While it is an effective and evidence-based approach, it is not a one-size-fits-all solution.
Like any therapy, it has limitations, downsides, and potential risks that should be considered.
- Requires a willingness to experience discomfort
-
- Not for those looking for quick symptom relief, since ACT concentrates on accepting distress rather than eliminating it.
- Some people may resist accepting painful emotions and struggle with the concept of “letting go of control.”
Example: Someone with severe anxiety might feel exhausted when asked to “sit with” their discomfort instead of using coping strategies like avoidance or distraction.
- Can be challenging for highly rational or analytical thinkers
-
- ACT involves mindfulness, experiential exercises, and metaphors, which some may find too abstract.
- Those who prefer structured and logical approaches (like CBT) may struggle with ACT’s emphasis on psychological flexibility rather than problem-solving.
Example: A person with OCD who wants a step-by-step method for eliminating obsessive thoughts may feel frustrated by ACT’s approach of accepting thoughts rather than changing them.
- Less focus on symptom reduction
-
- ACT does not directly aim to reduce symptoms of depression, anxiety, or other disorders, unlike traditional therapies (such as CBT).
- This might discourage individuals who expect therapy to provide direct relief from suffering.
Example: Someone with depression looking for strategies to boost happiness might struggle with ACT’s approach, which aims at living a profound life despite depression rather than making the disorder go away.
- May not be suitable for crises or severe mental illness
ACT may not be effective for individuals in crisis, such as those with:
-
- Severe suicidal ideation.
- Active psychosis.
- Manic episodes (in bipolar disorder).
Individuals in severe distress may need stabilization first (medication, crisis intervention) before ACT is helpful!
Example: Someone experiencing hallucinations or delusions may not benefit from mindfulness-based defusion exercises because they may struggle to differentiate reality from thoughts.
- Effectiveness can depend on the therapist
-
- Some therapists may not be properly trained in ACT, leading to ineffective treatment.
- A poor explanation of the core principles may cause misinterpretation of concepts like acceptance (believing it means passive resignation instead of active engagement).
Example: A therapist who doesn’t clarify ACT principles may leave a client believing they should “just accept” an abusive relationship rather than take action to leave it.
- Some exercises may be emotionally intense
-
- ACT frequently involves exposing oneself to uncomfortable thoughts and feelings, which can initially feel devastating.
- This may be challenging for those with severe trauma, PTSD, or unresolved emotional pain.
Example: A person with PTSD may struggle with exercises that push them to sit with painful emotions, potentially leading to emotional upset if not guided properly.
- Less emphasis on changing negative thought patterns
-
- Unlike cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), ACT does not focus on challenging or restructuring negative thoughts.
- Some people may prefer a more proactive approach to altering their thinking patterns rather than just observing them.
Example: A person with severe self-criticism might feel that simply “acknowledging” their thoughts isn’t enough. They might prefer a CBT-based approach that challenges and reframes self-judgmental beliefs.
- Limited research for some populations and conditions
While ACT is well-supported for depression, anxiety, chronic pain, and stress, research is still emerging for:
-
- ADHD
- Eating disorders
- Personality disorders
More studies are needed to confirm its long-term effectiveness for certain disorders and age groups.
Example: ACT has shown promise for eating disorders, but CBT-E (cognitive behavioral therapy for eating disorders) remains the gold standard.
