The ongoing dispute about social justice activism in psychology has flared up again in the UK with the publication of an excellent and insightful article by Colin Freeman in the Daily Telegraph.
He reports on the heated debate about ‘neutrality’ in therapy. The article quotes a piece published in the British Psychological Society’s journal, The Psychologist, titled “It’s time for psychologists to become activists” in which the claim is made that neutrality is “white-centric” and “a protective shield for the powerful.” It was written by Dr Mehdi Alemohammad, “a former NHS psychologist now in private practice”, who grew up in Iran. Dr Alemohammad claims that many of his “clients of colour” had been traumatised by Israel’s post-October 7th invasion of Gaza – as he had – and “needed me to join them in their fury”.
In response, Deanna Jade, a specialist in eating disorders, raised objections, stating that “the role of a psychologist is to be a neutral anchor for a person in distress” and “When we prioritise ‘social justice’ theories over clinical neutrality, we cease to be objective therapists and risk doing real harm to patients”.
Other psychologists and psychotherapists are quoted in the article, including Pat Harvey of BPS Watch and Ben Sears of Just Therapy. They advise against bringing politics into patient sessions “where people are presenting with a great deal of complex stress” and of having to be “very careful about introducing political agendas that might not actually reflect that person’s real problem”. The article also references CTA and repeats its warning that “activists are reframing the narrative of therapy, seizing control of professional bodies and institutions’.
Freeman quotes a spokesperson for the BPS who says “The Psychologist is designed as a forum for discussion amongst our members and beyond. Views expressed in signed articles are exclusively those of the author and does not constitute BPS endorsement”.
However, the last word is given to Deanna Jade who states that “The core purpose of psychology is to help people navigate their individual struggles, rather than acting as arbiters of social justice”.
Here at CTA, we could not agree more. As for the BPS spokesperson’s claim that the organisation does not endorse the views expressed in Dr Alemohammad’s article, we are not convinced. We have published several articles showing that the BPS does indeed endorse such views. You can read these articles here, here and here. Yet again, one of our major therapeutic bodies has been found wanting and still they won’t admit to it. Do better BPS.
Leave a Reply