Is online/video teleconference therapy as effective as face to face therapy - Term Paper Example

? ID Lecturer Is online/video teleconference therapy as effective as face to face therapy? This paper covers the basis of comparing the face to face therapy with the online/video teleconferencing measures. It is in support of the face to face therapy and discards the usefulness of the other (the apparently more technologically-advanced one). The discussion centers on the premise of bringing in a comparison which is made stronger with the negation of the technological link and the significance of the face to face therapy regimes. Online/Video Teleconference Therapy and Face to Face Therapy Within personality assessment, it is important that the person upon whom therapy is being imparted is present in a face to face setting. What this will do is to tell the one who is providing the therapy that it draws quite a number of advantages as compared to when the therapy is being done in an online/video teleconferencing mannerism. The online methodology might be a new idea but it does not come up with the success pointers that are derived from the face to face therapy perspectives. The need is to understand where the therapy is lagging and what could be done to make sure that this therapy remains stronger at the end of the day. In line with a comprehension as to how therapy should be provided, what remains pivotal is how well the provider is getting the hang of the relevant nuances and what he must be doing to make sure that the entire therapy gets done in the long run scheme of things. The effectiveness therefore has to be gauged beforehand because face to face therapy resolves quite a few issues which might not be solved if the therapy is done in an online/video teleconferencing mechanism. This paper emphasizes upon the details of face to face therapy being a better fit than the online/video teleconferencing methodologies which are more apt with the progressing times of today. It is very important to know here that personality assessment deals with quite a few aspects of the human beings. Some of these issues center on the premise of building up the strengths that lie within their folds more than anything else. The personality assessment takes care of the issues that deal with the individuals and it is always a good exercise to find out where they are lagging and what kind of problems they are going through. Therapy is a long process and often it takes a substantial amount of time to bring success within the domains of the people who are being treated with the same. It is therefore better to deal it in such a way that the individual under consideration (or question) is sitting opposite the one who is providing the therapy in entirety. It will solve half of the problems that acquaint such an individual because he would be analyzed well by the doctor or the therapist. However, this does not come about in essence when this person is being seen across a video/online teleconferencing act, where there are fewer chances to find out what exactly is taking place within his realms. In fact, it is a joke in its own right when a person is being analyzed and later on given therapy in such a way (Daim, 2011). The therapy process is consequently given the weight that it requires so that the individuals who are being analyzed and eventually treated are given the exact attention that they deserve. This shall solve the problems that they are plagued with and take into consideration the future issues which might come about within the same quarters. Online counseling is therefore one step down from face to face therapy which takes place under such situations and settings. Both counselors and therapists appreciate the idea of having their subject sitting right next to them so that they can study the facial gestures, body movements, any other actions and behaviors, which are all the more significant whilst comprehending what the exact problems are. However, it is a fact that both therapy types have their distinctive characteristics but the face to face therapy succeeds well over the online/video teleconferencing mechanisms which are in place. The single most differentiating and crucial factor between the two therapy types is that the former studies the body language better while the online/video teleconferencing does not take such details into proper consideration at all. This is the reason why it is not being given the significance in this day and age; however its use is being made use of more and more (Mountain, 2002). Analysis is such a necessity within such therapy sessions that without taking a look at the body language, there would be serious discrepancies within the relevant quarters. What is even more stressful is the fact that these online sessions do not give an idea as to how the individual under consideration is feeling or what he has gone through just before the therapy session started to take place. Hence the naivety does not work wonders for the online mode of communication under such therapy sessions without a shadow of a doubt. Counseling is an art if understood properly. This is because it deals with quite a few issues if seen within the corrective settings of therapy and healing provision. The online/video teleconferencing must be seen in such a way that there is room for comprehending where the individual is being analyzed properly and where he is lagging. If the counselors and therapists know beforehand that they are not going to see the individual in person, their interest fades away because now they are dealing with someone who is just a virtual entity and nothing more than that (Glomb, 2011). There is a great amount of resentment that comes within the ranks of the therapists when they know that they would have to deal with someone who does not exist in the most real self possible. The therapy session should always be handled in such a way that both the therapist and the person for whom the therapy is being conducted are in the same loop so that no missing link arises for any reason whatsoever. This would be an ideal situation where the face to face therapy is doing wonders for both the person upon whom the therapy is playing its action and the therapist who gets to see the patient up close and personal. The therapy should always be such that there are maximum avenues for both the therapist and the individual under question to gauge where they belong from and how well they understand one another, more so the therapist of the individual under consideration (Petheram, 2003). My viewpoint is based on the ideology that therapists and counselors require their time to understand the subject (or the individual). This is the reason why they must be given the proper time and space to come to terms with the reckoning that surrounds their notion of creating empathy and understanding. This viewpoint has come about with the passage of time where the main focus has remained on getting the individual healed or treated in the most apt manner that there could ever be present. I have known people who usually prefer meeting the therapist in a one to one setting because this helps them in easily getting their point across to the relevant therapist or counselor (Harris, 2006). They feel that they have told the entire story if they meet the therapist in person rather than meeting him over an online methodology which includes teleconferencing. I am certain that many people would appreciate the online methodology as well but then again most of the people I know take the online approach for granted as they feel it does not solve the problem at all which is lingering at their end. They believe that it would be a good thing if they discuss the issues with their respective therapists and counselors if they meet him in person because this is something serious that is attached with their lives. My stance is provided evidence by my belief that banks largely on the people I know as well as the secondary research that has been conducted over a period of time. I have come to know that individuals like me would generally mind if they are given a chance to face a therapist or a counselor in an online/video teleconferencing fashion. It would mean that they are not able to sustain the tough questions in an online methodology because it does not solve their problems at all. The basic belief of aloofness would remain for a number of different reasons and it would be sound to state here that these reasons do have a sense of genuineness attached with them. Hence my perspective is based on the premise of bringing in the therapist and the subject in a close, face to face examination so that the end result is one of a better empathy for the individual on the part of the therapist or the counselor. It would give the individual a good enough picture as to where he stands and how best to deal with the nuances which engulf his life in entirety. Such issues should always be dealt with a stern approach because face to face therapy sessions take care of the minor as well as the major areas which destruct a person’s life without a shadow of a doubt. The stance is made clearer with some researchers suggesting the same time and again. It is because of this research which has been done over a period of time that the success areas within therapy have been achieved. In fact, these have been turned into strengthening acts of providing relief, care and healing to the subjects under consideration (Groop, 2011). What remains most significant however is a vision to set things right for the future because the individuals who require therapy would continue to be at the backburner whenever the talk goes out loud regarding their therapy sessions. They are usually not allowed to choose which methodology they would be a part of, and how well this mechanism would be employed for their own betterment in the long run. Further research into this area of therapy and counseling has suggested that video teleconferencing does not always solve the problem that face to face therapy would actually do. What this implies is the fact that the amount of comfort available in face to face sessions is much more than when one does it with the online methodology where technology is exploited to the most optimum levels. What remains to be seen under such situations is how the patient is feeling because his emotions and sentiments are directly conveyed through his actions and behaviors plus he gets to see quite a lot through the varied actions of the therapist or the counselor who is facing him in an online fashion. The world of today might have seen extraordinary advancements and not more so the video teleconferencing mechanisms which are in place, but it would be wrong to suggest that these are for the betterment of therapy related modules which are in place and which suggest help and facilitation for all and sundry. Essentially the level of comfort would dictate the basis of success or failure for the patients and their coordination and communication with the therapists and counselors (Carey, 2011). If this level of comfort is maintained, there would not be any doubt that the video teleconferencing mechanism would continue to retain its place as being the most sought after methodology which is in place, and which shall create ripples within therapy for all the right reasons. The level of comfort would eventually solve quite a few lingering issues which remained present within the yesteryears and shall haunt the basis of harmony between the subject and the therapist or the counselor. After all, the subject does not have much idea as to how he would be seen and deciphered by the therapist or the counselor that he is attending. It is only a matter of knowing that he would be analyzed and examined which shall make him feel anxious and nervous at the same time. The subject should always be examined by comforting him because it is important that he remains positive and contented with whatever he has been asked from and the amount of discussion that is happening shall always remain positive at the end of the day (Fox, 2011). The individuals who have gone through such therapies have usually discussed what they felt is the right way to go about doing things. They believe that it is always a good practice to have as many face to face therapies as is possible because these solve the issues which plague the life of the subject under consideration. They also think that it is a good omen if the therapist or the counselor knows how to tackle the subject and to give him solace which he would direly need for him to become a better person in entirety. Therapy is an important part of any person’s individual self and it would be a good starting point if this remains a private concern. However, expanding it on to the online/video teleconferencing mechanisms would mean that his privacy is being subjugated upon which he shall feel strongly about. What is even more distressing to know is the fact that there are some third party arrangements that might have a look on the therapy sessions that are not allowed by the subjects under any situation whatsoever. Privacy therefore remains an important key under such circumstances and events. A good starting point would be to make sure that such therapies are discarded completely so that success can only be derived from the face to face therapies and no other way is deemed as beneficial between the therapist and the individual upon whom the therapy is being done. In the end, it would be sound to state here that therapy sessions if conducted in a face to face manner would have the best possible mileage – ensuring that people at both ends are in complete control of their respective trades and allowing the other one to derive success as well. The researchers have done their homework well because they have been able to find success under the face to face therapy sessions more than the online/video teleconferencing mechanisms. The technological link is very significant but not as such that it shall be the basis of immense productivity for the therapists and their patients. In essence, it would be a good starting point to make sure that the therapists know what is good for them and how they can derive the best and maximum mileage out of their therapy sessions in the long term scheme of things. My own perspective is therefore based on the premise of deriving the maximum value out of the face to face therapy sessions which would produce the best results, no matter wherever the therapy sessions are taking place around the world. The general dictum would remain the same irrespective of the procedure adopted and the mannerism undertaken by the different parties on a number of occasions. References Carey, T., 2011. As you like it: adopting a patient-led approach to psychological treatments. Journal of Public Mental Health, 10(1) Daim, T., 2011. Foreseeing disruptive technological innovations. Foresight, 13(5) Fox, S., 2011. How does the delivery of multisystemic therapy to adolescents and their families challenge practice in traditional services in the Criminal Justice System? The British Journal of Forensic Practice, 13(1) Glomb, T., 2011. Mindfulness at Work. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 30 Groop, J., 2011. Processes, episodes and events in health service supply chains. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 16(3) Harris, N., 2006. Does technology have a role to play in assisting stroke therapy?: A review of practical issues for practitioners. Quality in Ageing and Older Adults, 7(1) Mountain, G., 2002. Integration: The Occupational Therapy Experience. Journal of Integrated Care, 10(2) Petheram, B., 2003. Using benchmarking data for assessing performance in occupational therapy. Clinical Governance: An International Journal, 8(4) Read More