Art therapy is important for certain individuals

When most people think of therapy they think of sitting, or lying down in a futon while they talk to a person who most likely has glasses on across the room. They tell this person their struggles for the week and the person at the other end of the room usually has some type of solution or fix to their problems. This overly simplified and rather cartoonish view of therapy doesn’t fit the needs of everyone. Some people may need more treatment long term, their treatment may be through a screen or their treatment may involve the creation of art. The traditional  approach to therapy may even be detrimental to a person’s treatment, if the person seeking treatment is unable to properly express their emotions then this treatment method may be completely ineffective.  The same would also apply if someone who isn’t qualified to talk to the patient is allowed to give them counsel. 

Tactile therapy is very important to the growth of patients that perhaps have trouble expressing their emotions or have developmental issues. If a patient is in an environment that allows them to focus on another priority instead of their emotions it can help them to allow their emotions to flow more freely. Thus the method is crucial to their recovery plan the therapist has compiled for them. Messing up this routine may worsen the effectiveness of treatment. ( this view was cultivated through my talks with abbie) 

Though there are several types of art therapy some not even falling in the traditional definition of art therapy.  Abbie Kasoff The current Chief Executive director of the organization says it with clay describes art therapy as Therapy with a specific treatment plan that involves art. She goes on to state that “art with a therapeutic approach” isn’t art therapy. That art therapy must involve someone with a master’s degree in art therapy, though this requirement is different  in all 50 states. Art with a therapeutic approach such as coloring with an adult coloring book isn’t exactly what counts as art therapy. Art with a therapeutic approach or AWTA is what most people think of when they hear about art therapy because it fits the idea of what art is for people who may not care about it. That art is something only used to relax, that it’s always fun, or that it’s easy. But art can be used in several different ways and can invoke feelings of grief, pain and understanding. And when exploring these complex emotions it is important to have someone who is equipped to help get through the feelings, a sentiment that Kasoff also strongly expressed.  If such a person is not there with the patient then they may have trouble navigating their emotions and the patient suffers because the person they trusted with healthy exploring their emotions has been ineffective it may create a new problem. It could leave the patient worse off as they may refrain from exploring their emotions with therapy again. 

Another idea that may clash with the central thesis of this paper is the idea that digital media can be introduced into art therapy and have no real drawbacks. This idea may be true for some people but may also leave others behind. For those people say, those with trouble with anxiety when talking with people, it would actually do more harm than good. 

A study conducted by frontiers in psychology discussed the use of digital media in art therapy in the future. Concluding with the sentiment that digital art therapy would be helpful as it would be used to reach more people. While this sentiment is true in practice, a core component of therapy and especially art therapy is the human connection to both the art and to the therapist and part of that would be lost with creating and talking through a screen. If art therapy is used for those with communication issues, and let’s say that one of those people were to use digital art therapy it wouldn’t be as effective. They can simply hang up the phone if they get overwhelmed instead of having the therapist being in the same room as them and helping to get to the root of their emotions. The core part of their therapy is messed up and may put them off track. Even someone who is used to routine may be affected by digital therapy in a negative way, of course with traditional art therapy it exists in a specific location and that patient may have trouble getting to that particular location due to weather or a natural disaster, this would still be the case with digital media. It breaks the idea that digital art therapy can be done anywhere through video calls. Even if the video aspect is not there and the patient is in the room with the therapist the app the art is done on may crash or perhaps the therapist or the patient forgot to charge the device, this could cause more frustration because the patient paid the therapist for art therapy for part of the day and due to circumstances out of their control they are unable to get their treatment. This type of therapy isn’t accessible if the person lives in an area with trees or forgets to charge their device. And while yes, charging their device would also be an effective way to build a routine, it may enforce a negative routine as increased screen time and exposure to blue light from computer and phone screens puts one’s eyes at risk. 

If the accessibility of this type of therapy is offset by the effectiveness of the particular method of art where a core component is to make it more effective then is it worth it. Is it worth it to undercut the main focus of therapy? And is it really worth risking one’s eyesite by increasing screen usage to include an activity that is typically done without a screen?

References

Abbie Kasoff phone discussion that took place for about 30 minutes

Zubala, A., Kennell, N., & Hackett, S. (2021, April 8). Art therapy in the Digital World: An integrative review of current practice and Future Directions. Frontiers in psychology. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8060455/