Political affiliation is irrelevant to psychotherapy
A MENtal Strength series article—click here for the articles home page.
The professional ethics of psychotherapy are increasingly threatened by the rise of political ideologies within the field. In the wake of Donald Trump's re-election, some therapists openly admitted to refusing clients who supported him, undermining the fundamental principle of non-discrimination. Others have gone so far as to claim that conservatives are inherently unfit to practice therapy, suggesting that therapeutic competence must align with partisan values. This politicization of therapy is a dangerous trend that compromises the core commitments to client autonomy, respect, and ethical care.
As a liberal and a social worker, I deeply value social justice. Understanding systemic injustices is crucial to effective therapy, yet this doesn’t justify prejudice against individuals based on their political beliefs. This includes the millions who voted for Trump. Effective therapy transcends these divides, operating within a space where connection, understanding, and evidence-based approaches guide meaningful change. As Carl Rogers emphasized, this space must be founded on unconditional positive regard, where clients feel fully accepted, regardless of their beliefs or political stance.
When Political Beliefs Intrude into Therapy
Although the issue of political bias within therapy has the potential to impact Western society profoundly, it has not received widespread attention. In November 2024, an article reported that some therapists had declared they would cut off clients who supported Trump. While the article rightly raised concerns about unethical behavior, its conservative bias weakened its effectiveness by focusing too narrowly on partisan rhetoric. This undermined the larger ethical issue: therapists, regardless of their political affiliation, are obligated to treat clients without discrimination.
(NOTE: To maintain professional courtesy, I have chosen not to name or link the publication that published this article. It included the names of therapists who did not expect their comments to be shared publicly.)
The growing political divide among therapists became particularly evident in 2020, fueled by the popularity of works like Robin DiAngelo’s White Fragility. DiAngelo framed any questioning or disagreement with her approach to antiracism as inherently racist, accusing dissenters of defending white supremacy. Despite criticism from several Black intellectuals and activists, her ideas gained widespread support within online therapist communities, where dissent was often met with harsh criticism. This created an environment in which therapists were pressured to conform to a specific ideological stance, stifling open dialogue and critical thinking.
Such suppression is not just a theoretical issue; it reflects a broader trend of stifling open discussion within the profession. Therapists who refuse to engage with clients holding opposing views signal a departure from core therapeutic values like curiosity, respect, and open dialogue.
Fostering Open Dialogue Among Therapists
In response to the anti-intellectual climate within the profession, I founded the Critical Thinking Therapist group on Facebook, aiming to promote respectful dialogue. The central rule of this group is straightforward: members cannot attack others for holding differing beliefs, even if those beliefs conflict with the moderators’ views.
This approach has sparked controversy, particularly because the group has attracted more conservatives than liberals. This may be because many other therapist groups prioritize ideological conformity, often aligning with left-leaning members in silencing those with more moderate or right-leaning perspectives. As a result, my group has become less comfortable for those who feel strongly that attacking opposing views is justified.
The Critical Thinking Therapist group contrasts sharply with larger therapy-focused groups, where moderators often condone attacks aligned with dominant ideologies. Growing an ideologically uniform group would likely be easier, but I believe such environments hinder professional growth. True growth happens in spaces where ideas can be challenged and refined, and where therapists can expand their perspectives by engaging with differing viewpoints.
In extreme cases, the pressure to conform to a single ideology mirrors what Robert J. Lifton described in Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, where controlling the flow of information creates an environment that discourages dissent. Lifton identified key elements of totalitarian thought reform, such as "milieu control" and the "demand for purity," both of which create an atmosphere in which divergent ideas are suppressed, stifling critical thinking and intellectual growth. When therapists are coerced into ideological uniformity, it severely limits their ability to navigate the complexities of human experience and provide the best care for their clients.
Bridging Divides with Shared Humanity
At the heart of the political divide lies fear and anger—emotions that fuel both ends of the spectrum. Some therapists argue that political beliefs represent fundamental human rights issues, making engagement with opposing views morally impossible. However, refusing to engage with clients whose beliefs differ from our own does little to advance social change or address the human rights concerns at stake.
Therapists can help clients explore the fears and emotional wounds underlying rigid beliefs, such as bigotry. These beliefs often stem from unresolved emotional struggles, and addressing them within the therapeutic process creates opportunities for transformation.
A powerful example of this principle in action comes from Daryl Davis, a Black man who befriended Ku Klux Klan members. Through respectful dialogue and genuine connection, Davis helped dozens of individuals renounce their membership. While Davis is not a therapist, his approach underscores the potential of understanding and engagement over confrontation.
(article continues below)
Meeting Clients Where They Are
It is crucial to remember that those holding rigid or harmful beliefs are often the ones most in need of therapy. A therapist who cannot set aside their personal biases may need to refer a client to another professional. However, part of being an effective therapist is learning to manage counter-transference—our personal reactions to clients—so that these biases do not interfere with providing effective care. For instance, I’ve worked with men consumed by misogynistic rage. By building trust and offering support, I have helped many of these men develop humility and respect for women—not by shaming them, but by creating a space conducive to personal growth. This process requires flexibility, patience, and a willingness to tolerate discomfort. It sometimes requires forgiveness.
We must be able to listen deeply to painfully distorted views, confident that listening, and validating the humanity of the person we’re helping, does not amount to validating their views. Through this, therapists can help clients soften their beliefs and promote meaningful change.
Opening Up to Others’ Worldviews
Throughout my career, I’ve learned the importance of blending with clients’ values while staying grounded in my own. As a hospice social worker, I cared for people facing death, and never once did I feel offended by their beliefs, regardless of how unconventional or conflicting they were with my own.
I also worked with terminally ill patients experiencing psychosis. My role was not to challenge their delusions—whether about aliens in toilets or being dead since childhood—but to honor their dignity and provide emotional support. These experiences taught me to meet clients where they are, in their reality, without imposing my worldview on them.
A profound lesson came when I sought therapy through a military employee assistance program and was paired with a Christian therapist. Initially hesitant to share my own spiritual beliefs, I eventually did. To my surprise, we discovered we had been influenced by the same authors. My initial prejudice led me to believe he would judge me, but in reality, we shared far more common ground than I expected.
A Path Forward for Therapy
Therapists have chosen a profession grounded in connection, empathy, and understanding—even when faced with challenging beliefs. Refusing to engage with clients based on political differences undermines the transformative potential of therapy. Therapy is not about ideological alignment—it’s about fostering growth by providing a space where clients feel safe to explore their beliefs and experiences.
When therapists focus on their craft—building genuine connections and fostering personal growth—political affiliation becomes irrelevant. Therapy transcends ideological divides. For therapists who struggle to work with clients whose views clash with their own, I believe that’s one of the many reasons therapists also need to see therapists. As therapists, we need to be able to tolerate discomfort, lest through our attempts to avoid it, we compromise the quality of our work. Therapy thrives not by avoiding discomfort, but by navigating it with curiosity and compassion. By confronting their emotional reactions to differing beliefs, therapists can better understand the roots of these conflicts and continue providing effective care.
Ultimately, therapy is about meeting clients where they are—not where we wish they would be. This commitment to embracing diversity of thought and experience is essential for the success of both the therapist and the client.
Michael Giles LCSW is a psychotherapist who specializes in helping men overcoming anxiety, heal from trauma, and repair their relationships.
Click here to schedule a consultation.
Click here to read about his book, Relationship Repair for Men: Counterintuitive behaviors that restore love to struggling relationships.
