Miri Bar-Halpern, speaking to a news outlet, called on both the public and institutions to take corrective action, and contended that some clinicians were allowing advocacy to shape their professional conduct. Dean McKay, a psychology professor at Fordham University, told a federal panel that the American Psychological Association had responded to its antisemitism concerns in a way he viewed as lacking candor, while pointing to improved training as an avenue through which the field could move forward.
Both McKay and Bar-Halpern — a psychology lecturer based at Harvard Medical School — brought their perspectives to a September hearing convened by the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity, a body that provides the U.S. Department of Education with guidance on accreditation and related matters. Those witnesses, with legal representation from the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, called for procedural changes before the committee while stopping short of urging a suspension.
A panel vote on Sept. 24 put forward a proposal to strip the APA commission on accreditation of its federally recognised status for a period of twelve months. Pending a departmental decision on the recommendation, the commission holds its federally recognised standing.
On October 2nd, the APA — a professional body reporting a membership of more than 190,000 — issued a statement arguing that testimony related to antisemitism did not provide grounds for placing its psychology program accreditation authority on hold, and noted that any such action could put federal funding at risk for affected programs. McKay told a news outlet that the organisation had been receiving information on the matter for a considerable period.
In an October 2 letter, the association's CEO Arthur Evans Jr. and president Wendi Williams noted that public commenters had flagged two programs out of more than 1,300 accredited by the commission, and that the commission had already opened investigations into those complaints ahead of the hearing. The pair also conveyed their view that the growth of antisemitism across society calls for focused, sustained efforts to address it and to provide support for Jewish communities.
The concerns raised at the hearing centred in part on a therapeutic framework called "decolonial therapy" — a model that traces the psychological effects of historical oppression and positions activism as a component of the healing process. McKay noted that the method risks assuming patients hold the same political views as their therapists, and that some practitioners have treated a person's connection to Israel as indicative of a psychological disorder.
A paper published in the Journal of Contemporary Antisemitism by McKay, Bar-Halpern, and co-authors identifies what they term a "blind spot" within decolonial therapy, with the authors arguing that mental health treatment ought to centre the client and draw on evidence rather than ideological considerations. The paper's authors position their recommendations around two linked claims: that mental health practice should treat Jewish trauma as a legitimate clinical concern rather than setting it aside, and that the field's theoretical frameworks have drifted toward politically shaped models without the grounding in political analysis to support them — a drift the authors say works against genuine inclusion of Jewish clients. Separately, the paper contends that Jewish clinicians face professional bias that goes unaddressed, and that explicitly naming Jewish identity and Zionist perspectives within anti-discrimination policy could reduce practitioner burnout and help retain a wider range of professionals within the field.
During the hearing, Bar-Halpern described a Jewish student who had turned to counseling after antisemitism-related worry began interfering with both sleep and the ability to concentrate. In an interview with a prominent broadcaster, the counsellor steered the conversation toward conditions faced by Palestinians and raised the matter of time management.
The term "traumatic invalidation" — Bar-Halpern's phrase for the dismissal of Jewish suffering — appeared in a study she co-authored, released on September 19, drawing on responses from 733 Jewish American adults. The study found that people who experienced invalidation more often tended to report both heightened post-traumatic stress symptoms and diminished overall mental wellbeing, while also describing a deeper sense of connection to Jewish identity and community.
Efforts by McKay and Bar-Halpern are directed toward strengthening the preparation that therapists receive before entering the field. Funding from the Academic Engagement Network backs a project aimed at equipping faculty in doctoral clinical psychology programs with tools for confronting antisemitism.
Advances at the APA were among the developments McKay pointed to. A commentary co-authored by him alongside Elysa Koppelman White and Beth Rom-Rymer — one that takes issue with anti-Zionist positions found within decolonial scholarship — appeared in the pages of American Psychologist, the organisation's leading journal.
Speaking to a prominent television outlet, Bar-Halpern described a pattern she believes some Jewish patients may encounter in therapy — one where Zionism is framed as a source of shame, connected to white supremacy, fascism, and settler colonialism, and where letting go of ties to Israel and Jewish identity is positioned as part of the healing process — an approach she contends holds the potential to worsen rather than ease psychological distress. Speaking with a broadcast outlet, she noted that the experience carries the potential to produce feelings of shame.
Her advice to prospective patients is to question any therapist they are considering about whether that person will fully accept their identity — a step she frames as essential before any therapeutic relationship begins. She also described a client whose therapist had urged them to cancel sessions and join the therapist at a protest, and raised the example of a Jewish client processing grief who, upon seeking mental health support, encountered a therapist responding with a question implying the client's distress was foreseeable.
Bar-Halpern described the experience as a form of invalidation, explaining that patients asking about events in Gaza find their original health concerns go unaddressed.
Bar-Halpern has developed a practitioner framework she calls the "shalem" method, designed to equip both patients and clinicians with strategies for restoring a sense of safety and belonging. Alongside a companion book scheduled for release in November, her training work spanning the United States and Canada has been paired with a television interview in which she urged both individuals and organisations to take action, contending that clinicians have moved into the territory of advocacy.
