Coaching vs. Therapy: Ethical Risks, Key Differences, and Why Therapists Need Proper Training Before Coaching
The lines between coaching and therapy have become increasingly blurred, with many therapists now describing themselves as coaches in some of the support they offer. A quick search today, "coaching [home city]" revealed several coaching offers (the top 3), offered by therapists with no listed qualifications as coaches - seemingly perceiving that therapy qualification equates to coaching... as how different can they really be?
While both coaching and therapy aim to facilitate growth and change, their methodologies, ethical foundations, and intended outcomes are fundamentally different. Yet, a concerning trend has emerged—therapists offering coaching without specific training, often unknowingly applying therapeutic frameworks to coaching clients.
This raises an important ethical question: if therapists argue that coaches cannot provide therapy without the appropriate qualifications, why is the reverse not also true? Without formal coaching training, therapists risk delivering therapy under the guise of coaching, failing to secure explicit client consent for the process they are actually using.
This article explores why the distinction between therapy and coaching matters and calls for greater professional integrity in defining and practising these roles.
Therapy and Coaching: Different Approaches, Different Purposes
Therapy and coaching are distinct disciplines, each requiring specialised skills, training, and ethical considerations.
Therapy: Treating Trauma and Psychopathology
Therapeutic approaches are designed to:
Treat psychopathology (e.g., depression, anxiety, PTSD).
Help clients process and heal past traumas that continue to impact their present functioning.
Offer emotional support and regulation strategies to stabilise distress.
Provide a diagnosis and clinical interventions, when applicable.
Work at an open-ended pace to facilitate deep emotional processing.
A therapist’s role is often to guide a client through unresolved emotional pain, focusing on the origins of suffering and fostering psychological healing. Therapy is typically a long-term process, exploring patterns rooted in the past.
Coaching: A Distinct Skill Set with Future-Focused Goals
By contrast, coaching is not about resolving trauma or treating mental illness. It is a structured, goal-driven / personal development practice aimed at:
Enhancing performance (personal, professional, or athletic).
Developing practical skills (e.g., leadership, decision-making, time management).
Fostering accountability to help clients take action.
Challenging limiting beliefs and assumptions to create forward momentum.
Focusing on solutions and measurable progress rather than deep emotional processing.
Coaching is a time-limited, future-oriented process that helps individuals identify where they want to go and supports them in getting there efficiently.
(nb: For some coaching work (e.g. vertical development) a blend between coaching and therapy skills is often made. This requires training in both, adequate supervision and explicit consenting with clients.)
Core Differences Between Therapy and Coaching
Aspect | Therapy | Coaching |
Focus | Past trauma, emotional distress, mental health challenges | Future goals, performance, skill-building |
Methodology | Psychotherapy, clinical interventions, introspection | Solution-focused strategies, structured goal-setting |
Timeframe | Open-ended, varies by client need | Time-limited, focused on achieving specific goals |
Client Population | Individuals with mental health challenges or unresolved trauma | High-functioning individuals seeking growth or direction |
Regulation | Governed by licensing boards and ethical codes | No formal regulatory body, self-regulated through industry organisations |
The Ethical Dilemma: When Therapists Offer Coaching Without Training
When therapists claim to offer coaching without formal coaching education, they are likely to default to therapeutic approaches—whether intentionally or not. This creates an ethical issue of consent, as clients seeking coaching do not necessarily agree to therapy. In fact, many seek coaching to avoid trauma work they do not wish to experience, regardless of 'need'.
Many therapists object to unqualified coaches attempting to provide therapy, arguing that it puts clients at risk. Yet the reverse situation is rarely acknowledged: when therapists, without training, apply therapy-based methods to coaching clients who did not consent to a therapeutic process.
Imagine this scenario (something I hear often, as a previous journey, from clients who attend coaching):
A client seeks coaching to help decide whether to leave a corporate job and start a business.
Instead of using structured decision-making tools or performance strategies, the therapist-turned-coach begins exploring the client’s childhood experiences with risk-taking.
The coaching process morphs into therapy, despite the client seeking a future-focused, action-oriented approach.
This is a breach of ethical responsibility because clients consent to coaching, not therapy. If a coach were to diagnose and treat a mental health issue without training, therapists would (rightly) call this unethical. The same standard should apply in reverse.
Real-World Examples: Where This Problem Exists
This confusion is not theoretical—it is already happening in the industry.
Example 1: The Psychology Today Coaching Search
A clear demonstration of this problem can be seen in how Psychology Today lists coaches. Psychology Today is a widely used directory for therapists, yet when users search for a coach (which they now offer as a category), the platform does not list certified coaches. Instead, it returns a list of mostly counsellors who have written ‘life’ somewhere in their profile. Presumably because 'life coaching' is the filter they apply to profiles.
This means:
The public is misled into thinking they are accessing trained coaches when, in reality, they are being directed to therapists who may or may not be qualified in coaching.
Therapists with no specific coaching credentials are appearing as legitimate coaching providers simply because they have added the word 'life' to their profile.
The credibility of coaching as a distinct profession is undermined.
If therapists are uncomfortable with unregulated coaches providing therapy, they should equally recognise that calling themselves / being marketed as a coach without training is equally problematic.
Example 2: The Client Who Spent Years in Therapy Without Progress
A real-life example comes from coaching professionals who often encounter clients saying:"I was in therapy for years working on this, but we just talked about my past. I needed someone to help me move forward."
One such case involved a woman debating whether to give up on her lifelong career as a Psychologist, due to repeated burnout. She spent years with a therapist (framed as burnout coaching) exploring her relationship with her own parents, childhood fears, and unconscious anxieties. Yet she remained stuck and continued to feel overwhelmed.
In contrast, a structured six-session coaching process helped her reach both clarity and a strategy for leadership in her role and career planning. Making a decision about her career, freed up other decisions and created life-changing momentum. Coaching provided decision-making strategies, evidence-based leadership development / strategies, and alignment techniques that therapy had not.
This does not mean therapy was wrong—but it was the wrong intervention for her goal. A therapist offering coaching without training may have unconsciously defaulted to therapy, delaying the client’s progress.
The Public’s Confusion: Who Is Actually a Coach?
The coaching industry already faces challenges due to a lack of regulation. When therapists add "coaching" to their services without formal training, it further muddies the waters.
Potential risks include:
Clients not knowing what service they are actually receiving (coaching or therapy?).
Therapists using therapeutic models instead of coaching frameworks, which may not be appropriate.
Coaching being seen as an extension of therapy, rather than its own distinct discipline.
The result? Clients may lose trust in both professions / they don't get what they expect.
A Call for Professional Integrity: If You Want to Coach, Get Trained
If therapists want to expand into coaching, adequate training and supervision are essential. Therapy and coaching are different skill sets, and both require expertise to be practised effectively.
Steps to Ethically Incorporate Coaching
Seek Accredited Coaching Training – Programs through the International Coaching Federation (ICF), European Mentoring and Coaching Council (EMCC), or similar provide structured education in coaching methodologies. This should be substantive training (i.e. career development scale, such as 12 months on an advanced diploma/masters - and not a 2-month course), recognising that this is a new career route and not a quick bolt-on.
Get Chartered: Psychologists can now seek chartership with the BPS Coaching Division - where a commitment to standards and evidence is a central value.
Understand and Implement Coaching Ethics – Unlike therapy, coaching ethics focus on client autonomy, accountability, and performance rather than emotional healing.
Clearly Define Services – Separate coaching from therapy in marketing materials, client agreements, and service offerings.
Obtain Coaching Supervision – Just as therapy requires supervision, professional coaching should include ongoing mentoring and development.
Understand that the market is confusing and do your research - I wrote an article (linked below) on how complex the coaching pathways to competency are, based on trying to screen 5,000 coaches into a voluntary organisation.
Conclusion: Upholding Standards in Both Professions
Therapists argue that coaches should not offer therapy without qualifications—and they are right. However, the same applies to the reverse: therapists should not call themselves coaches without proper training.
By maintaining clear professional boundaries, obtaining the necessary coaching education, and ensuring clients give informed consent to the service they are actually receiving, therapists can engage in coaching ethically, competently, and professionally.
Dr Craig Newman - is a Clinical Psychologist and Chartered Coaching Psychologist - practitioner and supervisor. Having led a national coaching service with over 1,000 coaches supervised and trained. Currently a board member of the BPS Coaching Psychology Division.
Comments