As in there are life/other types of coaches on MHN?
Yeah, there are lots of coaches and therapists on MHN. The idea is that people have a single list that is known and trusted, and also provides a useful interface for people to be able to find a coach/therapist that is right for them. This is the main purpose of the providers page. There is some benefit to having the central resource including reducing the proliferation of separate lists, which can be confusing to people.
These coaches aren’t generally licensed mental health professionals (certainly some exceptions), but seeing an effective coach is certainly something that can greatly support mental health, and I think that was at least part of the reasoning of listing them there.
I’m not sure how I feel here. The coaches section has definitely got a bit bloated. I could do some rotation to highlight individuals, but that sounds quite a pain in the butt. I’m also a little wary of deferring to a single other resource, since I’m generally worried about EA groupthink that comes from deferred epistemics. Maybe a reasonable approach would be to list coaches only if they fit the opt-in criterion and for some (non-egregious) reason (e.g. that they don’t deal with mental health) aren’t listed on MHN?
I agree that rotation isn’t practical. I hear what you’re saying about being worried about deferred epistemics. My perspective is that MHN providers page is actually worth deferring to for this because it earns trust by providing a general platform where many people can be listed, (it wouldn’t be deferring to a shorter list of people getting outsized attention). The intention is that it gives someone a better chance at figuring out what provider is right for them based on their own analysis rather than other more arbitrary methods. It would be supportive of a process of evaluating multiple providers instead of just hearing of one provider and going with that person. Also it includes a bunch more things like factual information about the coaches that help with matching, and has recommendations from others who have gotten services (which, in aggregate, provide meaningful data). Would love to get your thoughts on this.
All that said, I think it would be reasonable to list coaches who contact you and fit the opt-in criteria and who aren’t on MHN.
Yeah, there are lots of coaches and therapists on MHN. The idea is that people have a single list that is known and trusted, and also provides a useful interface for people to be able to find a coach/therapist that is right for them. This is the main purpose of the providers page. There is some benefit to having the central resource including reducing the proliferation of separate lists, which can be confusing to people.
These coaches aren’t generally licensed mental health professionals (certainly some exceptions), but seeing an effective coach is certainly something that can greatly support mental health, and I think that was at least part of the reasoning of listing them there.
I agree that rotation isn’t practical. I hear what you’re saying about being worried about deferred epistemics. My perspective is that MHN providers page is actually worth deferring to for this because it earns trust by providing a general platform where many people can be listed, (it wouldn’t be deferring to a shorter list of people getting outsized attention). The intention is that it gives someone a better chance at figuring out what provider is right for them based on their own analysis rather than other more arbitrary methods. It would be supportive of a process of evaluating multiple providers instead of just hearing of one provider and going with that person. Also it includes a bunch more things like factual information about the coaches that help with matching, and has recommendations from others who have gotten services (which, in aggregate, provide meaningful data). Would love to get your thoughts on this.
All that said, I think it would be reasonable to list coaches who contact you and fit the opt-in criteria and who aren’t on MHN.