Vulnerability in Virtual Therapy
I am often asked what virtual therapy is like regarding a client’s capacity to be vulnerable, especially now that it’s so common in a “post”-COVID world. There are a lot of factors that impact vulnerability in virtual therapy, so I thought I’d write a bit about what I’ve seen and experienced, both as a clinician and as a client. I’ve noticed that responsiveness to virtual therapy is impacted by sense of safety, sneakiness, neurodivergence, accessibility, and personal preference.
Safety is an interesting factor when it comes to how vulnerable someone feels they can be in any situation. Safety in therapy, as in most places, in based on feelings of mutual trust and the ability to let one’s guard down. This is obviously really relevant to one’s experience in a therapy setting. From personal and professional experiences, it is clear that the presence of a screen affects one’s ability to let their guard down and allow for a space conducive to vulnerability. Some people find that the distance created by a screen allows for them to feel safer. Not being in the same physical room as someone allows them to be in the same emotional room with less anxiety and less reluctance. Some people find that the distance created by the screen runs both physically and emotionally. They might not connect as fully, and they might not feel the safety that the therapeutic relationship is intending to create.
That last piece also relates to sneakiness. This is not a dig at clients who resonate with this paragraph, and I want that to be clear. Some clients (myself included) are particularly skilled at engaging in therapy with an element of avoidance. They are able to redirect the conversations and shrug off the attempts to create an environment conducive to vulnerability. This is a very important passage in the therapeutic journey, and it’s for an important reason that I can explore in more depth in a different post. In regard to vulnerability as it relates to virtual and in-person sessions, I have found that these clients that present in a more sneaky way are more likely to use the distance created by a screen to the advantage of their avoidance. Again, this doesn’t make a sneaky client a bad client, and they can still have successful therapy through virtual means. It is a consideration, though, if this paragraph resonates for you and virtual therapy hasn’t been as effective as you were hoping for in the past. The intensity of an in-person setting may be helpful to bypass those protective mechanisms of emotional distance and avoidance.
Someone’s neurotype can relate to overall themes of accessibility. The advent of more common virtual therapy has allowed for more access to mental healthcare. For people who experience issues with their physical health, transportation, sensory sensitivities, and/or finding accommodations in various physical settings, virtual options can be extremely impactful and important. I have found that clients who struggle with transportation and childcare to especially benefit from the option to have virtual sessions. I also find, as a neurodivergent person, that I am affected differently in virtual versus in-person sessions. I can find eye contact to be difficult, and it seems to be less difficult in virtual sessions most of the time. Accessibility is also important to consider when providers are seeking office space, but that also relates to affordability and existence of appropriate facilities, which is a different -but related- conversation. Many office buildings are older and may not be ADA-accessible. The way waiting rooms and therapy rooms are designed also matters, including issues such as type of seating, lighting, and type of décor. Seating may not make the space comfortable for all bodies. Lighting can be intense or distracting for those with sensory sensitivities. A sterile office may not be conducive to relaxation or grounding for someone who thrives in warmer spaces or needs to fidget in order to focus.
In reality, the decision to do therapy virtually or in-person comes down to personal preference (outside of systemic issues like access to transportation options). You may be a neurodivergent person who resonates with being more sneaky or avoidant in intensely emotional settings, and you may very well still enjoy and thrive in virtual therapy. You may find that you don’t have a preference between the modalities. In a time when so many therapists are working within a remote-only model, these are important considerations while seeking therapeutic care. Struggling to connect with a provider in a virtual setting doesn’t mean you’re broken or doomed to “fail at” therapy (also an important conversation for another time). There are a lot of factors that affect progress in and out of session. You’re allowed to acknowledge those truths. You may not have the time for a commute to and from a therapist’s office. You may not get the most out of therapy unless you are in office. You often learn along the way, especially if you’ve never done either. That’s okay. It’s all a part of the overall therapeutic picnic. If that makes no sense, please read this explanation of the metaphor of picnic baskets for relationships: https://adivergentlenscounseling.squarespace.com/blog/metaphor-minute-picnic-basket
If you have any other questions or want to explore virtual and/or in-person options for yourself, please reach out. I’d be happy to have a conversation around your thoughts, concerns, and needs.
