I feel that e-therapy should be able to operate across the broad spectrum of the Internet quite freely. I also feel that any abuse should be dealt with severely. Having said that I reiterate that therapists should not be restricted, on the Internet to practice solely in the area in which they reside.
In my opinion it really is a matter of professionalism and not professional protectionism.
Of course across such a vast medium as the Internet and across 'jurisdictional boundaries' you are going to get some tricksters, fraudsters and individual out to take advantage of vulnerable people, but I also understand and suspect these numbers to be small.
The interesting thing about the Internet is that it 'shrinks' the world. It is almost like a village. Accepting the fact that the only way for a therapist to practice e-therapy is through a site which is wide open to everyone. It means that the moment that you do do something wring, is untoward, the moment you step out of line the whole village knows about it. In short your practice dries up you are no longer in business. In many respects it may be safer than many sheltered and secretive practices. It is easy to get a second opinion about an e-mail, rather than access to notes in a file. In fact, you could well argue that it opens therapy up to be scrutinized.
I would also suggest that, at a distance, it must be quite difficult for an trained/untrained and unscrupulous therapist to fool a client for too long. Are the proponents really suggesting that 'registration' and licensing really stops a therapist, doctor or psychiatrist, care worker etc from abusing or taking advantage of a vulnerable client if they really want to.
Also with the open encouragement of clients to check therapists credentials thoroughly and directly before accepting the service that they offer. This I would suggest further lessens the risk of the former category (inadequately qualified or unscrupulous therapists).
I guess the other thought that came to mind was that it may be o.k. in America to have say 'same state Internet therapists' then what about the rest of the world? China, S E Asia. Russia for instance.
I totally agree with the statement that it is much easier to offer a wide range of therapists and services if you are not limited by state and provincial laws.
Finally, not meaning to be provocative I find it difficult to understand why when society in general gets a facility with the level of freedom, access and communication given by the Internet the first thing that comes to mind is policing/protection. Isn't it about time that we as human beings learned and were able to control ourselves and act in the best interest of everyone. Maybe that is too idealistic.
I also wonder if this 'mongering' is really to do with keeping something 'precious'!!!
