But that shouldn’t mean no contact is possible or valuable unless all of those things align.

One valuable thing happening right here, potentially, is that I can take advantage of my moment to type, after taking several such moments to contemplate, and share not just with you but with others. That is certainly possible with face to face contact, but only if you are really very patient with the pace of the conversation and you locate the people in the world who might be interested in this comment and accurately convey my meaning.

The relationship within 1:1 therapy or even group therapy adds additional constraints of safety, trust and privacy, something that a face-to-face interaction can do better in most situations than computer-mediated communication. In other kinds of relationships, a multi-modal approach offers more ways to connect, each with a specific set of constraints and benefits, allowing us to communicate better.

Loaded question, but would you rather talk with me face-to-face? We do many of our daily family nitty gritty discussing via IM, from the dinner call to the transportation logistics, and it’s handy, and, ime, much easier than constant phone calls or a large calendar chart on the door. But when I type, “Carter’s playdate was canceled” you can’t see my face- my sadness over his rejection, or my relief over avoiding an awkward situation. Too much of missing those subtle communications can drain a relationship.

In general, use of both mediation and direct interaction is only going to strengthen relationships by (a) providing many more opportunities to interact, and (b) by providing opportunities to interact where specific barriers to entry are lessened. In the same way relying only on IM or email to communication misses the physical cues you mention, so too does relying only on face-to-face—or most annoyingly to me, declaring face-to-face to be inherently superior—exclude people who are inhibited, require more time to compose thoughts, and have schedules that do not fit with that of those with power in the relationship.

But for this: “If authentic connections are being made through mediated communications, that counts.” You threw this large comment in like Jesus=Superman comparison at summer Bible camp, and I haven’t accepted either into my heart.

When I was graduating from school, they were just starting to debate the ethics of long-distance therapy- what state guidelines apply, can you bill insurance, is it as valuable as face-to-face, and since then, the debate has spread to internet therapy services.

When providing therapy, striving for an authentic connection, I tune in to subtleties of body language, changes in voice tone, an anxious glance to the left. These parts of my brain, silent from the chorus of conscious thought, allow me to foster a more concrete connection with my client. Online, or on phone, I can not be as competent, or as connected.