Therapist Review Policy Template

Therapist Review Policy: A Template for Your Website and Profiles A therapist review policy is a short public statement, linkable from your website and directory profiles, that explains your practice doesn't solicit client reviews and won't discuss any specific client's experience in a public reply. It gives clients a clear answer if they ask about leaving a review, and it gives your staff consistent language to use if a review ever needs a response. Having this written down before you need it matters more than most practices expect — in the moment a review appears, whoever's handling your Google Business Profile should be reaching for a policy they already agreed to, not improvising a reply under pressure. Building a public review policy you can link from every profile is one of the simplest steps a practice can take toward consistent, ethics-aligned reputation management. Why write this down instead of handling it case by case A policy that only exists in someone's head tends to hold up fine until the first unusual review arrives, at which point whoever's handling it is improvising under some pressure to respond quickly. Writing the policy down, agreeing on it in advance, and publishing a version of it where clients and staff can both see it removes that pressure from the moment it actually matters — the reply is already decided, and the only job left is pasting it in. Why a public review policy helps A visible policy does two things at once: it tells prospective clients that your practice treats confidentiality seriously even in public-facing reputation management, and it quietly signals to current clients that they shouldn't expect — or feel obligated — to be asked for a review. That second point matters because several professional ethics codes caution against soliciting testimonials from clients given the risk of undue influence, which is covered in more depth in can therapists ask clients for reviews. A policy that states plainly that reviews aren't solicited helps demonstrate that the practice isn't working around that caution informally. What to include in a confidentiality statement At minimum, a confidentiality statement for reviews should cover: that the practice does not request reviews or testimonials from current or former clients; that any review response from the practice will not confirm or deny a treatment relationship with the reviewer, regardless of what the review says; and that clients with a concern about their care are invited to contact the practice directly rather than resolve it through a public review. Keeping the language general — without naming any platform-specific rules — makes it easy to reuse the same statement across Google, Psychology Today and any other directory. Where to publish the policy: website, GBP, directories The policy works best linked from wherever a client might look for it: a short page or paragraph on the practice website, the "from the business" section of a Google Business Profile where supported , and the practice's Psychology Today or other directory profile if the format allows a link or note. The goal isn't to make the policy prominent to every visitor — it's to make it easy to find for the rare client who asks, and to have language ready if a staff member ever needs to respond to a review. Template language (pending legal/ethics review) Confidentiality and review policy for [Practice Name]: "[Practice Name] does not ask current or former clients to leave reviews or testimonials, in keeping with our profession's ethics guidelines on client solicitation. If you choose to leave a review on your own, we're grateful for the feedback — but to protect everyone's confidentiality, we won't confirm, deny, or discuss any specific client relationship in a public reply, even in response to a positive review. If you have a concern about your care, please contact our office directly at [phone/email] so [Owner/Director] or your clinician can address it privately." Staff-facing guidance to pair with this policy: never write a public reply that references a review's specific content, never use the words "client," "patient," "session," or "treatment" in a reply regardless of context, and never post anything on social media — including screenshots, thank-you posts, or "client spotlight" style content — that names or otherwise identifies a current or former client, even with a nickname, a stock photo implying a specific person, or a story detailed enough to be identifiable from context. When in doubt, a reply or post gets held and run past [Owner/Director] rather than published, and any reply addressing a billing dispute, a complaint, or a disputed claim about care stays procedural and redirects to the private contact above — see how therapists should respond to online reviews for worked examples of that kind of reply. Who at the practice should own this policy One named person — typically [Owner/Director] or an office manager — should be the only one with posting access to the practice's Google Business Profile, Psychology Today account, and any social media accounts, and should be the one responsible for keeping this policy current as the practice's ethics codes and state licensing requirements change. A group practice with multiple clinicians benefits from naming this role explicitly in the policy itself, rather than leaving it ambiguous which clinician or staff member is authorized to reply to a given review. For how this plays out in day-to-day monitoring, see therapist reputation management: an ethics-first guide. Adapting this template for your practice The bracketed placeholders — [Practice Name], [Owner/Director], [phone/email] — should be the only parts of the template language that change from practice to practice; the underlying commitments (no solicitation, no confirmation of client status, redirect to a private channel) shouldn't be loosened even if a specific clinician feels confident a particular reply would be harmless. A practice that accepts insurance, uses telehealth, or operates across multiple states may have additional state-specific or payer-specific disclosure rules to layer on top of this baseline , which is a reason to route the final version past both a licensed ethics consultant and the practice's own counsel before publishing it anywhere public-facing. Frequently asked questions Does this policy need to be a separate page, or can it live in the practice's existing privacy policy? Either works, as long as it's findable and linkable — some practices fold this into an existing privacy or confidentiality page, while others give it a short standalone page specifically for review-related questions. What matters more than placement is that the language stays consistent everywhere it's referenced, including on directory profiles like Psychology Today where a direct link may not be possible. Should this policy be shown to clients during intake, or only published publicly? Many practices do both — publishing the policy publicly and also referencing it briefly in intake paperwork, so clients understand upfront that the practice won't be asking them for reviews and won't discuss their case publicly if one appears. This also sets the expectation early enough that a client is less likely to feel singled out if they ever ask about leaving a review and get a straightforward "we don't request those" in response. Every review, mention and AI answer in one place → Try Tailwind free. Tailwind runs $5 a month per tool, or $50 a month for the Full plan covering everything, with the first month free and no card required to start.