{"id":67880,"date":"2026-04-07T11:26:41","date_gmt":"2026-04-07T15:26:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/?p=67880"},"modified":"2026-04-07T11:38:27","modified_gmt":"2026-04-07T15:38:27","slug":"can-ai-replace-therapists","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/can-ai-replace-therapists\/","title":{"rendered":"Can AI Replace Therapists? A Clinical Psychologist’s Take"},"content":{"rendered":"

Can AI Replace Therapists? Clinic founder Michelle Sorensen<\/a>, registered Clinical Psychologist, shares her reflections on AI and therapy, and why skilled human connection remains at the heart of effective mental health care. Therapy is available virtually across Ontario and Quebec, and in person in Ottawa.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In today’s rapidly evolving AI landscape, a question is coming up more and more: do we still need real, human therapists?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is a fair question. Workers across many industries are grappling with what AI means for their roles, and mental health care is no exception. As the founder of Resiliency Clinic, leading a team of close to 30 therapists, and as a clinical psychologist with over 25 years of practice, I have thought about this carefully. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

My view is that the rise of AI will make the humanities and genuine human connection more important than ever, not less.<\/em> The skills that have sometimes been dismissed as “soft” such as deep listening, clinical judgment, risk assessment, the ability to help someone feel truly seen and heard are precisely what technology cannot replicate. Skilled therapists have always offered something that goes well beyond information or validation. That distinction is only going to matter more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AI in Clinic Practices and Administrative Work<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

What about using AI to make our work more efficient? It is worth addressing directly, because the pressure to adopt these tools is real.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\"Xavier<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

At Resiliency Clinic, we currently do not use AI to record sessions or automate note-taking. <\/strong>This is a deliberate choice. Writing up session notes is not just an administrative task, it is also an opportunity to reflect on what happened in the room and prepare thoughtfully for the next session. That process has clinical value. Sitting with the material after a session, in our own words, is part of how we stay attuned to each client over time.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We have also heard of clients at other clinics being asked whether they are comfortable having their sessions recorded to help the therapist save time. I understand the efficiency argument, but I think this places clients in a genuinely difficult position. Many of the people who come to us are working on exactly the issues that would make that question hard to answer honestly such as people-pleasing, difficulty advocating for themselves, a tendency to prioritize others’ comfort over their own needs. Asking someone in that position to consent to being recorded, or to later request proof that transcripts have been deleted, runs counter to the therapeutic work itself. The most straightforward way to protect confidentiality is to keep notes concise and focused on what is clinically relevant.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

On the administrative side, I have had many companies approach me about using AI to handle initial client inquiries. I have not adopted this, and I do not plan to. I personally read every email and listen to every voicemail from new clients. That first contact matters. It gives me the clinical information I need to match each person to the right therapist based on presenting concerns, fit, availability, and what I know about each member of my team. That matching process draws on 25 years of clinical experience and a detailed understanding of how my therapists work. It is not something I would hand off to an algorithm.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think we will increasingly see professions distinguish themselves by being clear about where they draw this line \u2014 not because they are resistant to technology, but because some things are better done by a human being who is paying attention.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Clinical Judgment Versus Constant Validation<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

There is something AI does quite well: it validates. Whether someone is typing into ChatGPT or Gemini, the response tends to be warm, affirming, and immediate. That feels good, especially when someone is anxious or looking for reassurance. But that warmth is not neutral. The business model of AI engagement tools is to keep users coming back, and validation drives that. I noticed this firsthand when I asked a parenting question and mentioned a worry about one of my teenagers. ChatGPT quickly affirmed what a great mom I was, even though I had not raised that concern. It was reassuring in a way that felt good in the moment for anyone managing parental anxiety<\/a> but unhelpful on reflection.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Therapists are skilled at empathy too but we use it with judgment<\/em>. There is a meaningful difference between feeling heard and being challenged to look more closely at something.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To illustrate: a client says, “I am really busy at work and I don’t spend much time with my teenagers. Is that okay?” A therapist will respond with empathy, but that same conversation can open into something more substantive. A discussion about the developmental importance of parental connection during adolescence, and how critical it is to stay present during the years when friends become the priority or teens begin to withdraw online. The therapist brings a background in developmental psychology and clinical experience with teenagers, young adults, and parents. They will be honest. They will help the client sit with something uncomfortable if that is what is needed. When I asked that same question to ChatGPT, the response focused on quality time over quantity in a way that was reassuring and, clinically speaking, incomplete.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Some people ask: don’t therapists also want their clients to keep booking sessions? It is a fair question. The difference is that a therapist’s long-term success depends on actually helping<\/em> people. Clients who feel genuinely supported come back when they need to, refer friends and colleagues, and trust the clinic because they have experienced real results. There is no pressure to book unless it is clinically warranted. A therapist who is honest, even when honesty is uncomfortable, builds the kind of relationship that sustains a practice over time. That is a very different incentive structure than an AI tool optimized for engagement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The problem with constant affirmation is that it can cause real harm. Many clients who contact us have had previous therapy experiences where they felt the therapist only listened, without ever offering a different perspective or gently challenging their thinking. That kind of challenge is not unkind, it is often where the real work begins<\/strong>. Some of the most important moments in therapy start with a client feeling a little resistance to something their therapist has reflected back to them. That discomfort is a signal that something worth exploring is there.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AI cannot offer that. AI is designed<\/em> to agree, reassure, and keep you engaged, and in everyday situations that can feel supportive. But when someone is making a significant decision, like whether to cut off a family member, leave a relationship, or make a major life change, receiving only validation without any clinical assessment of what is driving that decision can point someone in the wrong direction. A skilled therapist will not simply tell you what you want to hear. They will help you understand what is actually going on.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

When AI Becomes a Substitute for Real Relationships<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

There are also broader concerns emerging about how AI relationships are affecting people’s capacity for real human connection. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Esther Perel, an internationally recognized therapist and author,<\/a> has spoken about clients who develop deep emotional attachments to AI companions, finding them more compelling than real-life relationships. The appeal is understandable. An AI companion is consistently affirming, always available, and completely frictionless. Perel’s concern is not just that people prefer this. It is what that preference is doing to us over time. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

A relationship without friction, she has noted, gradually changes what we can tolerate in real ones. The discomfort of not knowing, the effort of working through conflict, the experience of being misunderstood and finding your way back. These are not flaws in human relationships; they are the conditions under which we actually grow. When people turn to AI for connection, they are often bringing a longing for something real but settling for an idealized version that requires nothing of them. That is a meaningful loss, even when it does not feel like one.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

AI will continue to be adopted across industries, including in aspects of health care. It can do a great deal. But the evidence points consistently to one conclusion: it cannot replace a skilled therapist, or the human relationships that are at the centre of a meaningful life.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If you have been curious about therapy, or have had an experience in the past that did not feel like the right fit, we would be glad to talk. A free 15-minute consultation is available to help you <\/a>find the right therapist for your needs. Therapy is available in person in Ottawa and virtually across <\/strong>Ontario and Quebec.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Disclaimer: These posts are not a replacement for psychological services.\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

People are asking whether AI will replace therapists. As a clinical psychologist with over 25 years of practice and the founder of a team of close to 30 therapists, it is a question I have thought about carefully. Here are my reflections.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":50,"featured_media":67882,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[11],"tags":[85,86,43],"class_list":["post-67880","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-blog","tag-ai","tag-technology","tag-therapy"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67880","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/50"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=67880"}],"version-history":[{"count":13,"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67880\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":67897,"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67880\/revisions\/67897"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/67882"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67880"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67880"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/resiliencyclinic.com\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67880"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}