FAQS

Not formally. Problematic technology use is not currently classified in the DSM or the ICD, and standardized diagnostic criteria have not been established. That gap is part of why so few clinicians think to assess for it in adults. What is clear from clinical work is that the distress is real. Using technology far past what you intended, and then struggling to stop, is a pattern that responds well to treatment. You do not need a diagnosis to be helped. 

The harms of an engineered internet are widely recognized when it comes to children, and rightly so. The same technology, built to capture and hold attention, shapes adults just as deliberately, yet adults are the ones expected to manage it on willpower alone. 

Nearly every specialized program in this field is designed for teenagers or young gamers, leaving adults underserved. This practice exists for them: for the professional, the parent, the person who long ago left the demographics these programs were built around and still finds their attention is no longer entirely their own. 

The practice is private-pay and out-of-network. Superbills are provided on request, which many clients submit to their insurer for possible out-of-network reimbursement. There is also a clinical reason this model fits the work. Billing insurance requires assigning a formal mental-health diagnosis, and problematic technology use is not one. An out-of-network practice makes it possible to treat what you are actually experiencing, without forcing an inaccurate diagnosis onto your record. 

Yes. Sessions are available virtually to anyone located in New York State, and in person at the Midtown Manhattan office. 

It is a brief, complimentary conversation, a chance to describe what you are experiencing and find the right starting point. There is nothing to prepare and no obligation to continue. 

An integrative approach combining EMDR, Internal Family Systems, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, and somatic practices. These are chosen because compulsive technology use lives in the body and the emotions, not only in habit.

No. The aim is not abstinence, which is rarely realistic. It is an intentional relationship with technology: reducing the hours that no longer serve you and reclaiming your attention for what matters.