Trying to Decide about Simple Practice?

Updated 8/29/23. We only have a few more days until the new terms and conditions need to be signed for Simple Practice users (deadline September 1, 2023). I’ve always recommended Simple Practice for solo private practices because it does so many things relatively well (and not for a referral fee-please don’t put my name in). I think there are some good new contenders out on the market that will make me revisit this recommendation in the future…but not before the September 1 deadline.

In the mean time, here are two resources to help you decide for yourself what the next best step is.

• A free webinar coming out: https://www.zynnyme.com/terms

• This video also from zynnyme along with the following information:

  I keep hearing SimplePractice has walked back its Terms of Service changes, but here's what I found this morning and what AI (Claude) thought of it:

  "After reviewing the full SimplePractice terms of service and business associate agreement (BAA), I still have ethical concerns about this agreement for therapists. Here are the key issues:

  The terms grant SimplePractice an extremely broad license to use, share, and create derivative works from any user data, including protected health information (PHI), for a wide range of purposes. This seems too expansive.

  The BAA reiterates that SimplePractice is considered a business associate under HIPAA. However, some provisions still appear too permissive around PHI use compared to typical business associate agreements.

  Therapists have an ethical duty to safeguard confidential client information that goes beyond the minimum legal requirements. This agreement allows more PHI sharing than ethics standards would suggest appropriate.

  SimplePractice states they do not consider initials to be identifiable PHI. However, ethics guidance indicates initials could potentially identify a client and would require consent prior to disclosure. There are alternative electronic health record systems more tailored to behavioral health that may allow better protection of confidential data.

  In summary, while there may be arguments on the legality, I would be very concerned about consenting to this broad of PHI use and data sharing from an ethics perspective as a therapist. I would advocate for strict limitations on any PHI access not essential for services.

  Consulting ethics guidance on vetting agreements may help find an option better aligned with professional duties."

  Here's what SimplePractice has done to my knowledge:

  Gave therapists until September 1st to review (Awesome!)
  Postponed the requirement of clients to sign new updated terms (these have yet to be seen).
  Provided a guide to the changes: "Important: This guide is solely for informational purposes. This is not legal advice or an interpretation of any terms or agreements between customers and SimplePractice. You should fully read the terms and policies to adequately and accurately understand all terms to which you are bound. If you have any questions, please contact your local legal counsel."

  What do y'all think?

  Thursday, we'll have a panel discussion with Person Centered Tech and a mental health attorney. Lemme know if you want the deets on that.

  We'll keep you updated if anything changes,
  Miranda, Kelly, and the zynnyme team

• This email from LPCAGA President, David Markwell:

  Advocate for LPCs

  Notice About SimplePractice recent changes in policy:

  The LPCA team has been watching the SimplePractice emails about their new policy.  We have been consulting with the state’s attorney office.  Their suggestion was wait and see what the final posting is.  Most of the changes seem to be around “other” providers that SimplePractice works with, such as credit card processing companies and adding AI.

  LPCA suggests the following since the overall goal is to keep out of court over a service that is “business” and not therapy.

  1.     Contact your professional liability insurance company about the concerns.  They are the ones that would have to defend you in court if there is an issue with a client (and SimplePractice).

  2.     Contact SimplePractice and request more information from them regarding your concerns.  We are hearing that SimplePractice has pulled its policy update. 

  3.     Please check out the following link to a website, that does a good job of explaining what may or may not be an issue, depending on what SimplePractice does next:

  https://www.zynnyme.com/blog/simplepractice-terms-and-conditions-changes-what-every-therapist-or-client-should-know#heading-1

  Here’s some feedback we have received from an attorney who is also a therapist:

  “Based on my review of the terms and policies, I have a few thoughts. Remember that although I am an attorney, I’m not YOUR attorney and this is not legal advice.

  1- Sharing data and sub-licenses with third parties. Since SimplePractice does not offer many of its services in house, it uses other company service providers. Like the clearing houses, video platform providers, stripe etc. What this does is allow relevant data to be shared in order to coordinate services between the companies. The content of sessions is not traded although things like names, session history, session costs, etc. will be.

  2- Liability. These terms are broad reaching and fall into that odd world of “you can’t really hold us liable for anything.” While that is a term included, it doesn’t always mean a court will enforce it, especially if it is an egregious issue. I don’t like these terms to be included in services like this but intend to be pro-consumer.

  3- HIPAA. The use of PHI on SimplePractice and with the BAAs in place means the data is being used in appropriate ways, however they weren’t very clear about this at first, they have since shifted their position and offered more transparency.

  4- In sum. I am staying with SimplePractice for now. I don’t like the way they rolled this out but they did a decent enough job to walk it back. I do believe we have reason to be concerned that the AI line may be crossed within the next few years.

  James Ahearn, JD, LPC

  We will continue to watch the issue.  And once there is a final read, we will push harder on the attorney and liability insurance companies to tell us what the best steps are.

  Best regards, 

  David Markwell PhD, LPC, LCMHC, NCC, ACS, CPCS, BC-TMH, CART, EAS-C

  President