Spanish psychologists face pricing and credibility doubts

Psychology at €50 per session and criticism of the profession

The debate centers on prices ranging from €50 to €100 per session, according to one participant. This figure resurfaces in an unresolved controversy. The suspicion does not come from outside the profession: some practitioners openly admit they cannot refute the criticisms. The discipline dealing with mental health carries an uncomfortable question: what if the problem is not just with the patient?

Is psychology a science or well-publicized interpretation?

The doubt begins on a theoretical level. A frequently repeated thesis argues that psychology is not a science but a pseudo-interpretation accessible to anyone, and that years of university study guarantee nothing. The accusation is heavy and relies on what we all think we recognize by hearsay.

Another line admits the discipline works, but not for healing: it is argued that its true yield lies in manipulation, social engineering, and advertising design, and that many contemporary conventions rely on it. It is a striking and difficult-to-prove thesis, but it explains why distrust does not distinguish between the therapy chair and the marketing department.

Some even trace the origins of cognitive-behavioral therapy to Buddhism: change is the only constant, pain is inevitable while suffering is optional, and it is not facts but their interpretation that matters. The connection is more literary than clinical, but it coincides with an idea the current itself repeats: how the problem is framed matters as much as the problem.

€50 to €100 per session: profitable business or survival?

Price is the most circulated data point: between €50 and €100 per consultation, with the underlying suspicion that the professional profits from others' despair. There is a counterargument. Keeping a practice open requires investment in advertising and client acquisition that few account for when complaining, and it is noted that some young professionals earn around €2,000 net per month.

Moreover, the market selects. Those who are unfit end up leaving the sector, accepting jobs unrelated to their degree, while good professionals maintain full schedules. The result is a split profession: a minority charging specialist rates and a majority struggling or changing fields.

Diagnosis admitted by professionals themselves

The most effective criticism is not signed by a disillusioned patient. It is signed by someone who makes a living this way and recognizes, with uncomfortable frankness, that they cannot contradict those who despise their guild.

On the table is a thesis about vocation: many students choose the degree to resolve personal issues, and self-knowledge is not learned in any university curriculum. From there to claiming they leave worse than they entered is a stretch, but the sequence repeats in various accounts. Other figures thrown around, such as the claim that 95% of psychologists have unresolved problems, lack backing: they are rhetorical devices and should be treated as such.

Another recurring idea: age matters. It is defended that young professionals have little experience and real value lies in those who have seen hundreds or thousands of cases, although that wisdom, according to the same argument, comes after age 60.

From therapy to pills: where everything breaks down

Here the tone rises. A personal account summarizes it: visiting for the first time at 32 years old, facing a sarracena dilemma, and leaving the office feeling treated like a lost soul. The testimony points to a professional struggling to manage their own state. One case does not allow generalization, but weighs more than any statistic in the conversation.

Alongside therapy appears psychiatry, treated more harshly. Overmedication, cold treatment, and dependence on benzodiazepines are described, and it is claimed that some preach successful lives while dragging their own problems. These are partisan assertions without possible verification. In mental health, each case requires individual assessment by a healthcare professional; no general conclusion emerges from a handful of testimonies.

The alternative: a friend, classical philosophy, and some experience

Against the clinic, the obvious is proposed: a trusted person who listens and advises, which is often enough. Reading classical philosophy, surrounding oneself with intelligent friends, and seeking role models to imitate are also recommended. The counterpoint is reasonable: everyone carries their own baggage and not everything is solved with a chat, because some problems are very hard to fix.

And an idea hovers over both sides: the therapist, after all, is someone who has already walked the path.

Remains the disorienting data. Distrust towards psychology grows precisely when mental health is discussed more. If even those paid to practice it doubt aloud, what would have to happen for the doubt to stop seeming like mere prejudice?