Part 1 — Through the Reamer Lens
The ethical tension that made me uncomfortable to read in one of Reamer’s articles was that Artificial Intelligence (AI) can lead to a misdiagnosis for a client (Artificial Intelligence in Social Work: Emerging Ethical Issues, 2023). I have always thought that the use of AI to diagnose individuals has been very risky. In my opinion, it didn’t seem as something as reliable as going to a medical professional. Just like I don’t really believe searching medical symptoms on Google is that reliable. Because I have always thought about how I can put my symptoms into Google, and it can lead me to think I have this extreme diagnosis. And I wonder if I can’t fully trust a search engine like Google because it gives me all these types of potential diagnoses, then can I trust AI? And although Google and AI aren’t the same, it is scary to even see the different diagnoses that can result from just a few searches of symptoms.
I do agree with Reamer that if a social worker is to use AI to evaluate the individual’s behavioral health challenges, the social worker needs to supplement that AI-generated assessment with their own judgment. But at the same time, I ask myself why even use AI for this type of purpose if the practitioner still has to do the same process they would complete if they didn’t use AI at all. Why put this AI method to use when, in the end, it is not a guaranteed process that can benefit the practitioner? They still have to look for it and make sure what is calculated is accurate. I wonder if this is just double the work and makes it hard for practitioners to judge their own professional judgment.
Part 2 — Haidt in the Room with Your Clients
When I read the article Haidt and Rausch wrote, I was not surprised to learn that mainly girls are affected by social media and have a higher risk of depression (The Case Against Social Media: Seven Lines of Evidence, 2026). The evidence of girls being at high risk of depression and how their body image has changed as a result of social media made me think of individuals with postpartum depression. I think this evidence will potentially hold higher for individuals who have this. I follow women on social media whose content is about themselves and the family they have grown. In that process, I have seen many of them become pregnant and see the experience post-pregnancy. These women I follow break those stereotypes made for women who are post-pregnancy. And there are a lot of individuals who have gone through the post-pregnancy process, in their comments interacting with the creator, how they appreciate that they are dismantling these expectations of how a mother needs to “bounce back” post pregnancy. But as much as I see the positive part of breaking stereotypes, I still see the side of comparison between mothers in the comments. If a creator looks physically slimmer than what is expected post-pregnancy, there are many women comparing themselves to the creator in the comments. They vocalize about how they wish they were able to look like that as well. Or if they perceive that the creator has the daily life all put together, the audience wishes they could have it like that too. Although I haven’t had to experience that, I witnessed it with my mother when she had my brother. It is very easy to compare yourself to an individual on social media who we may think has the perfect life.
I think this is something that should be acknowledged in clinical practice. What are things that individuals in these situations are being exposed to that can make the process that they already are in, naturally, be more intense than it already is? Postpartum depression, in my belief, is something that can be unexpected, and so when you start to be exposed and unintentionally feed yourself content that is overall not the full story, II believe it can be discouraging for any mother.
Haidt, J., & Rausch, Z. (2026, April 9). The Case Against Social Media: Seven Lines of Evidence. Afterbabel.com; After Babel. https://www.afterbabel.com/p/seven-lines-of-evidence-against-social-media?r=32tyct&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action
Reamer, F. G. (2023). Artificial Intelligence in Social Work: Emerging Ethical Issues. International Journal of Social Work Values and Ethics, 20(2), 52–71. https://doi.org/10.55521/10-020-205
Great post! I completely agree with your point about AI: “Why put this AI method to use when, in the end, it is not a guaranteed process that can benefit the practitioner?” AI was supposed to be a tool to help social workers by reducing workload and making things more efficient. But if the technology isn’t reliable, it just means social workers have to double-check everything, which can end up taking just as much time, if not more, than doing it themselves. Sometimes trying to cut corners with faster solutions only leads to more problems. You also made a really important point about body image. We live in a society where beauty standards are constantly changing and always on display, especially through social media. This creates a lot of body dysmorphia, particularly among young girls, but adults struggle with it too. Moving the age requirement for social media up might help a little, but it doesn’t solve the root problem. How can we, as a society, push back against these harmful standards when they’re always present online? What other steps could we take to really make a difference?
Your post raises two really important practice questions: what happens when technology adds confusion instead of clarity? and what happens when it adds pressure instead of support? I appreciate how you connected misdiagnosis risk to your own experience with automated systems at the clinic it shows that the ethical tension isn’t abstract for you; it’s something you’ve already watched clients struggle with. Your point about postpartum clients is especially compelling because it highlights a population Haidt doesn’t address but absolutely should. The way you describe mothers comparing themselves to influencers captures how social media can intensify an already vulnerable period, even when the content is meant to be empowering. You’re naming a pattern that clinicians need to pay attention to technology can amplify distress in subtle ways, and those effects depend heavily on timing, context, and the client’s emotional state.
I agree that AI should never replace a social worker’s professional judgment, especially when it comes to diagnosing or assessing a client’s mental health. One thing I kept thinking about while reading Reamer’s article is that AI isn’t meant to replace the assessment process but to support it. For example, as a client using Grow Therapy, I was informed that my therapist used AI to help with documentation, and I was comfortable with that because it wasn’t making decisions about my treatment. I wonder if AI could be most beneficial when it is used for administrative tasks or identifying patterns that a clinician can then evaluate, rather than trying to diagnose clients on its own.