(Left Couch)/Right Couch: Therapeutic Polarization and its Clinical—and Ethical—Consequences

• In Event: Sociology of Culture Section Roundtables
  In Refereed Roundtable (90 minute): 6. Far-Right Movements & Extremist Discourse

Abstract

Much research has been conducted on how political polarization negatively impacts mental health outcomes. What is less known is how political polarization among psychotherapists affects clinical decision-making—and reflects greater ethical commitments. Drawing from 107 interviews with therapists of varied training backgrounds and varied political orientations, I show that a recently emerged subset of conservative psychotherapists challenges many tenets of a broader, left-leaning field. After detailing the rise of the marked category of “conservative psychotherapy” in 2020, I illustrate three main differences in clinical approach across political party: (1) while (liberal) therapists draw from both cultural and structural competency efforts, conservative therapists draw only from the former; (2) while (liberal) therapists advance an accepting model of care built on affirmation and validation, conservative therapists advance a challenging model of care built on anti-affirmation and anti-validation; and (3) while (liberal) therapists see their role as part pedagogue, conservative therapists see their role as part coach. I frame my findings as contrasting a field-wide psychosocial ethic versus a conservative ethic of personal responsibility and conclude by theorizing how my findings advance scholarship on politics and morality, right-wing movements, and professional fields.

Author

• Nick Rekenthaler, New York University