Shrinking the Ethics: A Psychologist’s Take on TV Therapy
If you’ve been watching Shrinking, chances are you’ve laughed, cringed, and at least once mind-shouted “you absolutely cannot do that” at the screen. The show is warm, funny, and genuinely engaging, but from a psychologist’s perspective, it’s also an ethical minefield.
Before we go any further, an important disclaimer: Shrinking is a fictional TV show set in the United States. The psychological intervention we see on screen reflects neither best practice nor the ethical standards expected of Australian psychologists. Many of the behaviours played for humour or “radical honesty” would, in real life, raise serious concerns under the APS Code of Conduct and AHPRA standards and requirements.
Therapy on TV vs Therapy in Real Life (Especially in Australia)
TV therapy, counselling and psychological intervention loves blurred boundaries. In Shrinking, blurred boundaries aren’t just present — they’re the entire premise. Jimmy’s “radical honesty” approach might make for compelling television, but in Australia it would land most psychologists straight in the middle of an ethics complaint.
Australian psychologists are bound by clear principles around things like:
Professional boundaries
Informed consent
Confidentiality
Competence and fitness to practise
Avoiding multiple or dual relationships
With that in mind, here are some of the biggest ethical red flags Shrinking waves proudly.
1. Blurred Boundaries Everywhere
One of the most consistent issues in Shrinking is how casually professional boundaries are crossed.
For example:
Jimmy allows his client Sean to move in and live on his property
He regularly socialises with clients, including coffee catch‑ups and gym sessions
Gabby plays trivia with a client
Clients are introduced to friends and folded into the psychologist’s personal lives
Personal relationships are repeatedly converted into client relationships
In Australia, these would be considered multiple or dual relationships. Even when intentions are good, dual relationships increase the risk of harm, power imbalance, and impaired professional judgement. Ethical guidelines are very clear here — this is not a grey area.
2. Therapy Happens… Everywhere
Confidentiality isn’t just about what you say — it’s also about where therapy takes place.
In Shrinking, therapy happens:
In rooms with interruptions from personal contacts
In cafés
At an MMA gym
In public or semi‑public spaces
Jimmy taking a client to an MMA gym or out for coffee might look “creative” on TV, but Australian ethical standards require psychologists to take reasonable steps to protect client privacy and confidentiality. Public sessions would rarely, if ever, meet that standard.
3. Informed Consent (Or Lack of It)
Clients in Shrinking believe they’re receiving professional therapy — but they’re not fully informed about the experimental, non‑evidence‑based nature of what’s actually being offered.
Jimmy’s clients aren’t told they’re part of a “radical” experiment. They think they’re receiving standard psychological intervention when in reality they’re being subjected to unconventional life‑coaching strategies.
In Australia, informed consent means clients demonstrate a level of understanding in things like:
The nature of the intervention
Risks and benefits
Limits of confidentiality
The psychologist’s role and approach
“Surprise, this is an experiment” does not meet that standard.
4. Non‑Evidence‑Based Interventions
Jimmy’s signature move - essentially “jimmying” clients into confronting situations and telling them exactly what to do - is framed as bold and effective.
The problem? It’s not evidence‑based.
Australian psychologists are ethically required to:
Use evidence‑based or evidence‑informed approaches
Be transparent when approaches are novel or experimental
Avoid presenting personal opinion as clinical fact
Good TV doesn’t equal good practice.
5. Self‑Disclosure on Steroids
Some psychologists’ self-disclosure can be appropriate when it’s intentional and clearly in the client’s interest. In Shrinking, however, psychologists regularly disclose intimate details about their own lives - often to meet their own emotional needs, not the client’s.
Under Australian standards, self‑disclosure should:
Serve a clear therapeutic purpose
Be minimal and intentional
Never emotionally burden the client
This line is crossed repeatedly.
6. Fitness to Practise & Impaired Clinicians
Jimmy continues to see clients while:
Actively grieving
Binge drinking as a coping strategy
Clearly emotionally dysregulated
Australian psychologists have an ethical obligation to monitor their own wellbeing and step back from practice if they’re unfit. Continuing to treat clients while impaired — even emotionally, puts clients at risk.
7. Serious Ethical Breaches (Not Just “Unprofessional”)
Some moments in Shrinking go beyond poor judgment and into serious ethical breaches, including:
Breaking confidentiality by discussing a client with others (including a child)
Stalking a client by following them on a date to observe their behaviour
Checking phones and taking calls during sessions
Peers failing to escalate obvious misconduct
Highly enmeshed sexual relationships between colleagues in the workplace
In Australia, psychologists also have an ethical responsibility to act when they observe harmful or unethical behaviour. Silence isn’t neutral.
So… Can We Still Enjoy Shrinking?
Absolutely.
Shrinking isn’t a training video - it’s entertainment. But it’s worth remembering that real counselling doesn’t look like this, and for good reason. The ethical frameworks governing Australian psychologists exist to protect clients, clinicians, and the therapeutic relationship itself.
If anything, the show is a great conversation starter about:
Why boundaries matter
How power dynamics work between psychologists and clients
What ethical practice actually looks like behind the scenes
Enjoy the show - just don’t expect this type of engagement from your psychologist.
