October 1, 2025

This guidance on telehealth was published today by CMS on the status of telemental health. All telehealth services will return to the status of non-coverage that was in place before the pandemic, except for mental health services. This was what CSWA was expecting.

CMS made no change to the in-person requirement that goes into effect today. To review, it means that we need to see virtual Medicare patients once a year in-person. There is an option to document that the in-person requirement will interfere with ongoing treatment and waive it. It is unclear whether it is possible for new virtual patients to have the in-person requirement waived as of today.

Additionally, there will be a 10-day hold on payments for traditional Medicare. Claims can continue to be submitted but will not be processed for 14 days. Here is the guidance (yellow highlight is that of Laura Groshong, CSWA Director of Policy and Practice):

CENTERS FOR MEDICARE & MEDICAID SERVICES (CMS) Wednesday, October, 1, 2025 Update on Medicare Operations: Telehealth, Claims Processing, and Medicare Administrative Contractors Status During the Shutdown When certain legislative payment provisions (“extenders”) are scheduled to expire, CMS directs all Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) to implement a temporary claims hold. This standard practice is typically up to 10 business days and ensures that Medicare payments are accurate and consistent with statutory requirements. The hold prevents the need for reprocessing large volumes of claims should Congress act after the statutory expiration date and should have a minimal impact on providers due to the 14-day payment floor. Providers may continue to submit claims during this period, but payment will not be released until the hold is lifted. Absent Congressional action, beginning October 1, 2025, many of the statutory limitations that were in place for Medicare telehealth services prior to the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency will take effect again for services that are not behavioral and mental health services. These include prohibition of many services provided to beneficiaries in their homes and outside of rural areas and hospice recertifications that require a face-to-face encounter. In some cases, these restrictions can impact requirements for meeting continued eligibility for other Medicare benefits. In the absence of Congressional action, practitioners who choose to perform telehealth services that are not payable by Medicare on or after October 1, 2025, may want to evaluate providing beneficiaries with an Advance Beneficiary Notice of Noncoverage. Practitioners should monitor Congressional action and may choose to hold claims associated with telehealth services that are not payable by Medicare in the absence of Congressional action. Additionally, Medicare would not be able to pay some kinds of practitioners for telehealth services. For further information: https://www.cms.gov/medicare/coverage/telehealth. CMS notes that the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 allows clinicians in applicable Medicare Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) to provide and receive payment for covered telehealth services to certain Medicare beneficiaries without geographic restriction and in the beneficiary’s home. There is no special application or approval process for applicable ACOs or their ACO participants or ACO providers/suppliers. Clinicians in applicable ACOs can provide these covered telehealth services and bill Medicare for the telehealth services that are permissible under Medicare rules during CY 2025, irrespective of further Congressional action. For more information: https://www.cms.gov/files/document/shared-savings-program-telehealth-fact-sheet.pdf. MACs will continue to perform all functions related to Medicare Fee-for-Service claims processing and payment.

Please continue to let members of Congress know that the in-person requirement will be a hardship for many patients. Let Laura Groshong, LICSW, CSWA Director of Policy and Practice, know if you have any more questions about the changes to telemental health coverage at lwgroshong@clinicalsocialworkassociation.org.

September 29, 2025

By Laura Groshong, LICSW, Director of Policy and Practice

The post on telemental health that went out last week prompted many questions which I will try to answer here:

1. Are clients who are currently being seen virtually need to be seen in person once a year? If the patient has not been seen in-person prior to 10/1/25, they will need to be seen once a year in-person. If the patient has been seen virtually prior to 10/1/25, they will likely be exempt from the in-person requirement. (https://www.cms.gov/files/document/mln1986542-medicare-mental-health-coverage.pdf, p. 10)

2. Where are the citations for the in-person requirement? The citation in #1 and the following citation, both from CMS, are the information I am using. (https://www.cms.gov/files/document/mln1986542-medicare-mental-health-coverage.pdf, p. 6)

3. Do we know if this same restriction will apply to psychiatrists and psych NPs? We do not have an answer to this as it is outside of our scope.

4. Won’t the predicted continuing resolution (CR) again extend COVID era telehealth variances? For context, during the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress and federal agencies gave temporary flexibility for telehealth. Each time Congress has passed a CR, they’ve often tacked on an extension to include those flexibilities.

The continuing resolution to maintain funding for the Federal budget is by no means definite to avoid a government shutdown. A CR must occur by Tuesday, 9/30/25 or government funding for most functions will stop. Healthcare cuts are one of the ways that this administration planned to fund the huge bill passed this summer.

5. How do we define existing patient? An existing patient is someone who has been seen virtually prior to 10/1/25.

6. How will commercial insurers respond to the in-person requirement? There is no clear message from commercial insurers yet. They are probably waiting to see whether the in-person requirement is delayed or not.

7. Could you advise us members whom to contact to protest this? Contact your members of Congress at https://www.congress.gov/contact-us.

8. Will we be able to have a new Medicare client who is a no-show covered, including for the initial appointment? There are a few plans, mainly ERISA, i.e., self-insured, that cover no-shows, but Medicare is not one of them. There is no plan at this time for that to change for the in-person requirement.

9. Do patients who become Medicare-eligible while we are seeing them using different insurance coverage have to be seen in person when they switch to Medicare coverage? That is likely, but I would check with your Medicare Administrative Contractor to find out for sure.

I will continue to answer questions about telemental health as they come in and as information is provided by Congress and CMS.

Contact: Laura Groshong, LICSW, CSWA Director of Policy and Practice at lwgroshong@clinicalsocialworkassociation.org.

September 26, 2025

It appears that the furious effort by mental health groups to do away with the requirement that new patients be seen in person before beginning virtual mental health treatment has failed for now. Therefore, starting September 30, 2025, any new Medicare patient must be seen in-person before starting virtual treatment, and once a year after that. The good news is that current patients being seen virtually will not need to be seen in person.

If CMS does change these rules in the future, there is strong support for those changes to be retroactive. As most of you know, CMS has agreed to cover telemental health permanently, but the in-person requirements going forward will make virtual treatment much more difficult and have a chilling effect on seeing patients through telemental health. Additionally, there is the problem for LCSWs who have given up having an office where they can see patients in person.

CSWA will continue to provide information on this important topic as we receive it. Please let Laura Groshong, LICSW, CSWA Director of Policy and Practice know if you have any questions at lwgroshong@clinicalsocialworkassociation.org.

September 25, 2025

Beginning January 1st, 2026, CMS is starting a 6-year pilot project called the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction (WISeR) Model in six states (Arizona, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington State). Information can be found at https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/press-releases/cms-launches-new-model-target-wasteful-inappropriate-services-original-medicare. Under this pilot project, certain outpatient services that are thought to be prone to fraud, waste, or low clinical value will require prior authorization using artificial intelligence (AI). This would apply to traditional Medicare beneficiaries only. Currently, no mental health conditions or procedures are included in this pilot. The Prior Approval Pilot is a small example of how AI can affect our practices in ways that may be harmful to our patients and best practices.

Many members of CSWA have reached out to express concern about how this pilot project may have an impact on coverage of mental health treatment. The project will require prior approval for 17 conditions before coverage is accepted. CMS has also stated that any denials identified by AI will then be reviewed by a human. To be clear, there are NO mental health services on this list at this time, but the possibility that our services may be added is cause for concern. CSWA is providing the following information to make LCSWs aware of the way this project could affect psychotherapy, not as an imminent threat to our practices.

Prior Approval Pilot Project

The project will begin on January 1, 2026 and be applied to conditions covered by traditional Medicare only in Arizona, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington State, as well as Medigap plans, such as Plan G or Plan N, if they are using traditional Medicare coverage.

The conditions that will be governed by the project include the following:

• Facet joint procedures for back pain
• Nerve and muscle tests (electrodiagnostic testing)
• TENS units and similar electrical stimulation devices
• Hyperbaric oxygen therapy
• Spinal cord stimulators
• Deep brain stimulation (commonly for Parkinson’s)
• Sacral neuromodulation (for urinary conditions)
• Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)
• Arthroscopic knee cleaning or debridement
• Vertebroplasty/kyphoplasty for spine fractures
• Epidural steroid injections
• Non-emergency ambulance transport
• Botox injections for medical issues
• Negative pressure wound therapy pumps
• Hernia repairs
• Lumbar spinal fusion
• Skin graft substitutes for chronic wounds

The stated reason for inclusion on this list is that these services are often flagged for being overused and/or not always medically necessary (https://www.resourcemedicare.com/post/new-medicare-changes-in-2026-prior-approval-required-for-these-17-services).

CSWA has been studying the impact of AI on the work of LCSWs for the past year and stands firmly against the use of AI or large language models as an LCSW providing therapy, diagnoses, or mental health treatment. The Prior Approval Pilot is a small example of how AI can affect our practices in ways that may be harmful to our patients and best practices.

The pilot project uses AI to identify diagnoses and streamline the prior authorization process, reflecting insurers’ long-standing goal of expanding prior approval whenever possible. Minimizing approval of mental health treatment, and many other conditions, is seen as reducing costs for insurers. Here is a summary from the New York Times about this project:

“…The A.I. companies selected to oversee the program would have a strong financial incentive to deny claims. Medicare plans to pay them a share of the savings generated from rejections. The government said the A.I. screening tool would focus narrowly on about a dozen procedures, which it has determined to be costly and of little to no benefit to patients. Those procedures include devices for incontinence control, cervical fusion, certain steroid injections for pain management, select nerve stimulators and the diagnosis and treatment of impotence…The government may add or subtract to the list of treatments it has slated for review depending on what treatments it finds are being overused.” (New York Times, “Medicare will Require Prior Approval for Certain Procedures,” 8/28/25, https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/28/health/medicare-prior-approval-health-care.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare) .

If this approach is extended to mental health conditions, this type of prior approval approach could have a serious impact on patients having access to mental health/substance use treatment.

CSWA encourages members in the Pilot states, and all others, to send the following message to their members of Congress and Insurance Commissioners: “I am a licensed clinical social worker, a constituent, and a member of the Clinical Social Work Association. I have concerns about letting artificial-intelligence (AI) systems make prior-authorization decisions for a particular procedure or therapy is likely to limit a person’s access to needed treatment. In mental health, for example, LCSWs use interactive engagement to expertly assess an individual’s responses and affect, in ways AI cannot. Currently AI cannot reliably understand emotional health, because it cannot determine and interpret facial expressions, body language, and words. Please leave treatment decisions to licensed professionals, not to AI, in the Prior Approval Project.” You can find emails for Congress at https://www.congress.gov/contact-us .

As always, please let Laura Groshong, LICSW, CSWA Director of Policy and Practice, know when you have sent your messages at lwgroshong@clinicalsocialworkassociation.org.

September 22, 2025

Please visit the CSWA Position Papers page to view the Position Paper on Use of Artificial Intelligence. 

August 1, 2025

By Laura Groshong, LICSW, CSWA Director of Policy and Practice

As many of you know, LCSWs have had several anxious moments in the last two years as Congress has, at the last minute, approved short term extensions of Medicare coverage of telemental health.

In the always-changing world of Medicare coverage of telemental health, there is a new wrinkle to the changes that will be coming on October 1, 2025.

First, the good news. It appears that CMS is now recommending permanent coverage of telemental health services if the patient is present in their home, which we interpret to mean place of residence. Here is the citation:

“Telehealth, defined as 2-way, interactive, audio-video technology, to diagnose, evaluate, or treat certain mental health or SUDs if the patient is in their home. Practitioners must be able to provide 2-way, real-time, audio-video technology services but may use audio-only technology given an individual patient’s technological limitations, abilities, or preferences. We cover telehealth for behavioral and mental health on a permanent basis.”

(https://www.cms.gov/files/document/mln1986542-medicare-mental-health-coverage.pdf, p. 7)

The not-so-good news is that we still need to see patients in person with two exceptions. Here is the citation [bracketed italicized commentary is mine]:

“Starting October 1, 2025, in-person visit requirements will apply for mental health services provided by telehealth. This includes a required in-person visit within the 6 months before the initial telehealth treatment, as well as the required subsequent in-person visits at least every 12 months.

Telehealth also applies to mental health services provided by Rural Health Clinics (RHCs) and Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs). For RHCs and FQHCs, we don’t require the in-person visit for mental health services provided through telehealth to patients in their homes until January 1, 2026.”

The regulations at 42 CFR 410.78(b)(3)(xiv) describe 2 exceptions to the in-person requirements effective October 1, 2025:

”Patients who already get telehealth behavioral health services and have circumstances where in-person care may not be appropriate [no guidance on what the “circumstances” are].

Groups with limited availability for in-person behavioral health visits have the flexibility to arrange for practitioners to provide in-person and telehealth visits with different practitioners, based on availability [no definition of what “groups” are].

Exceptions to the in-person visit requirement require a clear justification documented in the patient’s medical record.” (https://www.cms.gov/files/document/mln1986542-medicare-mental-health-coverage.pdf, p. 10)

There is still confusion about the in-person visit for NEW patients “six months prior to treatment” beginning, but patients who have ALREADY been seen through telemental health prior to October 1, 2025, can continue to be seen virtually without being seen in-person. Additionally, there is an exception to the in-person requirement every 12 months if there is “clear justification” for why it is not appropriate. This should include working with patients who are in another state; an LCSW not having an office where the patient can be seen in-person; and/or seeing patients who are in the LCSW’s state but too far away to be seen in-person. This remains to be clarified but is the best interpretation I can give at this time. As we have been for the past three years, CSWA is working with members of Congress and other mental health groups to eliminate the in-person requirement completely.

We realize this is complicated. Let us know if you have any questions by contacting Laura Groshong, LICSW, CSWA Director of Policy and Practice at lwgroshong@clinicalsocialworkassociation.org.

July 3, 2025

By Laura Groshong, LICSW, CSWA Director of Policy and Practice

A new rule issued by CMS affects the practices of LCSWs. I encourage all CSWA members to read the entire rule at https://www.cms.gov/files/document/mln1986542-medicare-mental-health-coverage.pdf. I want to call your attention to two parts of the rule that are problematic (I added the yellow highlighting), specifically related to clinical social workers’ ability to provide services in skilled nursing facilities, as well as in-person visit requirements. See the glossary of terms used by CMS below*, as well as a detailed interpretation of the rule:

MFT Scope of Medicare Practice/MHC Scope of Medicare Practice

Payment

- We pay only on assignment.

- We pay for services at 80% of the lesser of the actual charge or 75% of the amount a CP gets under the PFS.

- We don’t pay under the MFT benefit category for MFT services to patients under a PHP or an IOP by a hospital outpatient department or CMHC.

- We exclude MFT services provided to SNF residents from consolidated billing. Include the SNF’s Medicare provider number when you bill for these Part B services. This means MFTs and MHCs can bill Medicare for independent services in SNFs while CSWs cannot.

LCSW Scope of Medicare Practice

Clinical Social Worker

Payment

- We pay only on assignment

- Paid at 80% of the lesser of the actual charge for the service or 75% of the CP’s PFS

[No coverage of independent CSW services as for MFTs and MHCs] This means that CSWs cannot bill Medicare for independent services in SNFs while MFTs/MHCs can.

All Mental Health Clinicians

In-Person Meetings

Starting October 1, 2025, in-person visit requirements will apply for mental health services provided by telehealth. This includes a required in-person visit within the 6 months before the initial telehealth treatment, as well as the required subsequent in-person visits at least every 12 months.

Problems:

The problems CSWA sees with this rule are as follows:

1. The long standing (1997) rule that has prevented LCSWs from providing psychotherapy for residents of skilled nursing facilities does not apply to MFTs and MHCs who are allowed to do so. This is extremely unfair to LCSWs. We must be allowed the same privilege.

2. There will be an in-person requirement every 6 months/12 months when patients are being seen virtually. This would likely make it impossible to work with virtual patients who are more than an hour away; in addition, some LCSWs no longer have an actual office. This will also interfere with the way the Social Work Compact will be run when it opens in the next year, as the Compact will allow LCSWs to work in all member states without seeing patients in person.

Action steps:

CSWA will be addressing the disparity in Part B coverage between CSWs and MFTs/MHCs working in SNFs, as well as the issue of seeing patients in person every 6 months/12 months to conduct virtual psychotherapy. Your help is needed. Please send the following message to your members of Congress at https://www.congress.gov/contact-us: “I am a constituent and a member of the Clinical Social Work Association. The new Medicare rule at https://www.cms.gov/files/document/mln1986542-medicare-mental-health-coverage.pdf will seriously impact the psychotherapy practices of licensed clinical social workers, the largest group of mental health clinicians in the country (370,000). Please tell CMS to include LCSWs as a group that can bill independently for psychotherapy services in SNFS under Part B; all other Master’s mental health clinicians are now allowed to do so. Also, please eliminate the requirement that patients being seen virtually must be seen in person every 6-12 months. This would make it impossible to see patients in other states or jurisdictions as many LCSWs do now.”

As always, please send me an email at lwgroshong@clinicalsocialworkassociation.org when you have sent your messages.

-----------

*GLOSSARY

CMHC = community mental health center (Federal)

CP = clinical psychologists

IOP = intensive outpatient services

MFT = licensed marriage and family therapist

MHC = licensed mental health counselor

PFS = physician fee schedule [includes LCSWs]

PHP = primary health provider

SNF = skilled nursing facility

May 20, 2025

A week ago, the Trump Administration announced its intention to stop the passage of the 2024 Mental Health Parity Rule that would have made the 2008 Mental Health Parity and Addiction Parity Act (MHPAEA) enforcement much stronger. As most CSWA members are aware, the implementation of this 16-year-old law has been a challenge [laws are the beginning of the legislative process which are implemented by rules]. The constant problems LCSWs have dealing with prior authorizations, network adequacy, reimbursement rates, timely reimbursement of claims, and more would have been largely resolved in the 2024 rule proposed by the Biden Administration. (View the proposed rule at https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/09/23/2024-20612/requirements-related-to-the-mental-health-parity-and-addiction-equity-act.)

Also about a week ago, the Trump Administration stopped putting new rules out for public comment, making it difficult for CSWA and other organizations to have a voice in the development of new rules. This is a major attack on the democratic process which allows the public to have a voice in the implementation of our laws.

One way we CAN affect rules is by contacting our members of Congress to ask that they informally influence the administration and agencies that carry out the proposed rule. An excellent summary of the dangers of eliminating the proposed rule can be found at KFF by visiting https://kffhealthnews.org/news/article/trump-biden-mental-health-parity-insurance-law-coverage-deadline/. These helpful materials can be used to develop a bill in Congress to implement this rule. Even though the current administration has announced that they are unwilling to implement any of the 2024 proposed rule, we can let our members of Congress know that we as constituents want them to push back on this attempt to allow insurers to continue practices that hurt LCSWs and our patients.

Here is a template for that you can use to send a message to your members of Congress at https://www.congress.gov/contact-us: “I am a licensed clinical social worker, a constituent, and a member of the Clinical Social Work Association. I am writing to ask you to oppose the intent of the Trump Administration to stop the 2024 Rule for the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Parity Act. For 16 years this Act has languished because passing meaningful rules has been opposed by insurers and the corporations that have become the groups that control our health care system. Please give our citizens the access to the mental health and addiction services they need by pushing for the passage of the 2024 MHPAEA Rule.”

As always, please let CSWA Director of Policy and Practice, Laura Groshong, LICSW, know when you have sent your messages by emailing her at lwgroshong@clinicalsocialworkassociation.org.

May 9, 2025

As the current administration continues to implement harmful policies affecting both our practices and our patients, you may have not have heard about the changes being made to how LCSWs are providing mental health services in the Veterans Administration. There is an excellent article in the New York Times about the way this has impacted confidentiality and privacy about this problem, which we hope you will all read. 

In short, most of the 100,000 LCSWs and other VA mental health staff have been required to return to working in offices without having private spaces in which to work. As the article notes:

“In a Boston V.A. hospital, six social workers are conducting phone and telehealth visits with veterans from a single, crowded room, clinicians say. In Kansas City, providers are planning patient care while facing each other across narrow, cafeteria-style tables in a large, open space, according to staff members.

And in South Florida, psychiatric nurses have been treating veterans with mental health conditions in a hallway near a bathroom, sitting down with them in a makeshift medical bay jury-rigged out of filing cabinets and a translucent screen.”

This new policy violates basic social work ethics and HIPAA rules. As stated in the Clinical Social Work Association (CSWA) Code of Ethics (2024):

“Clinical social workers have a primary obligation to maintain the privacy of both current and former clients, whether living or deceased, and to maintain the confidentiality of material that has been transmitted to them in any of their professional roles. Exceptions to this responsibility will occur only when there are overriding legal or professional reasons and, whenever possible, with the written informed consent of the client(s).”

The conditions under which LCSWs are being forced to work violates this fundamental clinical premise. This puts LCSWs in a difficult position of choosing between ethics, their livelihoods, and continuing to serve their patients. The CSWA calls on the VA to ensure all mental health professionals in their organization have private spaces in which to work.

CSWA would like to know if any members who work for the VA or have other connections to VA patients have been affected by these changes. Please let CSWA Director of Policy and Practice, Laura Groshong, LICSW, know if this is your experience by emailing her at lwgroshong@clinicalsocialworkassociation.org.

April 22, 2025

The Clinical Social Work Association (CSWA) and the Psychotherapy Action Network (PsiAN) are alerting mental health professionals, the public, and regulators that a company called 7 Cups of Tea, or 7 Cups, has used the professional information of licensed mental health clinicians without permission or notification. Using clinicians’ names and professional information is concerning on many levels. First, 7 Cups is a for profit business, and it is using this information about therapists, which it has obtained in unclear ways, to sell its own services. Second, 7 Cups’ actions may also represent a restraint of trade, and we are pursuing legal options on this front. Finally, this marketing tactic adds to the confusion of unreliable information circulating online about mental healthcare and breeds mistrust, which is especially concerning at a time of such high need for reliable and effective psychotherapy.

In addition, the 7 Cups website offers connections both to licensed mental health clinicians and to “listeners.” While talking to someone about one’s problems may be helpful, it is starkly different from engaging in therapy with a professional. 7 Cups listeners are rated and rewarded as they are on many apps and games, earning “cheers” and “compassion hearts” for increased engagement. Blurring the lines between professional treatment and gamified interactivity is a fraught strategy, and will likely only add to the confusion people have when they are in need of effective mental healthcare.

Background Information

7 Cups is apparently taking information from therapists’ Psychology Today profiles, and other places, to list on its website, representing that these therapists work for 7 Cups. However, clinicians who wish to get referrals from 7 Cups must pay for the privilege, $39.99 a month. Additionally, here is a list of the costs which 7 Cups charges clients for various services:

Free: Access to volunteer listeners, chat rooms, and forums.

Premium: $7.99 monthly for 1-on-1 chats with an Active Listener, group chats, and the AI chatbot.

Messaging Therapy: $159 monthly for text-based therapy with a licensed therapist.

Talk Therapy: $299 monthly for all premium features and a weekly video call with a therapist.

These tactics are similar to those that were used by a company called CareDash in 2022. The difference is that CareDash used data taken from the government’s NPI database. Following complaints filed to the Federal Trade Commission by CSWA, PsiAN, and other organizations, CareDash’s parent company shut down that business.

Guidance for Therapists

To protect therapists and the public, here is what CSWA and PsiAN recommend therapists do to protect their practices and the public:

1. Google “7 Cups [your name]” to confirm that you have been listed on this website. This is more likely if you have a Psychology Today profile.

2. Once you see your name is listed, go to 7 Cups help and use the drop down box to “data removal request”.

3. You should receive confirmation that your request was received in the next 24 hours. If you do not, send your request again.

4. Contact your state’s Insurance Commissioner about this attempt to stop potential clients from contacting you, since anyone who checks a clinician’s name who has not paid a fee is referred to 7 Cups' own list of clinicians. Here’s a link to locate your state’s commissioner.

5. Email the 7 Cups' legal department at legal@7cups.com or have your attorney contact them and ask 7 Cups to “cease and desist” using your professional information. If you prefer to use their mailing address, it is 7 Cups of Tea Company, 1201 Orange Street, #600, Wilmington, Delaware 19899.

6. Contact your state Attorney General with this information and ask them to investigate as this seems to violate the Lanham Act which is designed to keep companies from profiting from the name and professional qualifications of others without consent.

7. Contact the Federal Trade Commission to report this issue. The FTC will ask for an actual address which is 7 Cups, 746 E. Colorado Blvd, Pasadena, CA 91101.

8. You may also file a complaint with your state attorney general consumer protection.

9. Here is a template for sending a complaint:

I am a Licensed [enter your discipline] writing to inform you that a company, 7 Cups, is unfairly restricting my practice as [your discipline]. They have listed my professional information on their website without my permission and refer anyone who checks my name to their own list of clinicians. I do not wish to work with 7 Cups, nor even to have my name listed on what they call a “registry”. The bulk of people on this registry are doing “listening,” which is not psychotherapy and does not require a license. Having my name on this registry blurs the line between what might be considered coaching/peer support and psychotherapy. This is a restriction of trade that should be stopped immediately.

These marketing tactics add to the confusion of unreliable information circulating online about mental healthcare. As we know, many people seeking care are especially vulnerable and need effective psychotherapy.

CSWA and PsiAN encourage all members and affiliated societies to file complaints with the appropriate state and/or national organizations.

Contacts:

Stephanie Payne, LCSW, President, Clinical Social Work Association, president@clinicalsocialworkassociation.org

Laura Groshong, LICSW, Director of Policy and Practice, Clinical Social Work Association, lwgroshong@clinicalsocialworkassociation.org

Linda Michaels, PsyD, MBA, Chair, Psychotherapy Action Network (PsiAN), Linda.michaels@psian.org