Grow My Therapy
Grow My TherapyGrow My Therapy — done-for-you social media for psychology
You already know what is circulating. Checklists that turn ordinary human variation into a diagnosis, confident claims about what a childhood behaviour means, and an enormous quantity of content encouraging people to identify themselves with a condition they have never been assessed for.
People arrive at your practice having absorbed all of it. A psychologist explaining what an assessment actually establishes — patiently, without contempt for anyone who believed the checklist — is content nobody else in the feed can produce.
The environment
The most successful mental health content on these platforms works by recognition: a list of traits phrased so that almost anyone reads it and thinks yes, that is me. It performs extraordinarily well, it is frequently produced by people with no clinical training, and it is the reason a meaningful share of your assessment enquiries arrive already convinced of the answer.
Trying to compete on the same terms means producing the same thing with a doctorate attached, which is worse rather than better. What works instead is the material that is genuinely yours: what an assessment can and cannot establish, why traits are not a diagnosis, what differential means in practice, why an evaluation takes six hours rather than six minutes.
That content performs less explosively and converts far better, because the person who follows it is the person who wants to actually know — and they are the person who books an evaluation.
The goal is not to argue with the checklist accounts. It is to be the place someone goes after the checklist has left them uncertain.
The material a psychology practice has
All of these come from work you already do. None of them require a trend, a dance or a hook.
Who you are talking to
A parent scrolling at eleven at night is looking for permission to take a worry seriously. A paediatrician, a school counsellor or another clinician who follows you is doing something else entirely — deciding, slowly, whether you are someone they would refer to.
Both are worth having, and content can serve both if it is written for the parent and true enough for the professional. What fails is content pitched at neither: generic wellbeing material that a professional recognises as filler and a parent has seen a hundred times.
For practices whose assessment work depends on institutional referral — schools, physicians, attorneys — the professional audience is frequently the more valuable of the two, and it favours plainer, more substantial posts than the platform norms suggest.
How that shapes the content
The process
You are never handed a content calendar to fill. The work is ours; the approval is yours.
How you explain assessment to a worried parent, and a few pieces of your own writing. This is what the voice is built from.
Once, at the start
Terminology, topics you will not discuss, whether comments are open, how you refer to diagnoses, and anything your board restricts.
Enforced mechanically thereafter
Posts and carousels written from your explanations rather than from a template of therapy content.
Your sentences, not a content mill’s
Designer-drawn layouts rebuilt in your practice’s colours, logo and typefaces — not a stock template with your name applied.
Recognisably your practice
Every draft run against your rules. Anything that breaks one does not reach you.
You review content, not compliance
You read every post first. Direct publishing is in build; until it ships you receive finished files ready to post.
Nothing goes out without your yes
Questions we get
It depends what you want. If the goal is follower count, no — you will lose to content engineered for agreement. If the goal is assessment enquiries from people who want a real answer, the substantial content wins comfortably, because it attracts the person who is prepared to spend money on being properly assessed.
We would rather build a small account that produces evaluations than a large one that produces comments.
Address the claim, not the account. Quoting or naming another creator invites a fight, drags their audience into your comments and rarely persuades anyone. Explaining why a widely repeated idea is incomplete, on its own terms, does the same job without the exposure.
We would not, and we do not write it. Composite examples are frequently recognisable to the person they are built from, and in assessment work the details that make a story worth telling are precisely the identifying ones. Everything we produce describes process and general principle rather than individuals.
Consistency matters more than frequency, and for a psychology practice a modest, sustainable cadence outperforms a burst. What you should not do is start at five posts a week — that pace ends within a month and a dormant account reads worse than no account.
Not yet — direct publishing is in build. You receive finished files and post them, which takes a few minutes per set. We would rather be straight about that than describe a capability that has not shipped.
Whatever families arrive believing is usually the best post you will ever publish. We will draft it in your voice and show you the set. See everything we do for psychologists.
No obligation · nothing published without your approval
More for psychologists
Or see everything we do for psychologists in one place.