Comment by nradov
7 days ago
I think it would be great to make mental healthcare accessible to everyone who could benefit from it, but have you actually run the numbers on that? How much would it cost and where would the money come from? Any sort of individual counseling or talk therapy is tremendously expensive due to the Baumol effect.
And even if we somehow magically solve the funding problem, where will the workers come from? Only a tiny fraction of people are really cut out to be effective mental health practitioners. I'm pretty sure that I'd be terrible at it, and you couldn't pay me enough to try.
This addresses the key problem. The lack of access to therapists is due to lack of therapists, because the demand far outweighs supply. It is simply not possible to train the number of therapists that we need, so technological advancement is probably the correct answer.
How do you know the demand is the key problem and not a symptom downstream of the root problem?
In other words, why is the demand so high that it outstrips supply? That might get you a didn’t solution than “technological advancement.”
Let's solve that productivity issue!
The classic view of one reclining on a couch, and the professional listening, seems to have a lot of downtime for the professional. The occasional sound of affirmation, 'go on', 'yes, yes' may be heard, but often a lot is the patient talking.
We could easily move this to text or video, but let's choose text. Best would be some form of speech to text, but AI driven and with a shorthand for emoted quality.
I suggest we assign primary emotions to primary colours, using three base emotions as primaries, and the professional would be able to read the emotions at play, and quantity, merely by the resulting colour of text. Larger print or bold or what not, could be used for more intense speech, eg yelling.
This would allow one professional to allow multiples to speak, yet they could simply wait for the text to appear, consider it, and respond vocally. Any perceived delay in response, could be derided by the concept of "I needed time to think on your words".
Thus the patient speaks, the professional's voice responds, the illusion of complete dedication to one patient is whole. Yet anywhere from 4 to 10 patients could be served in parallel with such a system, and remotely too!
I'm fairly sure I could whip this entire platform up over a weekend.
This solves the surmised shortages, for one could do the work of 10. It also helps the environment, with people not traveling to an office for their appointment.
Hmm. Maybe I should pursue this, and be bought out by Amazon so it can be included in Prime Plus or whatever.
/s... Right...?
Partially.
There's probably a way to optimize in this sphere. What's important is the perception of a relationship with the professional, but on the professional's side, the application of their knowledge in the most effective way.
The masses may not be able to afford in person, one on one sessions.
But if they can be provided a means to speak their mind, discuss their problems, and have a meaningful response? That's still exceptionally helpful, especially with that response being crafted by a professional in a medical capacity.
The validity of my method can be highlighted by how many are using LLMs for "therapy". Often they're just talking, looking for a sounding board.
The problem is, LLMs are by no means therapists. Their responses are not really targeting this specific category, nor are they really helpful in sussing out a more significant medical problem.
Yet a therapist with such a setup could provide an in-between solution. Actual real skill and training, without the costs of a full one-on-one.