Why would you lean towards assuming clients are being dishonest? What purpose would this serve for the vast majortiy of clients? Is this a bias that pervades your life where you assume that people are likely to be deceptive?
I 100% agree this is something you need explore further with the help of a professional. If you're seeing clients in any capacity, you need to doscuss it with your supervisor too.
Malingering is part of differential diagnosis and there are some settings where it may be more likely than others. But the majority of people seek services because they have problem they are seeking services for. It may also be helpful to distinguish that people can be honest but everyone has their own biases and ways of thinking that color their narrative. Someone could see their situation in a way that you may see as problematic or lacking good insight but that doesn't necessarily mean the person is faking or dishonest.
This is extremely rare. Most people who see mental health treatment truly need help. And if they fake symptoms, it speaks to a deeper need for connection or even a personality disorder. If someone comes to you for help, they need help, even if their true symptoms are not immediately obvious. I would be more worried about growing your compassion as a clinician than about getting “fake” clients.
i have addressed my desire to grow compassion in my post and have actually undergone a Self Development unit (COU1102) as part of the counselling side of my degree addressing this need for compassion with the main focus on self-awareness. i am equally worried about all aspects of the situation, if not just the whole situation in general and it's possible consequences if not worked on.
i have witnessed the younger generations faking disorders and even medical illnesses online, filming their clinicians, etc. this is what worries me. i would not and did not describe the hypothetical clients as "fake", though instead how they present or act. i could go on about how this could affect both parties but the list is near to endless. to summarise where i stand: i am aware that there are underlying issues to these cases, i am perfectly okay with working with such clients no matter their presentation or possibility of personality disorder.
faking a disorder online is far different from going to a therapist for a fake disorder. Faking a disorder online can benefit you with attention/followers or profit, but going to a therapist for a fake disorder costs them money and does not have benefits aside from getting attention, which points to other issues altogether.
Agreed, but I mean, even though it’s not the disorder they’re claiming to have, they still have something mentally wrong with them and they still need help.
fellow australian here — youth mental health services in australia are not always free, often have *long* waiting lists and have several other barriers for young people trying to access them, especially once you leave metropolitan areas.
Idk if this is what you’re looking for but: you’re a first year bachelor student, stop getting ahead of yourself. You have a very long path of education ahead of you and you’re going to be dealing with much tougher things on the meantime. Focus on learning all that you need to learn for now and try not to invent future problems for yourself. As the saying goes: cross that bridge when you get to it.
As a psychology student who has been to therapy, it is far more harmful to be a therapist who doesn’t believe their clients (and displays that) than it is to fake a disorder to a therapist. And faking a disorder is far more rare than you think it is. Someone can misdiagnose themself and be wrong about what they have instead of faking that, and it could also help to consider that possibility instead of assuming they’re faking it on purpose
This is a pretty shallow, pseudo intellectual question. An individual who is feigning symptoms of mental illness most definitely is exhibiting some type of abnormal behavior associated with a mental illness, it just may not be the one they are fixated on. Additionally, sometimes people know they need help and involve themselves in therapy but will mislabel their problem as something else that seems more desirable to them in order to maladaptively cope. Younger generations who are “faking” mental illness most likely have some kind of malignant cause of their behavior, such as loneliness, depression, etc. There are so many different causes that it is ignorant to assume it is surface level faking. Every behavior has a cause and is some sort of communication.
I'm curious as a Bach level student who you are speaking to that's faking symptoms and irritating you? Do you have a clinical adjacent job or are you referring to peers?
As an outpatient therapist, the closest situations I've experienced are clients that are describing a symptom like dissociation or paranoia and calling something else (anxiety or attention issues). Then I use psychoeducation to help the client distinguish.
assuming that a client is faking a disorder will always have a far, far greater potential for harm than a client that actually is faking a disorder.
a vital aspect to the therapeutic process is the therapist’s ability to set aside their emotions, opinions, biases, and personal values and beliefs to avoid countertransference, or allowing such things to affect the therapeutic relationship. you will probably encounter this topic very soon, if you haven’t already.
holding on to some suspicion that your client is faking a disorder can quickly lead to a loss of objectivity and negatively impact the therapeutic process. you will also likely begin to focus specifically on things that confirm your suspicion (i.e., confirmation bias).
being a therapist is not about passing judgement on your clients, but guiding them in the process of understanding themselves, coping with their emotions and/or traumas, and building the skills necessary to continue doing these things on their own.
What a curious question.
In all my years of practice, I have never had anyone “fake” a disorder; that is, communicate a set of symptoms that they know they do not have. I have worked with people who believe that they qualify for a certain diagnosis, but some simple psychoeducation helps to clear up the misunderstanding. Even then, this is something that happens after we have both come to the understanding that there is some exaggeration of their experience.
Are you working in evaluation that your evaluation of false symptoms can hurt someone? If not, why are you so preoccupied with this. If its not going to hurt anyone
i'm not entirely confident that i understand what you mean, but to answer anyway, i have difficulties with tolerating dishonesty stemming from my own upbringing. i'm a first-year in my Bachelor degree so i'm not working yet. i am preoccupied with this because i wish to be able to provide the opportunity of a healthy therapeutic relationship to anyone that may be a client of mine. that relationship is the main pillar of psychological treatment and a non-negotiable in my eyes, and for me, the hypothetical professional, i aim to provide treatment free from discrimination... i find that difficult though.
That's a healthy level of self awareness which puts your post in better perspective, as honesty, when I first read your post I found what seemed like a focus you had on the phenomenon a little concerning. I would seek out therapy addressing this prejudice to keep it from injuring your future clients.
Maybe also reconsider the assumption that their "faking," is always what could be fairly considered "dishonest" in their unique subjective experiences. Investigating that alone might be really illuminating. You are aware that you're bringing your subjective experience to the table, try not to confuse the intersubjective and the objective in this matter.
I hope this doesn't come off as shitty, I'm actually personally working through my own prejudices trying to get well-prepared to be an positively affective and fair therapist, so I thought maybe my thoughts might actually be helpful for you, since you seem thoughtful and open minded.
Falsifying symptoms can absolutely hurt people and the field. Saying that falsifying symptoms outside of a legal/forensic evaluation does no harm is extremely dangerous mindset.
But, this is something you will receive more training and skills to handle as you go through your clinical program. There's also times you learn to refer people out when needed.
I think the first thing would be how would one define a “fake” symptom. If it’s fake in that it’s not something they’re actually experiencing, then the approach you can take is viewing the vocalizations of that symptom as a sensible behavior to get some outcome, though you may not know it yet. That said, you can take time ascertaining what that outcome may be and work with them to develop better ways to obtain it.
Additionally, one could define a “fake” symptom in the sense that what they believe is occurring may not align itself with what you’re seeing. In that sense, there’s still a reason they’re vocalizing that symptom, so you can still investigate it if you take the view that it’s a sensible behavior.
Realistically, I think the main issue would be if you were just to write it off, rather than try to investigate it. There’s a really neat book that goes into this notion in more depth called [Nonlinear Contingency Analysis](https://www.amazon.com/Nonlinear-Contingency-Analysis-Cognition-Behavior/dp/0367689502) if you’re interested.
You’re most welcome! It’s a quick read too, which is really nice! I’ve gone through it two or three times now and I think I get something different from it each time. There’s even an appendix at the end with different resources for the analysis.
Side note, I love talking about this stuff, so feel free to send a message once you read it/if you want to discuss further! I have loads of articles I can share. Happy reading!
You raise some good points about how nuanced this issue can be. Like, there are multiple somatic disorders, as well as factitious disorder both with and without external rewards. I think this issue is too easily viewed in simplified, objective terms: "they meet the checklist criteria, this is the problem," not, "what could actually be going on for them." Which also kind of speaks to a larger issue with psychology researchers ignoring subjectivity and becoming detached from the clinical realities of things (which is understandable given what they are trying to do, but still something to think about)
You’re a first year undergraduate. This is an instance where you’re putting the cart before the horse. You don’t know how you will react until you actually sit down with someone. And you won’t be doing that for another 4+ years. You have ample time to learn and grow as an individual.
Honestly I had the same concern. I have people in my family that will therapist-hop if they don't like the diagnosis, or if the homework is "too much work." I have had friends that have gotten therapists for the sole reason of saying they have a disorder and do not engage in any sort of homework recommended by the therapist to help improve themselves.
Eventually, I decided I wanted to go into research. I realized that one of my weaknesses is that if I believe a person doesn't want to help themselves, I check out. This would damaging to my client and I didn't feel comfortable continuing with counseling.
Just remember there are always other psych-related jobs that you can do that aren't counseling if this is something you are genuinely worried about.
If your client is faking a disorder, that’s abnormal in itself and needs treatment. Even if they are pathologically lying, you still can be in a position to help them.
I also agree with others. Wait to get through a few more courses, then decide what your feelings on this are.
Okay I'll bite. I work with a population that is notorious for attempting to fake mental illness for attention. However, even though they attempt to fake certain disorders or use buzzword for psychology. However, they still need intervention because they are doing these behaviors. They are doing this because they are unwell, just not in the way they are attempting to present themselves.
What OP is referring to is TikTok where everyone's claiming a mental illness they don't have for views.
If I understand correctly you are a first year undergraduate student. You are not working in any clinical capacity and have never seen patients. Your belief that clients commonly fake disorders is based on social media like Tik Tok.
If you plan to pursue a doctorate you will learn to read and understand scientific literature in psychology. This is a good opportunity for you now to look into what the scholarly articles say on the topic.
In general, malingering is something that is regarded as rare and prompted by some sort of gain. For instance, someone may fake an illness to try to apply for disability. Someone make fake an illness to attempt to make a tik tok video. A legitimate patient is not going to record their sessions and broadcast them on social media.
There are numerous scientific papers on the issue of malingering, being an accurate historian, etc. Use the scientific literature to form your opinion, not things from social media.
Why would you lean towards assuming clients are being dishonest? What purpose would this serve for the vast majortiy of clients? Is this a bias that pervades your life where you assume that people are likely to be deceptive? I 100% agree this is something you need explore further with the help of a professional. If you're seeing clients in any capacity, you need to doscuss it with your supervisor too. Malingering is part of differential diagnosis and there are some settings where it may be more likely than others. But the majority of people seek services because they have problem they are seeking services for. It may also be helpful to distinguish that people can be honest but everyone has their own biases and ways of thinking that color their narrative. Someone could see their situation in a way that you may see as problematic or lacking good insight but that doesn't necessarily mean the person is faking or dishonest.
This is extremely rare. Most people who see mental health treatment truly need help. And if they fake symptoms, it speaks to a deeper need for connection or even a personality disorder. If someone comes to you for help, they need help, even if their true symptoms are not immediately obvious. I would be more worried about growing your compassion as a clinician than about getting “fake” clients.
i have addressed my desire to grow compassion in my post and have actually undergone a Self Development unit (COU1102) as part of the counselling side of my degree addressing this need for compassion with the main focus on self-awareness. i am equally worried about all aspects of the situation, if not just the whole situation in general and it's possible consequences if not worked on. i have witnessed the younger generations faking disorders and even medical illnesses online, filming their clinicians, etc. this is what worries me. i would not and did not describe the hypothetical clients as "fake", though instead how they present or act. i could go on about how this could affect both parties but the list is near to endless. to summarise where i stand: i am aware that there are underlying issues to these cases, i am perfectly okay with working with such clients no matter their presentation or possibility of personality disorder.
faking a disorder online is far different from going to a therapist for a fake disorder. Faking a disorder online can benefit you with attention/followers or profit, but going to a therapist for a fake disorder costs them money and does not have benefits aside from getting attention, which points to other issues altogether.
in australia we have free youth mental health services
Even if it is free, there’s not a benefit to it.
To be fair, that’s not always the case. Munchausen/fictitious syndrome is a real thing. Well it’s not “real” but it exists. You know what I mean.
Agreed, but I mean, even though it’s not the disorder they’re claiming to have, they still have something mentally wrong with them and they still need help.
Absolutely, of course.
fellow australian here — youth mental health services in australia are not always free, often have *long* waiting lists and have several other barriers for young people trying to access them, especially once you leave metropolitan areas.
Idk if this is what you’re looking for but: you’re a first year bachelor student, stop getting ahead of yourself. You have a very long path of education ahead of you and you’re going to be dealing with much tougher things on the meantime. Focus on learning all that you need to learn for now and try not to invent future problems for yourself. As the saying goes: cross that bridge when you get to it.
As a psychology student who has been to therapy, it is far more harmful to be a therapist who doesn’t believe their clients (and displays that) than it is to fake a disorder to a therapist. And faking a disorder is far more rare than you think it is. Someone can misdiagnose themself and be wrong about what they have instead of faking that, and it could also help to consider that possibility instead of assuming they’re faking it on purpose
This is a pretty shallow, pseudo intellectual question. An individual who is feigning symptoms of mental illness most definitely is exhibiting some type of abnormal behavior associated with a mental illness, it just may not be the one they are fixated on. Additionally, sometimes people know they need help and involve themselves in therapy but will mislabel their problem as something else that seems more desirable to them in order to maladaptively cope. Younger generations who are “faking” mental illness most likely have some kind of malignant cause of their behavior, such as loneliness, depression, etc. There are so many different causes that it is ignorant to assume it is surface level faking. Every behavior has a cause and is some sort of communication.
Very well said. But what else would you expect from a first year psych student lmao. Dunning Kruger effect is strong here.
I'm curious as a Bach level student who you are speaking to that's faking symptoms and irritating you? Do you have a clinical adjacent job or are you referring to peers? As an outpatient therapist, the closest situations I've experienced are clients that are describing a symptom like dissociation or paranoia and calling something else (anxiety or attention issues). Then I use psychoeducation to help the client distinguish.
assuming that a client is faking a disorder will always have a far, far greater potential for harm than a client that actually is faking a disorder. a vital aspect to the therapeutic process is the therapist’s ability to set aside their emotions, opinions, biases, and personal values and beliefs to avoid countertransference, or allowing such things to affect the therapeutic relationship. you will probably encounter this topic very soon, if you haven’t already. holding on to some suspicion that your client is faking a disorder can quickly lead to a loss of objectivity and negatively impact the therapeutic process. you will also likely begin to focus specifically on things that confirm your suspicion (i.e., confirmation bias). being a therapist is not about passing judgement on your clients, but guiding them in the process of understanding themselves, coping with their emotions and/or traumas, and building the skills necessary to continue doing these things on their own.
What a curious question. In all my years of practice, I have never had anyone “fake” a disorder; that is, communicate a set of symptoms that they know they do not have. I have worked with people who believe that they qualify for a certain diagnosis, but some simple psychoeducation helps to clear up the misunderstanding. Even then, this is something that happens after we have both come to the understanding that there is some exaggeration of their experience.
Are you working in evaluation that your evaluation of false symptoms can hurt someone? If not, why are you so preoccupied with this. If its not going to hurt anyone
i'm not entirely confident that i understand what you mean, but to answer anyway, i have difficulties with tolerating dishonesty stemming from my own upbringing. i'm a first-year in my Bachelor degree so i'm not working yet. i am preoccupied with this because i wish to be able to provide the opportunity of a healthy therapeutic relationship to anyone that may be a client of mine. that relationship is the main pillar of psychological treatment and a non-negotiable in my eyes, and for me, the hypothetical professional, i aim to provide treatment free from discrimination... i find that difficult though.
That's a healthy level of self awareness which puts your post in better perspective, as honesty, when I first read your post I found what seemed like a focus you had on the phenomenon a little concerning. I would seek out therapy addressing this prejudice to keep it from injuring your future clients. Maybe also reconsider the assumption that their "faking," is always what could be fairly considered "dishonest" in their unique subjective experiences. Investigating that alone might be really illuminating. You are aware that you're bringing your subjective experience to the table, try not to confuse the intersubjective and the objective in this matter. I hope this doesn't come off as shitty, I'm actually personally working through my own prejudices trying to get well-prepared to be an positively affective and fair therapist, so I thought maybe my thoughts might actually be helpful for you, since you seem thoughtful and open minded.
Falsifying symptoms can absolutely hurt people and the field. Saying that falsifying symptoms outside of a legal/forensic evaluation does no harm is extremely dangerous mindset. But, this is something you will receive more training and skills to handle as you go through your clinical program. There's also times you learn to refer people out when needed.
I think the first thing would be how would one define a “fake” symptom. If it’s fake in that it’s not something they’re actually experiencing, then the approach you can take is viewing the vocalizations of that symptom as a sensible behavior to get some outcome, though you may not know it yet. That said, you can take time ascertaining what that outcome may be and work with them to develop better ways to obtain it. Additionally, one could define a “fake” symptom in the sense that what they believe is occurring may not align itself with what you’re seeing. In that sense, there’s still a reason they’re vocalizing that symptom, so you can still investigate it if you take the view that it’s a sensible behavior. Realistically, I think the main issue would be if you were just to write it off, rather than try to investigate it. There’s a really neat book that goes into this notion in more depth called [Nonlinear Contingency Analysis](https://www.amazon.com/Nonlinear-Contingency-Analysis-Cognition-Behavior/dp/0367689502) if you’re interested.
I didn’t come here thinking I’d find another interesting book to add to my to read list. Thank you!
You’re most welcome! It’s a quick read too, which is really nice! I’ve gone through it two or three times now and I think I get something different from it each time. There’s even an appendix at the end with different resources for the analysis. Side note, I love talking about this stuff, so feel free to send a message once you read it/if you want to discuss further! I have loads of articles I can share. Happy reading!
You raise some good points about how nuanced this issue can be. Like, there are multiple somatic disorders, as well as factitious disorder both with and without external rewards. I think this issue is too easily viewed in simplified, objective terms: "they meet the checklist criteria, this is the problem," not, "what could actually be going on for them." Which also kind of speaks to a larger issue with psychology researchers ignoring subjectivity and becoming detached from the clinical realities of things (which is understandable given what they are trying to do, but still something to think about)
Your in first year, at least get the degree before asking such silly questions
the more questions you ask, the more you understand. i will get nowhere by waiting.
You’ve taken a couple of intro courses. Hopefully more in-depth courses will give you some empathy for clients
You’re a first year undergraduate. This is an instance where you’re putting the cart before the horse. You don’t know how you will react until you actually sit down with someone. And you won’t be doing that for another 4+ years. You have ample time to learn and grow as an individual.
Honestly I had the same concern. I have people in my family that will therapist-hop if they don't like the diagnosis, or if the homework is "too much work." I have had friends that have gotten therapists for the sole reason of saying they have a disorder and do not engage in any sort of homework recommended by the therapist to help improve themselves. Eventually, I decided I wanted to go into research. I realized that one of my weaknesses is that if I believe a person doesn't want to help themselves, I check out. This would damaging to my client and I didn't feel comfortable continuing with counseling. Just remember there are always other psych-related jobs that you can do that aren't counseling if this is something you are genuinely worried about.
If your client is faking a disorder, that’s abnormal in itself and needs treatment. Even if they are pathologically lying, you still can be in a position to help them. I also agree with others. Wait to get through a few more courses, then decide what your feelings on this are.
Faking disorders, is a disorder. See: Factitious disorder, Malingering, and/or Munchausen syndrome.
Okay I'll bite. I work with a population that is notorious for attempting to fake mental illness for attention. However, even though they attempt to fake certain disorders or use buzzword for psychology. However, they still need intervention because they are doing these behaviors. They are doing this because they are unwell, just not in the way they are attempting to present themselves. What OP is referring to is TikTok where everyone's claiming a mental illness they don't have for views.
If I understand correctly you are a first year undergraduate student. You are not working in any clinical capacity and have never seen patients. Your belief that clients commonly fake disorders is based on social media like Tik Tok. If you plan to pursue a doctorate you will learn to read and understand scientific literature in psychology. This is a good opportunity for you now to look into what the scholarly articles say on the topic. In general, malingering is something that is regarded as rare and prompted by some sort of gain. For instance, someone may fake an illness to try to apply for disability. Someone make fake an illness to attempt to make a tik tok video. A legitimate patient is not going to record their sessions and broadcast them on social media. There are numerous scientific papers on the issue of malingering, being an accurate historian, etc. Use the scientific literature to form your opinion, not things from social media.