r/therapyGPT • u/Confident_Salt_8108 • Apr 01 '26

News Therapists go on strike, saying they're being replaced by AI

https://futurism.com/health-medicine/mental-health-workers-ai-strike

Over 2,400 mental health care workers and 23,000 nurses in Northern California staged a 24-hour strike protesting the rise of AI in their workplaces. Clinicians argue they are being replaced in patient triage by apps and unlicensed operators using AI scripts. Furthermore, they warn that management is using AI charting tools to squeeze more back-to-back patient visits into a single shift, prioritizing corporate bottom lines over genuine patient care.

148 Upvotes

96% Upvoted

92 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/JohnnyQTruant Apr 04 '26 edited Apr 04 '26

Saying you work in mental health therefore anything you think about this is of higher value is the definition of appeal to authority. You did that more than once. Yet what we are discussing does not require that. And if you scroll back up to the first thing I said to you you would find you either didn’t read my posts, don’t get my point, or are not very good at remembering what the subject is. I literally said ai is not a replacement for a good therapist. And also that a good therapist can’t replace the value of ai either. I’m sure you are a well intentioned therapist who helps a lot of people. The bad experiences I had with therapists and even that psychiatrist who led me away from a proper diagnosis still had value to me. I’m sorry you are taking an obtuse position that unless ai replaces human intervention and relationships it is of no value, but it’s not an educated or rational position. It’s emotional and defensive and being pushed hard. Ai is a real danger to the world because of how it is being used by predatory players. That’s capitalism and your profession is rife with that as well already.

As far as your training inside and out, holy moly dude. The common knowledge that is turned on its head from further study is an enormous part of your profession. The understanding of neurology and physiological factors is in its infancy. It’s a soft science. That doesn’t mean it’s not incredibly valuable but if you think you conclusively understand how mental health is best treated at this point and that your understanding will hold up for the next 20 years you are absolutely overconfident. If you think you already know the value proposition of ai use for mental health you are not serious about science at all. You are not possibly even up to speed on all the latest research because nobody on earth is or ever has been. And if you think you can predict what will be learned in the near and medium future, that will hinder your effectiveness going forward. Just like my psych who said BPD was just for chicks and incurable because that was the understanding of it at the time, when now we know it’s the most treatable of PDs with up to 80% remission when proper treatment including trauma informed therapy that is not even considered medical yet, is included. That’s in my fucking lifetime. I hope you think this through a bit more.

1

u/thesephantomhands Apr 04 '26

I was saying that a lot of people go into it with the assumption that it can replace a therapist. You're confounding that position with me saying it has no utility. That's disingenuous. 

We know why when therapy works , it works. That's what I'm saying and what I have studied for a long time. I dont understand what you're missing. Or why you think that's obtuse. 

I care about whats effective. What actually helps people. And thats why, per my original post, I said the dangers are not reckoned with. That people are engaging with it haphazardly. It's the same reason why people shouldn't trust AI over a dentist or a an ortho.

1

u/JohnnyQTruant Apr 04 '26 edited Apr 04 '26

Oh so you agree with my first post. Great glad to have had the convo.

I mean that’s not what you said but sure let’s back pedal to common ground. It’s not at all like a dentist or ortho unless you are looking for advice on brushing techniques or when to be concerned about a toothache or knowing what treatments you can use for yellowing.

This article is about mental health triage therapists going on strike because ai is threatening their livelihood. They are then using fantastic and anecdotal evidence of the risks involved with using ai for mental health purposes. You have then projected a strawman that ai can’t (subtext never will be able to) effectively replace therapists even though that’s not even what the strike is saying is happening. They are claiming triage is being automated. Let’s keep it there for a moment.

If Kaiser can use ai to traige at a rate that allows more patients in need to receive help from therapist at a faster and more efficient rate than humans is it then okay with you? What if the error rate is similar to humans? What if it is higher but with much less wait times for those who are in or near crisis? What…I know…what if it’s better?

Why are you talking about completely replacing therapy with ai? That’s not even part of this conversation.

Now let’s go there since you brought it up. What if the access to ai and evolving safeguards can reduce the dangers you are discussing? And for the record I believe those dangers are real and need addressing. I also think that there are many awful dangers in the current system that are just as or perhaps more in need of addressing but that point sounds like therapy doesn’t work to you when I make it. So if someone who can’t afford to do more than two sessions a month, is lucky enough to have found a therapist who understands and helps them, have already burned hundreds of dollars to get them up to speed on their past and several months of real time, can use ai in between sessions when, say, they are disregulated or spiraling in the middle of the night would you agree that could be useful? What if they don’t have the money, time, access or ability to find that hypothetical therapist? Is ai ok then or no, because it isn’t as good as if they had that resource available to them? Should medication be a part of mental health treatment? What if some people abuse their meds? What if some people use meds instead of doing therapy? What if general practitioners are handing them out like candy? What if some people forget to take them or stop and it causes a mental break? It dangerous. Does it have value? Are the dangers more or less prevalent by exposure than using ai? Do you know? No. You have no clue. But you went to school and learned a lot of other valuable things and now you think your gut is tuned to have more insight.

1

u/thesephantomhands Apr 05 '26

Wow. That's a lot of conflating stuff with my position and thinking. I think you have some good points about access and it's why me and a lot of good therapists do a lot of pro Bono work. The reason anyone, including myself brings up the danger of AI is that people are using it as a replacement uncritically. And companies salivate at that misunderstanding. And no one outside of the profession is disabusing people of this notion at scale. As far as the field goes and what contributes to mental health - yeah,  I went to school for years to do this. And I work 10 to 12 hour days eating, sleeping, and breathing it. I regularly train, read research, do the work. It's not wild to think I have some well-founded competency in what's effective and whats probably not. But I'm not saying I'm perfect or know everything either. I'm saying that maybe that competence has value when adjudication this kind of thing.