Mental health (MH) needs secret shoppers able to spot check & asses industry integrity of services rendered.

In retail, dining, & other services, one quality control tactic is implementing secret shoppers who perform a service as a customer anonymously to report the experience integrity thru analysis. Business do this as well, as we’ve seen on reality shows.

Therapy & psychiatry needs exactly this: Someone performing tests on large sample sizes then analyzing these findings in report/article form using a standardized approach (data collection).

One of the reasons MH providers think there is no problem (among themselves or others) is because there is no system of accountability – they assess their own work, or not at all.

Their sample size reaching this conclusion is so small (themselves, coworkers & maybe another few therapists or none at all); leaving the integrity of these conclusions questionable at best. Completely inadmissible at worst.

I don’t see therapists peer reviewing coworkers let alone anonymous practices outside their very small realm; yet they are the first ones to speak up with their own industry conclusions. This is awful data, plain & simple.

Maybe they discuss methodologies at retreats & other functions, or amongst themselves at dinner with friends, but no one is watching their peers work in any independently worthy fashion.

So the conclusions they reach are based on impossibly small n-values, not to mention the inherent subjectivity, bias & conflicts of interest incentivizing positivity & evading their own accountability. 🤯

A Catching Karens (CK) goal I am hashing out feasibility for is being this secret shopper & eventually empowering others to do the same, including analytically assessing MH treatments in some substantial way beyond just “I like my therapists, everything is fine” or the skewed self assessments of therapists putting themselves on pedestals.

I’ve seen no other industry operate so independently void of peer review of any kind. It’s awful; imagine restaurants all being responsible for doing their own inspections. Yuck.

We aren’t reinventing the wheel here; we’re applying old school time tested tactics every other industry uses that MH has somehow ducked entirely.

It’s really quite shameful that MH professionals haven’t raised their own red flags here & tried to take action.

But the self-saving incentives & conflicts of interests leave no surprise. There’s simply no direct benefit for MH providers to police themselves; much like a restaurant voluntary seeking food inspections.

They can only lose, unless you consider the system at large. In our case, the bigger picture is people dying & being lead astronomically astray through cavalier half-baked MH services no one is policing, all at patient expense; it’s enabling bad clinicians to stay bad perpetuating inside vacuums of their own design.

This is bad science.

Among these same solutions would be an internal peer review a patient can blow the foul whistle at anytime for:

“Ref, foul! Please spot check what my therapist just said, I think it’s wrong or damaging”.

Yet currently we have nothing like this, and issues need dramatically pushed to upper management where patient comes off erratic or overzealous.

Read Also

Recent Posts

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *