Treatment-Resistant Anxiety: Your Client Understands Everything—So Why Are They Still Stuck?

Your client can explain anxiety better than some graduate students.

They know what catastrophizing is.

They understand that avoidance reinforces fear.

They recognize their reassurance-seeking pattern.

They can tell you that perfectionism is connected to anxiety.

They have breathing exercises saved on their phone.

They journal.

They challenge automatic thoughts.

They have read three books about anxiety.

They even say:

“I know this is irrational.”

And yet Monday morning arrives, and they rewrite the same email eight times.

Their partner takes twenty minutes to reply, and they immediately ask:

“Are we okay?”

A harmless physical sensation appears, and within minutes they are searching symptoms online.

They understand that avoidance is shrinking their life, but they still cancel the trip.

They know checking creates temporary relief, but they check anyway.

Week after week, therapy sounds increasingly sophisticated.

But life outside therapy looks almost the same.

This is one of the situations in which clinicians may begin wondering about Treatment-Resistant Anxiety.

But that label deserves care.

A stalled case does not automatically mean the client is resistant.

It does not necessarily mean the diagnosis is wrong.

And it certainly does not mean the client “doesn’t want to change.”

Sometimes treatment has been too brief.

Sometimes the intervention has not been delivered with enough intensity or fidelity.

Sometimes subtle avoidance remains untouched.

Sometimes reassurance has entered the therapy itself.

Sometimes the client has changed their understanding without changing their behavior.

And sometimes therapists are treating the visible symptom while an important underlying fear, belief, defensive strategy, comorbidity, or environmental problem remains active.

That is the clinical puzzle at the center of this article.

Not:

“Why is this client difficult?”

But:

“What is still teaching this client’s nervous system, behavior, and beliefs that the old strategy is necessary?”

---

First, Be Careful With the Phrase “Treatment Resistant”

There is an actual research literature on Treatment-Resistant Anxiety, and it is more specific than simply describing a frustrating therapy case.

A 2024 expert consensus paper developed operational criteria for treatment-resistant anxiety disorders and emphasized that a person should not be classified as psychotherapeutically treatment resistant until they have received an adequately delivered evidence-based first-line psychotherapy, such as CBT, with appropriate duration, intensity, therapist competence, exposure practice when relevant, and treatment adherence.

That distinction matters.

A client who completed four sessions of irregular CBT is not necessarily treatment resistant.

A client who understands exposure but has never actually completed meaningful exposures is not necessarily treatment resistant.

A client who practices exposure while continuing several hidden safety behaviors may not have received an adequate behavioral learning trial.

A client whose primary condition has been misidentified may appear resistant to a treatment that was never well matched to the problem.

Before asking:

“Why isn’t this client responding?”

the therapist should ask:

“What treatment did they actually receive?”

---

True Nonresponse vs. Apparent Nonresponse

Situation	What It May Look Like	What the Therapist Should Examine
Adequate treatment with limited improvement	Symptoms remain significant despite well-delivered evidence-based care	Diagnosis, comorbidity, formulation, treatment adaptation, consultation
Insufficient treatment dose	“CBT didn’t work” after a few sessions	Duration, frequency, homework, exposure practice
Safety behaviors remain active	Client completes exposure but feels no new confidence	Checking, reassurance, escape plans, distraction
Insight without behavioral change	Client explains every pattern accurately	Whether learning is intellectual rather than experiential
Wrong primary target	Anxiety interventions repeatedly stall	OCD, trauma, substance use, medical issues, depression, ADHD, eating disorders, etc.
Environmental threat remains real	Client appears “hypervigilant”	Whether danger, discrimination, abuse, financial instability, or health concerns are actually present
Therapist reassurance maintains cycle	Sessions temporarily calm client	Whether therapy has become part of the safety system
Treatment is overfocused on symptom control	Client has dozens of coping tools but a smaller life	Avoidance, values, exposure, behavioral flexibility

The goal is not to remove the concept of resistance.

It is to make sure the term does not become a shortcut for incomplete formulation.

---

Therapist Struggle #1: The Client Has Insight—but Insight Has Become the Destination

Therapists love insight.

For good reason.

Understanding can reduce shame and create choice.

But one of the easiest mistakes in anxiety treatment is confusing accurate explanation with new learning.

A client may say:

“I know my fear of presenting comes from believing everyone will think I’m incompetent.”

That is meaningful.

But if they continue avoiding every presentation, their behavioral system keeps receiving the same lesson:

Presentations are dangerous enough to escape.

The American Psychological Association describes CBT as involving both cognitive and behavioral change. In anxiety treatment, clients are often encouraged to approach feared activities and situations so they can test predictions and learn that feared outcomes may be less likely—or more manageable—than expected.

This creates an important distinction.

Intellectual learning

“I understand that my fear is exaggerated.”

Experiential learning

“I entered the situation, experienced anxiety, stayed, and discovered that I could tolerate what happened.”

These are not interchangeable.

A therapy session can become highly sophisticated while the client’s life remains organized around avoidance.

That is one reason Treatment-Resistant Anxiety should prompt clinicians to ask not only:

What does the client understand?

but:

What has the client experienced differently?

---

Therapist Struggle #2: Coping Skills Can Quietly Become Safety Behaviors

Imagine a client afraid of panic.

Before entering a store, they:

• perform breathing exercises;
• carry medication “just in case”;
• check the nearest exit;
• stand close to the door;
• repeatedly monitor their heart rate;
• text their partner throughout the visit.

They technically entered the store.

Was it exposure?

Maybe.

But what did the client learn?

Potentially:

“I survived because I controlled my breathing, had medication nearby, knew the exit, monitored my body, and had my partner available.”

That is different from:

“I can experience panic sensations and remain safe without emergency protection.”

APA describes exposure therapy as structured confrontation with feared stimuli and explains that it may help clients disconfirm feared predictions and build self-efficacy.

Clinical Events’ own guide to Anxiety Disorders Exposure Therapy also addresses subtle safety behaviors, repeated practice, collaborative hierarchy development, and the importance of learning rather than simply “getting through” an exercise.

This creates a subtle treatment question:

Is the coping skill helping the client approach life—or helping them avoid discovering that they can function without the coping ritual?

Context matters.

Breathing, grounding, medication, planning, and support are not inherently problematic.

The issue is function.

What does the client believe would happen without them?

---

Therapist Struggle #3: Reassurance Has Entered the Therapy Room

A client with health anxiety asks:

“You don’t think this means something serious, right?”

The therapist reassures them.

The client relaxes.

Ten minutes later:

“But if it were serious, wouldn’t I feel different?”

More reassurance.

Next week:

“I know you said it was probably anxiety, but…”

The therapist may feel compassionate.

They may also be slowly becoming part of the client’s certainty-seeking system.

A similar pattern appears with relationship anxiety.

“Do you think my partner sounds distant?”

Career anxiety:

“Do you think my boss is upset with me?”

Parenting anxiety:

“Do you think I’m damaging my child?”

Reassurance can temporarily lower distress.

The clinical question is whether it produces durable learning or teaches:

“When uncertainty appears, I need an authority figure to remove it.”

This is especially important in Treatment-Resistant Anxiety, because a therapist may inadvertently strengthen the process they are trying to treat.

A more useful response may be:

“I notice that part of you wants me to guarantee the outcome. What would it be like if we didn’t resolve that uncertainty immediately?”

That does not mean withholding empathy.

It means shifting the therapeutic task from certainty acquisition to uncertainty tolerance.

---

Therapist Struggle #4: The Client Is Doing Exposure—but the Exposure Is Too Safe

Sometimes the problem is not lack of exposure.

It is exposure that never meaningfully tests the feared prediction.

A socially anxious client fears:

“If people see me make a mistake, they will realize I am incompetent.”

Their exposure is:

Ask a cashier a question.

That may produce mild social discomfort.

But does it test the actual belief?

Not necessarily.

A stronger behavioral experiment might involve:

• speaking up in a meeting without rehearsing every sentence;
• intentionally allowing a small, harmless imperfection;
• asking a question despite fear of appearing uninformed;
• giving a short presentation without memorizing it word for word.

Exposure works best when therapists understand what the client predicts.

Otherwise, the clinician may expose the client to situations without exposing them to the feared meaning.

This is where deeper formulation can add value.

The event’s Deconstructing Anxiety model specifically asks clinicians to investigate the core fear and the protective strategy—or “chief defense”—that has developed around it. The model is presented as an integrative framework drawing from CBT, psychodynamic thinking, mindfulness, positive psychology, and exposure-based principles.

The model’s value here is not replacing exposure.

It may help sharpen the target.

---

Therapist Struggle #5: “Resistance” May Be a Logical Protection Strategy

A client procrastinates before applying for jobs.

The therapist sees avoidance.

The client says:

“I’m lazy.”

But further exploration reveals:

“If I really try and nobody hires me, then I’ll know I’m actually not good enough.”

Now procrastination makes psychological sense.

It preserves an alternative explanation:

“I didn’t fail. I never fully tried.”

Another client repeatedly chooses emotionally unavailable partners.

Another overprepares every task.

Another refuses to delegate.

Another never disagrees.

Another keeps everyone at emotional distance.

These patterns may look self-defeating.

But often they carry protective logic.

Behavior	Immediate Protection	Possible Deeper Fear or Meaning
Overpreparing	Reduces chance of visible error	“A mistake will expose me as inadequate.”
Reassurance seeking	Temporarily reduces uncertainty	“If they leave, I won’t be able to handle it.”
Never delegating	Preserves control	“Someone else’s failure will become my failure.”
Avoiding dating	Prevents rejection	“Rejection proves I am unlovable.”
Procrastinating	Delays performance test	“Trying fully could expose my limitations.”
People-pleasing	Reduces conflict risk	“Disapproval means loss of connection.”
Emotional withdrawal	Limits vulnerability	“Need creates danger.”
Compulsive checking	Creates temporary certainty	“If I miss something, catastrophe will be my fault.”

This does not mean every anxious behavior hides one universal unconscious cause.

It means the therapist should ask:

“What problem does this strategy solve for the client?”

Once you know the answer, treatment can become more precise.

---

Before Calling It Treatment-Resistant Anxiety, Check the Diagnosis Again

Clinical stagnation sometimes reflects a formulation problem rather than a client-change problem.

Consider a person referred for “anxiety” who actually has prominent OCD.

Generic reassurance reduction and cognitive reframing may be insufficient without competent Exposure and Response Prevention.

A client with panic-like symptoms may need appropriate medical assessment.

A person with trauma-related symptoms may require a trauma-informed formulation.

Severe depression may reduce energy, motivation, and follow-through.

Substance use can intensify anxiety or interfere with treatment.

ADHD can make homework completion appear like avoidance.

An eating disorder may involve significant medical and psychiatric complexity.

Real abuse, stalking, discrimination, unstable housing, or medical illness should not be reduced to irrational worry.

The first question in a stalled case should not always be:

“How do I push harder?”

It may be:

“Are we treating the right problem?”

NIMH emphasizes that treatment selection should reflect the person’s needs, preferences, medical situation, and professional assessment; CBT is well supported for GAD, but different people and conditions may require different approaches.

---

Where the Deconstructing Anxiety Model Fits

The September 26 Clinical Events training presents Todd Pressman, PhD’s Deconstructing Anxiety model as a synthesis of multiple therapeutic traditions.

According to the model, therapists examine two linked ideas:

Core Fear: the deeper feared meaning beneath the presenting symptom.

Chief Defense: the strategy the person repeatedly uses to prevent contact with that feared experience.

The current event page describes the framework as integrating CBT, psychodynamic approaches, mindfulness, positive psychology, exposure, and learned optimism. Course objectives include identifying the client’s core fear and chief defense and examining the model’s five proposed core fears.

This framework can be useful in Treatment-Resistant Anxiety when the client has become skilled at controlling symptoms without changing the larger defensive pattern.

But an important clinical caveat is necessary.

The model’s five-core-fear taxonomy is Todd Pressman’s integrative conceptual model, not a universally established scientific classification of all anxiety disorders.

Clinical Events’ existing Deconstructing Anxiety: Understanding the 5 Core Fears That Shape Human Suffering makes this distinction and is the better internal resource for readers who want the full theory.

This article has a different job:

What do therapists do when treatment appears to be working conceptually—but the client’s life remains stuck?

---

The Five Core Fears—Briefly

Within Pressman’s framework, the five proposed broad themes are:

1. Abandonment or loss of love
2. Loss of identity
3. Loss of meaning
4. Loss of purpose
5. Death

These categories can provide questions, not conclusions.

A therapist might ask:

“If your boss thought the presentation was poor, what would that mean?”

Client:

“They might think I’m incompetent.”

Therapist:

“And if they did?”

Client:

“Then maybe I’m not actually as capable as everyone thinks.”

The visible problem was presentation anxiety.

The deeper meaning may involve identity.

Another client fears their partner leaving.

Another fears physical sensations because they represent death.

Another fears retirement because it threatens purpose.

The clinical usefulness comes from connecting surface anxiety with the meaning the client assigns to the feared event.

But therapists should resist forcing every person into one category.

Formulation remains collaborative and testable.

---

Why “Doing the Opposite” Can Be Powerful—and Why It Requires Judgment

One intervention emphasized in the Deconstructing Anxiety model is described as doing the opposite of the chief defense.

If the defense is excessive control, the client practices tolerating selected uncertainty.

If it is perfectionism, the client permits a manageable imperfection.

If it is withdrawal, the client moves toward safe connection.

If it is compulsive reassurance, the client practices leaving a question unanswered.

This overlaps conceptually with behavioral experiments, exposure, and response prevention.

But “do the opposite” should not become simplistic.

A client who is hypervigilant because they are currently unsafe does not need to “stop protecting themselves.”

A perfectionistic surgeon should not become careless.

A financially vulnerable person should not abandon planning.

A trauma survivor should not be pushed into indiscriminate vulnerability.

The intervention should challenge unnecessary defensive rigidity, not legitimate safety.

That distinction protects the work from becoming reckless.

---

Clinical Scenario 1: “I Know My Partner Loves Me—I Still Need to Ask”

Composite example

Maya has been in therapy for eight months.

She understands attachment anxiety.

She can identify her triggers.

She knows that repeated reassurance gives temporary relief.

Yet she asks her partner several times a day:

“Are we okay?”

Her therapist has spent months discussing childhood attachment experiences and cognitive distortions.

Maya has insight.

But the behavior remains.

The therapist maps the loop:

Trigger: partner becomes quiet.

Prediction: “They’re losing interest.”

Defense: reassurance seeking.

Immediate effect: anxiety drops.

Long-term effect: Maya becomes less able to tolerate ambiguity.

Then comes the deeper question:

“If they eventually left, what would that mean about you?”

Maya says:

“That I was never enough.”

Now therapy can work at two levels.

Behaviorally, Maya can begin delaying or reducing reassurance.

Cognitively, she can examine the belief that rejection equals worthlessness.

Relationally, she can learn that uncertainty does not automatically mean abandonment.

The objective is not to convince Maya that nobody will ever leave.

The objective is to reduce the power of:

“If someone leaves, I cease to be okay.”

---

Clinical Scenario 2: The Executive Who Calls Anxiety “High Standards”

Composite example

Daniel is successful.

He prepares extensively.

He checks every presentation repeatedly.

He has never missed an important deadline.

His therapist suggests that perfectionism may be increasing anxiety.

Daniel replies:

“Perfectionism is why I’m successful.”

He is partly right.

Care and preparation helped him.

The therapeutic error would be to demonize those strengths.

Instead, ask:

When does preparation stop improving the work and start regulating fear?

Daniel notices that after the third review, quality barely improves.

But he continues for another two hours.

Why?

“Because if there is a mistake, people might realize I’m not as competent as they think.”

Here, Treatment-Resistant Anxiety may look less like obvious fear and more like socially rewarded overfunctioning.

The experiment could be small:

Submit a low-stakes document after two reviews rather than six.

Then examine:

• What did Daniel predict?
• What actually happened?
• How long did anxiety last?
• Did he covertly check afterward?
• What did he learn about competence and imperfection?

The goal is not reduced standards.

It is increased freedom.

---

Clinical Scenario 3: Health Anxiety After “Everything Has Been Ruled Out”

Composite example

Elena has received appropriate medical evaluation for recurring benign sensations.

Each new sensation begins a familiar sequence:

1. notice;
2. scan;
3. search online;
4. ask family;
5. seek additional reassurance;
6. experience relief;
7. notice something else.

The therapist tells her:

“You’ve already been medically cleared.”

Elena knows.

That information lasts approximately six hours.

A stronger formulation asks:

“What does another search promise you?”

Elena:

“That I’ll catch something before it’s too late.”

Now the therapist can distinguish responsible healthcare from compulsive certainty-seeking.

The feared issue is no longer only:

“Do I have an illness?”

It may also be:

“Can I tolerate not knowing with complete certainty?”

This creates a more meaningful behavioral target.

Not medical neglect.

Not denial.

But carefully reducing anxiety-driven checking after appropriate medical guidance.

---

Clinical Scenario 4: The Client Who Says Exposure “Doesn’t Work”

Composite example

Andre has social anxiety.

He says he has tried exposure repeatedly.

He attends social gatherings.

He gives presentations.

He goes to networking events.

Yet anxiety remains intense.

His therapist investigates.

At every event Andre:

• rehearses sentences before speaking;
• avoids eye contact;
• checks reactions constantly;
• keeps his phone in hand;
• leaves early;
• mentally reviews every interaction afterward.

He entered the feared situation physically.

But psychologically he remained highly defended.

APA notes that exposure involves repeated confrontation with feared stimuli and can work by disconfirming fearful predictions and increasing mastery.

For Andre, the next treatment step may not be “attend more parties.”

It may be:

attend while dropping selected safety strategies.

That creates new learning.

---

The Difference Between Symptom Reduction and Life Expansion

One of the more useful questions therapists can ask is:

“If this client’s anxiety score stayed exactly the same for one month, could their life still become larger?”

Could they:

• apply for the job?
• go to dinner?
• take the flight?
• speak up in the meeting?
• delegate?
• date?
• stop researching every decision?
• let someone be disappointed?
• submit work before it feels perfect?

This is important because anxiety treatment can accidentally become:

“First eliminate anxiety, then live.”

Clients wait for calm before action.

The problem is that avoidance often keeps calm conditional.

NIMH describes ACT as encouraging nonjudgmental acceptance of thoughts and engagement in meaningful activities, while CBT helps clients challenge harmful thinking and change self-defeating behavioral patterns.

The Deconstructing Anxiety training similarly extends beyond symptom relief toward meaning, purpose, and fulfillment.

That creates a useful shift:

From:

“How do we make anxiety disappear?”

to:

“How do we make anxiety less powerful in deciding how this client lives?”

---

A Practical Framework for Stalled Anxiety Cases: STUCK

This is a clinical thinking aid, not a validated assessment instrument.

S — Step Back From the Label

Before deciding that you are seeing Treatment-Resistant Anxiety, reassess:

• diagnosis;
• medical contributors;
• substance use;
• medication issues;
• comorbidity;
• environmental threat;
• treatment duration;
• treatment fidelity.

Ask:

“Has this client actually received an adequate trial of the treatment we believe has failed?”

---

T — Track the Maintaining Loop

Identify:

Trigger → prediction → emotion/sensation → defense → immediate relief → long-term cost

Do not settle for:

“The client has anxiety.”

Get specific.

---

U — Understand What the Defense Protects

What becomes psychologically threatening if the client stops checking, pleasing, avoiding, controlling, overpreparing, or withdrawing?

Treat your answer as a hypothesis.

Test it collaboratively.

---

C — Create New Learning

Insight must eventually meet experience.

Use:

• behavioral experiments;
• appropriately designed exposure;
• response prevention;
• reduction of selected safety behaviors;
• values-consistent action.

Do not simply repeat psychoeducation.

---

K — Keep Measuring What Matters

Measure more than distress.

Track:

• functioning;
• avoidance;
• reassurance;
• behavioral flexibility;
• work/school participation;
• social engagement;
• exposure completion;
• client-defined quality of life.

A client can feel anxious and still be making meaningful progress.

---

Signs You May Be Treating the Defense More Than the Fear

Therapists sometimes work incredibly hard while accidentally helping clients strengthen protection.

Watch for sessions dominated by:

Endless reassurance

The client always leaves calmer but never more capable of uncertainty.

New coping skills every week

The toolbox grows while behavior remains unchanged.

Intellectual analysis

Every pattern is explained, but little is tested.

Overpreparation for exposure

The client never feels “ready enough,” so exposure remains hypothetical.

Therapist rescue

The clinician starts regulating every spike rather than helping the client discover capacity.

Premature deep interpretation

The therapist insists on a hidden fear the client does not recognize.

Overaggressive confrontation

The clinician treats all avoidance as pathology and ignores context.

Good anxiety work usually requires movement between understanding and action.

Too much of either can become limiting.

---

What About Mindfulness?

Mindfulness can be helpful when it changes the person’s relationship with internal experience.

It becomes less useful when it is employed exclusively as:

“Make this feeling go away immediately.”

A client may use meditation in the same way another client uses reassurance.

If every anxious thought triggers an urgent fifteen-minute mindfulness exercise, the implicit message may become:

Anxiety must be neutralized before I can continue.

The therapist can instead frame mindfulness as:

“Can we notice this without immediately solving it?”

That is a different task.

Mindfulness then supports observation and response flexibility rather than becoming another emergency control strategy.

This distinction fits the training’s integration of mindfulness with CBT and other methods rather than treating mindfulness as a standalone cure.

---

When Deeper Meaning Helps—and When It Becomes a Distraction

There is a risk on both sides.

Too little depth

The clinician repeatedly targets symptoms without asking what those symptoms protect.

Too much depth

Every behavior becomes symbolic.

Every worry must reveal childhood trauma.

Every fear requires an existential explanation before treatment can proceed.

Neither extreme is ideal.

The therapist can ask:

“Would understanding the deeper meaning change what we do?”

If yes, explore it.

If not, behavioral treatment may remain the more useful priority.

A client’s fear of elevators may not require a year of existential exploration.

A client’s lifelong perfectionism tied to fragile identity may benefit from deeper formulation.

Clinical judgment determines the balance.

---

Treatment-Resistant Anxiety Should Trigger Curiosity, Not Blame

One of the most important shifts therapists can make is replacing:

“Why won’t they do the work?”

with:

“What makes the current strategy still feel necessary?”

Resistance frequently contains information.

The client who refuses exposure may believe distress will permanently damage them.

The client who cannot stop checking may believe failing to check would make them morally responsible for harm.

The client who never delegates may believe dependence is dangerous.

The client who intellectualizes may fear emotional vulnerability more than anxiety itself.

The goal is not to admire the defense forever.

It is to understand it well enough to create a viable alternative.

---

Clinical Events Resources That Fit This Case

Clinical Events already has several articles that complement this topic without needing to duplicate them.

Clinicians who want a deeper explanation of repetitive reassurance, checking, perfectionism, control, and avoidance can read Anxiety Patterns: Why Clients Keep Doing What Makes Their Anxiety Worse.

For the theoretical core-fear model, use Deconstructing Anxiety: Understanding the 5 Core Fears That Shape Human Suffering.

For the behavioral side of treatment, the Anxiety Disorders Exposure Therapy guide covers exposure principles, safety behaviors, hierarchy development, and common clinician concerns.

Clinical Events also has an existing article on how defenses can keep anxiety alive.

These internal links create a useful anxiety-treatment topic cluster rather than forcing one article to explain every concept.

---

Evidence-Based Anxiety Treatment Still Matters

A “deeper” model should never become an excuse to abandon established care.

NIMH identifies CBT as a well-studied, research-supported psychotherapy commonly used for generalized anxiety disorder. It also notes growing evidence for ACT and emphasizes tailoring treatment to the individual’s needs and circumstances.

APA describes CBT as highly effective for anxiety disorders and highlights behavioral approaches that encourage clients to approach rather than continually avoid anxiety-provoking situations.

APA’s exposure resources explain how structured exposure can help weaken fear associations, disconfirm predictions, and increase mastery.

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs likewise lists evidence-based cognitive-behavioral approaches among effective anxiety treatments.

The clinical advantage of an integrative model is therefore not:

“Evidence-based anxiety treatment doesn’t work.”

It is:

“When a case stalls, can a broader formulation help us understand what established interventions need to target more precisely?”

---

When to Seek Consultation

A stalled anxiety case deserves consultation when:

• diagnosis is uncertain;
• symptoms are worsening;
• OCD or trauma may require specialty treatment;
• the therapist is avoiding exposure due to their own discomfort;
• the client has completed adequate treatment with little response;
• medication questions require coordination with a prescriber;
• medical symptoms require evaluation;
• risk is increasing;
• therapy has become unusually reassurance-heavy;
• the therapist feels frustrated, helpless, or overly responsible.

Consultation is especially important before concluding:

“This client is resistant.”

Another clinician may see a missing variable you no longer notice because you have lived inside the case for months.

---

When Referral May Be the Better Treatment

Not every therapist should treat every anxiety presentation.

A generalist may appropriately refer or collaborate when a client requires:

• specialized ERP for OCD;
• intensive treatment;
• medical evaluation;
• eating-disorder services;
• substance-use treatment;
• trauma-specialty care;
• medication management;
• higher-acuity support.

Referral should not be framed as punishment for insufficient progress.

It may simply mean:

“This problem now requires a degree of specialization or treatment intensity that another provider can offer more effectively.”

That is good clinical care.

---

Continuing Education: Going Beneath the Symptom Without Losing the Evidence

The Clinical Events program Deconstructing Anxiety: A New Approach to Understanding and Treating Anxiety Disorders is scheduled for September 26, 2026, virtually, from 10:00 AM–1:15 PM ET, with 3 CE Credits. Registration is currently listed at $67.

The presenter is Todd Pressman, PhD, creator of the Deconstructing Anxiety model. The current training objectives include identifying a client’s core fear and chief defense, understanding the core-fear/chief-defense formulation, and examining the model’s five proposed core fears and associated defenses.

The agenda includes:

• an overview of anxiety approaches;
• evidence-based techniques and identification of causes;
• CBT, mindfulness, and positive psychology approaches to resistance;
• movement from fear toward purpose, meaning, and fulfillment;
• clinical application and Q&A.

For therapists encountering Treatment-Resistant Anxiety, the useful question is not whether this model should replace CBT, exposure, diagnosis, or established treatment.

It should not.

The more productive question is:

Can an additional fear-and-defense formulation help us understand why a client’s existing strategies remain so compelling even after they understand the anxiety intellectually?

Clinicians can review the specific Deconstructing Anxiety training and registration page, browse the evergreen Clinical Events schedule for all upcoming CE trainings, or explore additional therapist-focused resources in the Clinical Edge Blog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Conclusion: The Client May Not Need Another Explanation of Anxiety

The therapy room can create an illusion of progress.

The client becomes fluent in psychological language.

They can identify cognitive distortions.

They understand attachment.

They recognize avoidance.

They know the difference between a trigger and a threat.

They can explain exactly why reassurance is temporary.

And yet Tuesday morning arrives—and they still reorganize their entire life around avoiding uncertainty.

This is where clinicians need more than another explanation.

They need formulation.

Before concluding that you are dealing with Treatment-Resistant Anxiety, confirm that the client actually received an adequate treatment trial.

Revisit diagnosis.

Look at comorbidity.

Look at adherence.

Look at the environment.

Look at safety behaviors.

Look at what happens between sessions.

Look at what the therapist may be reinforcing.

Then ask the deeper question:

“What does this client believe will happen if they stop protecting themselves in the old way?”

Perhaps perfectionism protects identity.

Perhaps reassurance protects attachment.

Perhaps overcontrol protects against helplessness.

Perhaps withdrawal protects against rejection.

Perhaps checking creates the illusion of preventing catastrophe.

The defense exists for a reason.

The goal is not to shame it.

The goal is to help the client discover that the defense is no longer the only option.

That usually requires something more powerful than insight alone.

Experience.

Action.

Uncertainty.

New learning.

A small behavioral risk.

A different relationship with fear.

And enough therapeutic safety to discover:

“I can feel this—and I do not have to organize my life around preventing it.”

That is the moment treatment shifts.

Not from fear to perfect calm.

But from fear controlling the client’s choices to fear becoming one experience among many.

And for therapists working with stalled anxiety cases, that may be the more useful question than:

“How do I make this client’s anxiety go away?”

Ask instead:

“What would this client do differently if they no longer had to obey the strategy anxiety has taught them to trust?”

That question can move treatment beyond explanation.

And sometimes, beyond stuckness.

For additional evidence-based guidance on anxiety treatment, clinicians can review the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) guidance on CBT, ACT, and treatment planning NIMH — Generalized Anxiety Disorder, the American Psychological Association (APA) overview of exposure therapy and avoidance reduction APA — Exposure Therapy, and the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs resources on evidence-based anxiety treatment VA — Anxiety Treatments & Therapies. Therapists can also explore upcoming professional trainings through the Clinical Events — All Events calendar.