough patch.
  6. Ability to operate at a bandwidth of 384 Kbps or higher.This means the software should be able to work on a somewhat slow Internet connection. It’s worth noting that Skype does not do this well, and VSee’s most noted feature is that it does this very well.

I’ve never seen low-cost software that includes all these features, but most telehealth-oriented video software includes most of these features.

What Else Do I Need to Do or Know?

The topic of this article — Security and features of videoconferencing software – is only the tip of the iceberg. Also vital is informed consent; culturally, linguistically, and regionally relevant emergency plans; cross-state practice issues; getting paid, and more. These things do not have to be daunting at all, and may be more or less difficult to accomplish depending on the skills and resources already at your disposal.

How Do I Learn More About Telehealth?

All the professional guidelines on telehealth practice make reference to a need to develop “professional and technical competence” in both the process of telehealth and the use of the relevant technology. There are some places where you can get formal training on this, listed in alphabetical order:

The DCC (Distance Credentialed Counselor)
The Online Therapy Institute
The Telemental Health Institute
The Zur Institute

Disclosure: I have courses with the Zur Institute that may be included with telehealth education packages, and from which I will receive royalties.

I also have courses you can take online. Issues of telehealth technology are generally included with other technology-related topics including HIPAA compliance and practice management:

Digital Confidentiality According to Professional Ethics and HIPAA: A Heart-Centered Approach. My live webinar program.
My self-study CE courses at the Zur Institute.

I also use my newsletter to keep readers abreast of the fast-changing landscape of digital confidentiality. You can subscribe to it at www.personcenteredtech.com.


American Association of Marriage and Family Therapists. (2012). Code of Ethics . Alexandria, VA: Author.

American Counseling Association. (2005). Code of Ethics . Alexandria, VA: Author.

American Psychological Association. (2010). American Psychological Association Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct . Washington, DC: Author.

American Psychological Association. (2013, July). Guidelines for the Practice of Telepsychology. Author.

American Telemedicine Association. (2009). Practice Guidelines for Videoconferencing-Based Telemental Health. Author.

Huggins, R. (2013, October). Clients Have the Right to Receive Unencrypted Emails Under HIPAA. Retrieved October 17, 2013, from Person-Centered Tech.

Louisiana State Board of Social Work Examiners. (2009). Consumer Information Regarding Distance Therapy. Retrieved October 17, 2013, from Louisiana State Board of Social Work Examiners: http://www.labswe.org/distherapy.html

Maheu, M., & Mcmenamin, J. (2013, March). Telepsychiatry: The Perils of Using Skype. Retrieved October 17, 2013, from Psychiatric Times: http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/blog/telepsychiatry-perils-using-skype

NASW and ASWB. (2005). Standards for Technology and Social Work Practice . Author.

National Association of Social Workers. (2008). Code of Ethics . Washington, DC: Author.

National Board for Certified Counselors. (2012). Code of Ethics . Greensboro, NC: Author.

National Board for Certified Counselors. (2012, July). Policy Regarding the Provision of Distance Professional Services. Author.

Oregon Board of Licensed Professional Counselors and Therapists. (2011). Distance Counseling. Oregon State Archives . Salem, OR: Author.

Reinhardt, R. (2013, February). HIPAA FInal Rule and the Conduit Exception. Retrieved October 17, 2013, from Tame Your Practice: http://www.tameyourpractice.com/blog/hipaa-final-rule-and-conduit-exception

Sleeman, J. (2011, December). Skype Security and HIPAA Compliance. Retrieved October 17, 2013, from HIPAA Compliance IT: http://www.hipaacomplianceit.com/skype-security-and-hipaa-compliance/

US Dept. of Health and Human Services. (2006). HIPAA Administrative Simplification. Washington, DC: Author.

US Dept. of Health and Human Services. (2013). HIPAA Omnibus Final Rule . Washington, DC: Author.

How to Fight a Phobia

Not only do I treat phobias when people come to my psychotherapy office, but I’ll confess to having struggled with public speaking anxiety myself. It’s actually one of the most common phobias.

Last April, I decided to challenge myself: teach about phobias in an Ignite talk. I’ve gotten pretty comfortable giving talks, but the Ignite format: 20 slides, 5 minutes, with slides auto-advancing every 15 seconds….that definitely made me nervous.

But a friend nudged me to face my fear, I submitted my talk, and it was accepted!

Here is the result:



The slides can be viewed in better quality below.


When Psychotherapists Digitally Eavesdrop on Social Media

This post was first published on PsychCentral.

Mental health professionals have worried for years about their clients digging for personal information about them on the Internet. But what about when psychotherapists consult Google to unearth personal information about their clients? Do psychotherapists carry the same concerns for client privacy that they do for their own?

Some mental health professionals assert that what clients post on the web is public information, and — as such — it is fair game for review. And, yes, it is one thing if you are in a forensic role, and your job is to investigate your client. But what if your role is clinical and involves building a relationship of trust and authenticity? Do we somehow have a right to access all of a person’s archived Internet data simply because they visited our office seeking care?

Those who assert that clinicians have a right to search for this information seem to be expressing a sense of entitlement to a patient’s out-of-session life. Reasons given for looking for this information include assessing risk and verifying information shared in treatment. But would these same clinicians attend a performance or a talk a client was giving and not tell the client they had attended? Would they go observe other social events secretly and not share with their client that they had done so? It is the discretion provided by the Internet that seems to allow some clinicians an excuse for engaging in online behaviors they would never endorse offline.

For most people, taking time to develop trust and a connection before divulging difficult information is part of healthy boundaries, even when seeking psychological treatment. A psychotherapist who rushes to discover what a client hasn’t yet shared may be contaminating the therapy relationship or re-enacting boundary violations that the client has already experienced. Many clients of mine share deeper secrets as the therapy progresses, and for me to race ahead to these points of vulnerability in a web search would seem to to be shortchanging both of us in the clinical relationship.

Those who argue clients look us up on the Internet, and therefore it is fair game for us to do the same, are failing to note a key difference in that there is a significant power differential when psychologists seek supplemental personal information about clients.

As mental health professionals, we have the ability to use this information to influence our diagnostic impressions. We hold authority in our relationships with our clients that they do not hold with us. We are not equals. That is why we have licensing boards and an informed consent process with clients in which we are required to share with them our policies and protocols. When patients look us up before retaining our services as professionals, they are typically seeking information about how we practice or if others recommend our services. If we routinely engage in the practice of researching our clients without informing them that we do so, I’d say it has the potential to be exploitative, harmful, and deceptive.

While the extent of such a search and whether it is clinically warranted may alter the significance of it, in my opinion, those who do so without engaging in a thoughtful analysis of their motivies and those who do not inform their clients of this practice may be taking advantage of electronic access to those who are in our care. If you are compelled to seek out this information, why not do such a search with your client present? Why not do it openly, with full disclosure, so that the two of you may discuss the accuracy of what you find then and there and actually incorporate it into treatment?

None of this is to say that it’s possible to avoid incidental contacts with patients on the Internet. It is all too easy to stumble onto a client’s Facebook page or Twitterfeed by following a shared connection.

But what one does when they arrive there does matter. Do you read every post on the client’s Wall and browse his photo albums? Or do you hit the back button on your browser and let your client enjoy a life outside of the therapy room, choosing himself what to bring into treatment?

I’d vote for the latter.

Agree or disagree with this post? I’d love to know your thoughts. Feel free to comment.

Online Dating…. for Psychotherapists? What Should Mental Health Professionals Consider When Using Personal Ads?

This article was originally published in the July/August Vol. 22 No. 4 issue of The National Psychologist. 

Many people search for love on online dating sites, and why should psychologists be any different? We also want to meet people for activities, dating, and romance. Sometimes, looking for love online is good way to get outside of our usual social circles without going to bars or singles events. But having an online dating profile can also pose challenges to clinicians who worry how it may affect clients, students, or supervisees to see them putting their hopes and hearts into prose while searching for intimacy on the Internet.

There is literature focusing upon the challenges of running into clients or trainees in the offline world but online personal ads can reveal a lot more intimate information to those who stumble onto your profile than would be typically revealed by showing up at the same event. There is also the additional possibility that if a client doesn’t tell us they saw our profile, we may never know it was seen by them and we won’t know how it affected them.

In a recent study of 227 clinicians on the Internet, 16% reported using online dating sites, 3% reported accidentally finding a client’s personal ad on such a site, and 2% reported intentionally searching for and finding personal ads belonging to a client (Kolmes & Taube, 2012). If your clients, students, or supervisors are in a similar age group as your dating pool, it may only be a matter of time before these online encounters occur.

Here are some strategies for clinicians venturing into online dating:

  • Some clinicians choose to mask their profession in their profiles, noting that saying they work in mental health can create awkward interactions when dating or may invite potential partners to search for their professional websites. If this concerns you, consider waiting to meet before you share your occupation.
  • Be aware that Google image search makes it possible for people to drag and drop a photo into a search form and find all other sites on which that photo appeared. So you may wish to use a different photo and not use any of the ones you have used on your professional website.
  • Consider not posting a photo at all. You can let interested persons know you are willing to send a photo via email if they like what you wrote in your ad. This is one way to be careful about who might recognize you, but it also makes you less “competitive” in the world of online dating since most people use photos to screen potential dates. It also isn’t a guarantee that the person you send a photo to isn’t a client or student posing under a pseudonym or using a fake photo on their own ad.
  • If you do use your photo, consider presenting a more generic and less “sexy” profile. Craft your profile with the awareness that it may be viewed by clients, students, professors, or even those in your client’s lives who know they see you. Some clinicians feel strongly about their right to a personal life and they don’t want to “clean up” their ad. At the same time, it’s worth thinking about how you would feel if any of your clients were to see a photo of you posed in a revealing outfit, holding a glass of wine, or listing your favorite Friday night activities.
  • Many dating sites provide “sexy” questionnaires on things such as kissing styles or questions about deeply held beliefs on a variety of topics. If there is something posted that you wouldn’t want a client to see, take it out. This may, unfortunately, also lead to a relatively bland profile.
  • But this could be the alternative! (One user’s OK Cupid profile graph shared below.)
Screen Shot 2013-07-16 at 1.05.55 AM

Is this what you want your clients to see?

  • If you use a social media policy in your practice, you might use your policy to acknowledge that online dating sites are another space in which you may “cross paths” outside of therapy and you can encourage clients to bring it back into treatment if they see you on a site and they have feelings they want to discuss about it. This can help normalize such an event and help clients to know that it’s not a taboo topic.
  • A twist on the above would be to note your profession in your dating profile and acknowledge briefly in your ad that any clients viewing your ad are welcome to bring it back into the office if they care to discuss it.
  • A suggestion offered by Michael Brodeur, Psy.D. of Washington State University is to have a trusted colleague review your profile and let them recommend edits. This isn’t a bad idea considering that your colleagues may also view your profile and they may form opinions about your sensitivity and awareness of the impact of your profile on your clients, thus influencing how they feel about referring or consulting with you.


Kolmes, K., Taube, D. O., (2012). Seeking and Finding Our Clients on the Internet: Boundary Considerations in Cyberspace. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice.