A Trauma Therapist on Why The Crown’s Princess Diana Episodes Are So Hard to Watch
As a trauma therapist, I’ve found myself deeply affected by The Crown’s portrayal of Princess Diana. It’s not just a story; it’s a visceral experience of institutional cruelty and the profound impact of betrayal. We’ll explore why these episodes resonate so deeply, touching on the body’s role in archiving trauma and the universal wound Diana represents. It’s an unflinching look at a life under immense pressure, and I invite you to join me in understanding its profound clinical implications.
Last reviewed: June 2026 by Annie Wright, LMFT
- Dear Creators of The Crown: On the Unbearable Weight of Institutional Cruelty
- To the Writers: The Body Archives the Impossible Position
- To the Audience: Understanding the Wound as Larger Than a Marriage
- To the Storytellers: When Betrayal Becomes a Systemic Language
- To the Portrayers: The Metaphor of the Royal Machine
- Both/And: The Personal and the Public Trauma
- The Systemic Lens: How Institutional Betrayal Shapes Our Understanding
- To All of Us: Reclaiming Our Own Narratives
- Frequently Asked Questions
The Crown’s Princess Diana episodes are painful viewing because the story depicts institutional betrayal, harm that occurs when an institution relied on for protection instead causes or enables harm. The body’s response is often as intense as the response to personal relational betrayal, because the nervous system processes both as fundamental violations of expected safety. Watching someone be gaslit and disbelieved activates viewers’ own nervous system memories. In my work with driven women, the resonance is often a doorway into recognizing betrayal in their own histories.
In short: The Crown’s Diana episodes are painful to watch because they depict institutional betrayal with clinical accuracy, activating viewers’ own nervous system memories of being disbelieved or failed by structures of power.
If your nervous system learned the safest way to exist was to manage everyone else's world, my self-paced course Enough Without the Effort is the recovery map.
I’ve worked with women processing institutional betrayal, including by employers, medical systems, and family structures, across more than 15,000 clinical hours, and the somatic response to this form of harm is consistent and under-recognized. Jennifer Freyd, PhD, psychologist who coined the concept of betrayal trauma, articulates why betrayal by trusted institutions produces distinct and lasting psychological damage (Freyd 1996).
Dear Creators of The Crown: On the Unbearable Weight of Institutional Cruelty
The soft glow of the television screen illuminates the room, casting long shadows as the scene unfolds. A young woman, seemingly trapped within gilded cages, navigates an institution that demands her conformity while simultaneously stripping her of agency. You can almost feel the chill in the air, the suffocating weight of expectation, the insidious creep of isolation. It’s not just a historical drama; it’s a visceral, almost somatic experience for many of us watching, a testament to the show’s powerful, often unsettling, portrayal of a life under unimaginable duress. This isn’t merely entertainment; it’s a mirror reflecting profound truths about power, vulnerability, and the human spirit.
As a trauma therapist, I’ve noticed a distinct shift in the collective response to The Crown’s Princess Diana episodes. There’s a deeper resonance, a palpable discomfort that goes beyond typical character empathy. It feels like the show isn’t just telling a story; it’s excavating a collective wound, touching on themes of family trauma and institutional cruelty that many of us recognize, even if unconsciously. This isn’t about diagnosing real people, but about understanding the profound impact of systemic pressures on an individual, especially when that individual is as publicly visible as Diana.
The brilliance of The Crown, particularly in these seasons, lies in its ability to render the abstract concrete. The ‘firm’ isn’t just a concept; it’s a living, breathing entity that exerts immense pressure, shaping and distorting lives within its orbit. This portrayal allows us to witness the slow, agonizing erosion of self, a process that’s incredibly difficult to watch precisely because it feels so real. It’s a masterclass in showing, not just telling, the insidious nature of betrayal trauma when it originates from the very structures meant to provide safety and belonging.
This isn’t to say that all viewers are experiencing trauma in the same way, but rather that the show taps into universal themes of powerlessness, voicelessness, and the profound impact of being unseen. It’s a testament to the creators’ ethical approach that they manage to evoke such strong reactions, forcing us to confront uncomfortable truths about institutions and the individuals caught within their machinery. We’re not just watching history; we’re feeling it, and that’s a powerful and often unsettling experience that demands our attention and our critical reflection.
To the Writers: The Body Archives the Impossible Position
Dear Creators of The Crown, you’ve managed to capture something truly profound in your depiction of Diana’s struggle, particularly with her bulimia. It’s not just a symptom; it’s a language, a desperate attempt by the body to archive an impossible position, a way to exert control when all external control has been stripped away. This isn’t merely a plot point; it’s a visceral, heartbreaking illustration of how the body becomes a canvas for unexpressed pain, a silent scream when words fail or are silenced. It’s an unflinching look at the devastating impact of chronic stress and emotional neglect.
To the writers, your portrayal of Diana’s eating disorder transcends mere sensationalism; it delves into the psychological and somatic realities of complex trauma. You’ve shown us how the body, in its wisdom, attempts to cope with overwhelming emotional distress, even if those coping mechanisms are ultimately self-destructive. This isn’t about moral judgment; it’s about understanding the deep, often unconscious, drive behind such behaviors, particularly when an individual feels trapped and unheard. It’s a powerful narrative choice that resonates deeply with clinical understandings of trauma.
The scenes depicting Diana’s bulimia are incredibly difficult to watch because they lay bare the raw vulnerability of a person pushed to their absolute limits. They illustrate how the body can internalize and express the trauma of institutional cruelty, becoming a site of both suffering and desperate agency. This isn’t just about a princess; it’s about anyone who has felt their self-worth eroded by external forces, anyone who has sought control in destructive ways when their autonomy was denied. It’s a universal story of the body archiving the unspeakable.
Your willingness to explore this aspect of Diana’s life with such unflinching honesty is commendable. It highlights the profound connection between emotional distress and physical manifestations, a concept central to trauma-informed care. You’ve shown that addiction, in its various forms, often emerges from a deep sense of loss and a desperate attempt to create meaning or control in an otherwise meaningless or uncontrollable situation. It’s a powerful reminder that these behaviors are often cries for help, not moral failings.
Institutional betrayal refers to wrongdoings perpetrated by an institution against individuals dependent on that institution, including failures to prevent or respond to wrongdoings by individuals. This concept was developed by Jennifer Freyd, PhD, psychologist.
In plain terms: When a powerful organization you rely on (like a family, school, or government) harms you or fails to protect you from harm, it’s called institutional betrayal. It’s a deep breach of trust that can leave lasting emotional wounds.
To the Audience: Understanding the Wound as Larger Than a Marriage
To the audience, it’s crucial to understand that Diana’s wound, as portrayed in The Crown, is far larger than her marriage to Prince Charles. While their relationship certainly served as a focal point for her suffering, the show meticulously illustrates how her distress stemmed from a much broader systemic issue: the institutional cruelty of the monarchy itself. This isn’t just a personal tragedy; it’s a profound exploration of how individuals can be consumed by systems that prioritize tradition and image over human well-being. It’s a powerful commentary on the cost of belonging to such an institution.
When we witness Diana’s struggles, we’re not just seeing a woman in a difficult marriage; we’re seeing a person grappling with a profound sense of maternal wounds and the crushing weight of expectation from an entire nation, embodied by an ancient institution. This broader lens allows us to move beyond simplistic narratives and understand the complex interplay of personal and systemic factors that contributed to her suffering. It’s a story of an individual trying to find her voice within a system designed to silence it.
Consider composite client Elena, who experienced similar feelings of being trapped and unheard within her own high-profile family. Like Diana, Elena felt that her individual needs and emotions were secondary to the family’s public image and expectations, leading to years of silent suffering and self-destructive coping mechanisms. The show makes it clear that Diana’s plight wasn’t just about a husband, but about an entire apparatus that failed to see her as a whole person, echoing Elena’s own experiences of institutional neglect within her family system.
Similarly, Maya, another composite client, found herself identifying deeply with Diana’s sense of isolation and the feeling that her emotional pain was constantly dismissed or minimized. Maya had grown up in a family where emotional expression was discouraged, leading her to feel profoundly alone even when surrounded by people. The Crown’s portrayal of Diana’s increasing isolation within the royal family resonates with Maya’s experience, highlighting how systemic emotional neglect can lead to deep, pervasive loneliness, even for someone as globally recognized as Diana.
Complex trauma, or C-PTSD, results from prolonged or repeated exposure to traumatic events, often interpersonal in nature, within contexts where escape is difficult or impossible. Judith Herman, MD, psychiatrist, extensively described this phenomenon.
In plain terms: Imagine experiencing trauma not just once, but over and over, often by someone you depend on. That’s complex trauma. It shapes your worldview and sense of self far more deeply than a single traumatic event, making healing a longer journey.
To the Storytellers: When Betrayal Becomes a Systemic Language
To the storytellers, you’ve masterfully shown how betrayal becomes a systemic language within the royal institution, not just an interpersonal failing. It’s not just that individuals betray Diana; the institution itself, through its rigid protocols, its demand for secrecy, and its prioritization of image over authenticity, enacts a continuous, pervasive form of betrayal trauma. This isn’t about individual malice; it’s about a system that is inherently disloyal to the emotional and psychological needs of its members.
This systemic betrayal is what makes these episodes so incredibly difficult to watch. It’s the slow, agonizing realization that there’s no escape, no one to truly turn to, because the very structure meant to support you is the source of the harm. This institutional betrayal creates a profound sense of insecurity and a deep wound that no amount of personal affection or individual kindness can fully heal. It’s a powerful illustration of how context can amplify and perpetuate trauma.
When Elena watched these scenes, she recognized the insidious nature of institutional betrayal from her own experiences within a corporate environment that prioritized profit over employee well-being. She saw how Diana’s attempts to speak out were met with dismissal and further isolation, mirroring Elena’s own struggles to voice concerns in a system that punished dissent. The show powerfully illustrates how such environments can foster a pervasive sense of distrust and psychological unsafety, making genuine connection impossible.
Maya, too, resonated with the pervasive sense of betrayal, recalling instances where her family’s public facade contradicted their private dysfunction, leaving her feeling gaslit and confused. The Crown’s depiction of the royal family’s carefully curated image versus the emotional chaos within its walls echoed Maya’s experience of living in a family where appearances were everything, and genuine emotional needs were constantly overlooked. It’s a poignant reminder of how institutional structures can perpetuate deep emotional wounds.
Somatic Experiencing is a body-oriented therapeutic model for healing trauma and other stress-related disorders. Developed by Peter A. Levine, PhD, biophysicist and psychologist, it focuses on helping individuals re-negotiate and release traumatic shock stored in the body.
In plain terms: Somatic Experiencing is about listening to your body to heal from trauma. Instead of just talking about what happened, you learn to notice physical sensations and release the trapped energy of past stressful events, helping your nervous system regulate.
To the Portrayers: The Metaphor of the Royal Machine
To the portrayers, the metaphor of the royal machine is incredibly potent in these episodes. It’s not just a backdrop; it’s an active antagonist, a relentless, impersonal force that grinds down individuality and demands absolute conformity. This machine, with its centuries of tradition and unyielding expectations, serves as a powerful symbol of the oppressive systems many of us encounter in our own lives, albeit on a less grand scale. It’s a chilling reminder of how institutions can dehumanize even those at their very center.
The show effectively uses this metaphor to illustrate how Diana’s attempts to break free or to express her authentic self are met with overwhelming resistance, not from a single person, but from the entire monolithic structure. This institutional resistance is what makes her struggle so profound and so relatable, even for those of us who will never experience royal life. It speaks to the universal human desire for authenticity in the face of stifling expectations, a theme beautifully explored in The White Lotus.
This metaphor also highlights the concept of Diana’s public wound, a trauma that wasn’t just personal but was played out on a global stage. The royal machine didn’t just hurt Diana; it made her suffering a spectacle, further compounding the trauma. This public dimension adds another layer of complexity, demonstrating how visibility can be both a source of power and a profound vulnerability, especially when one is trapped within a system that controls their narrative.
The genius of this portrayal lies in its ability to make the abstract tangible. The ‘firm’ becomes a character in itself, an entity with its own will and its own methods of enforcing conformity. This allows us to understand, on a deeper level, how institutional structures can inflict profound psychological damage, even without overt acts of malice. It’s a powerful commentary on the subtle, insidious ways that systems can erode individual well-being and autonomy, a theme I often discuss in my executive coaching practice.
Disorganized attachment arises from a caregiver’s frightening or frightened behavior, leading a child to experience the caregiver as both a source of comfort and a source of fear. Mary Main, PhD, psychologist, and Erik Hesse, PhD, psychologist, pioneered research in this area.
In plain terms: If a child’s primary caregiver is unpredictable. Sometimes loving, sometimes scary. The child might develop disorganized attachment. They crave closeness but also fear it, leading to confusion and difficulty forming secure relationships later in life.
“Addiction begins when a woman loses her handmade and meaningful life…”
Clarissa Pinkola Estés, Women Who Run With the Wolves
Both/And: The Personal and the Public Trauma
Both/And: The personal and the public trauma of Princess Diana are inextricably linked, forming a complex tapestry of suffering that resonates deeply with viewers. The show doesn’t separate her private anguish from her public role; instead, it demonstrates how one constantly informs and exacerbates the other. This isn’t just a story about a woman’s personal struggles; it’s a profound exploration of how individual trauma can become a public spectacle, and how public pressure can inflict deeply personal wounds. It’s a nuanced portrayal that avoids simplistic explanations.
The Crown excels at showing how Diana’s personal vulnerabilities, such as her desire for love and acceptance, were exploited and amplified by the public nature of her role. Her every move, every emotion, was scrutinized, judged, and often weaponized against her. This constant public exposure denied her the privacy and safety necessary for healing, transforming her personal pain into a collective narrative. It’s a powerful reminder of the unique challenges faced by those living under constant public gaze.
This intertwining of personal and public trauma is what makes these episodes so impactful. We witness how the lack of emotional support within her private life was mirrored by the rigid, emotionally distant nature of the institution she served. There was no safe haven, no true refuge from the relentless pressure. This duality underscores the pervasive nature of her trauma, highlighting how it permeated every aspect of her existence, a concept I explore in my Fixing the Foundations™ course.
The show brilliantly illustrates how Diana’s attempts to forge genuine connections and find her own path were constantly thwarted by the demands of her public image and the expectations of the monarchy. This constant conflict between her authentic self and her prescribed role created an unbearable tension, a profound sense of internal fragmentation. It’s a poignant portrayal of the human cost of living a life that is not truly your own, a theme that resonates with many who feel trapped by external expectations.
The Systemic Lens: How Institutional Betrayal Shapes Our Understanding
The Systemic Lens: Viewing Diana’s story through a systemic lens reveals that her suffering wasn’t merely the result of individual failings, but rather a predictable outcome of an institution designed to maintain power and tradition at the expense of individual well-being. This perspective shifts the blame from Diana herself, or even from specific individuals within the royal family, to the inherent flaws and rigidities of the system. It’s a crucial distinction for understanding the depth of her trauma.
This systemic analysis highlights how the monarchy, as an institution, was ill-equipped to handle an individual who challenged its norms and sought authenticity. It wasn’t designed to nurture emotional health or facilitate genuine connection; its primary function was perpetuating a specific image and lineage. This institutional structure created an environment where Diana’s emotional needs were consistently unmet, leading to a profound sense of isolation and distress, a pattern I often see in my therapy work.
The show effectively demonstrates how institutional betrayal, as described by Jennifer Freyd, PhD, psychologist, was deeply embedded in the fabric of Diana’s experience. The very institution she was meant to trust and be protected by became a source of profound harm, failing to acknowledge her pain, gaslighting her experiences, and ultimately isolating her. This systemic betrayal is what makes her story so heartbreaking and so resonant with those who have experienced similar institutional failures.
You've been holding everything together. You're allowed to put some down.
A focused self-paced course on overfunctioning, achievement-first self-concept, and the trauma response that masquerades as a personality. Not a productivity problem. Not a boundary problem. A nervous system that learned competence was the only safety.
Understanding Diana’s story through this systemic lens allows us to move beyond superficial judgments and recognize the profound impact of oppressive structures on individual lives. It’s a powerful reminder that trauma isn’t always about overt abuse; it can also be the result of chronic emotional neglect, invalidation, and the relentless pressure to conform to an unhealthy system. This perspective is vital for truly comprehending the magnitude of her struggle and the enduring legacy of her public wound, which I explored further in M15.
To All of Us: Reclaiming Our Own Narratives
To all of us, Princess Diana’s story, as portrayed in The Crown, serves as a powerful invitation to reclaim our own narratives and to challenge the systems that may be stifling our authenticity. Her struggle, while unique in its scale, touches on universal themes of finding one’s voice, asserting one’s truth, and navigating the complexities of institutional power. It’s a call to examine the ‘royal machines’ in our own lives, whether they be family systems, workplaces, or societal expectations.
Her story encourages us to recognize the subtle ways in which we might be betraying ourselves by conforming to external pressures, and to consider the profound cost of such conformity. It’s a reminder that true healing often begins with acknowledging the wounds inflicted by systems, not just by individuals. This self-awareness is the first step towards building a more authentic and fulfilling life, a journey I often guide clients through in my one-on-one work.
By witnessing Diana’s journey, we are given permission to explore our own experiences of feeling unheard, unseen, or trapped. It’s an opportunity to reflect on how our bodies might be archiving our own impossible positions and to seek healthier ways of expressing and processing our pain. This isn’t about wallowing in victimhood, but about empowering ourselves to recognize and address the systemic factors that impact our well-being. You can learn more about these dynamics in my newsletter.
Ultimately, Diana’s story, as told by The Crown, is a testament to the resilience of the human spirit in the face of overwhelming adversity. It’s a poignant reminder that even in the most gilded cages, the desire for freedom, authenticity, and genuine connection can never be fully extinguished. It’s an invitation to connect with our own inner strength and to advocate for the systemic changes that foster true well-being for all. If you’re curious about your own attachment style, consider taking my quiz.
Clinically, this is where A Trauma Therapist on Why The Crown’s Princess Diana Episodes Are So Hard to Watch becomes useful rather than merely interesting. When I sit with driven women who recognize themselves in this kind of story, the work is rarely about deciding whether a character was good or bad. The more useful question is what your body learned to do in the presence of love, danger, obligation, longing, and shame. That question belongs beside deeper resources such as C1 C5 M15 T10, because the cultural text is only the doorway; the real work is learning what your own nervous system has been carrying.
I also want to name the two composite threads I hear in this material. Elena might be the client who can describe everyone else’s pain with astonishing precision but loses language when her own need enters the room. Maya might be the client who has built an impressive life around never asking too directly for care. Neither woman is broken. Both adapted intelligently to relational conditions that made direct wanting feel dangerous, selfish, or too costly to risk.
The healing edge is often quieter than people expect. It may look like noticing the moment you reach for competence instead of comfort, pausing before you explain someone else’s harm away, or letting another trustworthy person witness what you have been privately metabolizing for years. Those moments can seem small, but they are not superficial. They are foundation-level repairs to the beliefs, emotional regulation patterns, attachment expectations, and body memories that shape whether adult intimacy feels possible or perilous.
This is why pop culture can matter therapeutically. A story can put language around something that has felt wordless. It can help you see the pattern from a safer distance before you are ready to name it in yourself. And if that recognition stirs grief, anger, relief, or tenderness, that response deserves respect. Your reaction may be information from a part of you that has been waiting for a less lonely way to tell the truth.
Q: Why are the Princess Diana episodes of The Crown particularly hard to watch for some viewers?
A: These episodes are profoundly difficult because they depict a relentless institutional cruelty that transcends individual relationships. Viewers witness Diana’s slow, agonizing erosion of self, a process amplified by the systemic betrayal of the monarchy. The show masterfully portrays how her personal anguish was magnified by public scrutiny, creating a pervasive sense of powerlessness. This resonates deeply with anyone who has felt trapped or unheard within a rigid system, making her story a visceral experience of complex trauma and the profound impact of institutional neglect. It’s a testament to the show’s ability to tap into universal themes of authenticity versus conformity.
Q: How does The Crown portray Diana’s bulimia from a trauma-informed perspective?
A: The Crown portrays Diana’s bulimia not as a moral failing, but as a desperate coping mechanism for overwhelming emotional distress and a lack of control. From a trauma-informed perspective, this behavior is depicted as the body archiving an impossible position, a somatic expression of unexpressed pain and systemic invalidation. The show highlights how her eating disorder was a response to profound isolation and the inability to exert agency within a stifling institution. This nuanced portrayal helps viewers understand bulimia as a symptom of deeper psychological wounds, rather than simply a physical illness, aligning with clinical understandings of trauma and the body’s role in processing it.
Q: What is meant by ‘the wound as larger than her marriage’ in Diana’s story?
A: The phrase ‘the wound as larger than her marriage’ signifies that while her marital difficulties were significant, Diana’s suffering stemmed from a much broader institutional context. The Crown brilliantly illustrates how the monarchy itself, with its rigid protocols and demand for conformity, inflicted a profound and pervasive trauma. Her wound wasn’t just about a husband; it was about the systemic emotional neglect, the constant public scrutiny, and the betrayal by an institution meant to protect her. This systemic lens reveals that her distress was a predictable outcome of an environment that prioritized image and tradition over individual well-being.
Q: How does The Crown illustrate institutional betrayal through Diana’s experiences?
A: The Crown vividly illustrates institutional betrayal by showing how the monarchy, as an entity, failed to protect Diana, acknowledge her pain, or meet her fundamental emotional needs. Jennifer Freyd, PhD, psychologist, defines institutional betrayal as wrongdoings by an institution against individuals dependent on it. The show depicts this through the pervasive gaslighting, the dismissal of her emotional distress, and the relentless pressure to conform, which collectively constituted a profound breach of trust. This betrayal wasn’t always overt malice but rather an insidious, systemic disregard for her well-being, making her feel trapped and fundamentally unsafe within the very structure she was part of.
Q: What lessons can we draw from Diana’s story in The Crown about challenging oppressive systems?
A: Diana’s story in The Crown offers powerful lessons about challenging oppressive systems. It highlights the immense courage required to seek authenticity and voice one’s truth within environments designed to silence dissent. Her struggle underscores the importance of recognizing and naming institutional betrayal, rather than internalizing the blame. We learn that while systemic change is arduous, the pursuit of self-integrity is paramount. Her journey invites us to examine the ‘royal machines’ in our own lives, be it family, workplace, or societal expectations, and to advocate for environments that foster well-being and genuine connection, rather than demanding conformity at the cost of self. That’s the enduring clinical and cultural gift Diana’s story continues to offer us.
Related Reading
- Estés, Clarissa Pinkola. Women Who Run With the Wolves: Myths and Stories of the Wild Woman Archetype. Ballantine Books, 1992.
- Herman, Judith Lewis. Trauma and Recovery: The Aftermath of Violence, From Domestic Abuse to Political Terror. Basic Books, 1997.
- van der Kolk, Bessel A. The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma. Viking, 2014.
- Freyd, Jennifer J., and Pamela Birrell, PhD. Blind to Betrayal: Why We Fool Ourselves We Aren’t Being Fooled. John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
References
Peer-Reviewed Research (Vancouver)
- Cloitre M, Stolbach BC, Herman JL, van der Kolk B, Pynoos R, Wang J, et al. A developmental approach to complex PTSD: childhood and adult cumulative trauma as predictors of symptom complexity. J Trauma Stress. 2009;22(5):399-408. doi:10.1002/jts.20444. PMID: 19795402.
- Gómez JM, Smith CP, Gobin RL, Tang SS, Freyd JJ. Collusion, torture, and inequality: Understanding the actions of the American Psychological Association as institutional betrayal. J Trauma Dissociation. 2016;17(5):527-544. PMID: 27427782.
Books & Cultural Sources (Chicago Author-Date)
- Estés, Clarissa Pinkola. Women Who Run with the Wolves. Vintage, 1982.
Read Annie’s weekly essays on rebuilding after relational trauma.
Weekly Substack essays from Annie Wright, LMFT on relational trauma, recovery, and the House of Life framework. For driven women who want a structured path back to themselves.
WAYS TO WORK WITH ANNIE
Individual Therapy
Trauma-informed therapy for driven women healing relational trauma. Licensed in 11 jurisdictions.
Executive Coaching
Trauma-informed coaching for driven women navigating leadership and burnout.
Fixing the Foundations
Annie’s signature course for relational trauma recovery. Work at your own pace.
Strong & Stable
The Sunday conversation you wished you’d had years earlier. 25,000+ subscribers.
Annie Wright, LMFT
LMFT · Relational Trauma Specialist · W.W. Norton Author
Helping driven women finally feel as good as their résumé looks.
Annie Wright is a licensed psychotherapist (LMFT #95719) and trauma-informed executive coach with over 15,000 clinical hours. She works with driven women. Including Silicon Valley leaders, physicians, and entrepreneurs. In repairing the psychological foundations beneath their impressive lives. Annie is the founder and former CEO of Evergreen Counseling, a multimillion-dollar trauma-informed therapy center she built, scaled, and successfully exited. A regular contributor to Psychology Today, her expert commentary has appeared in USA Today, Forbes, Business Insider, Inc., NBC, and The Information. She is currently writing her first book with W.W. Norton.
Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist (LMFT #95719)
15,000+ direct clinical hours
California · Connecticut · Washington DC · Florida · Maine · Maryland · New Hampshire · New Jersey · Texas · Virginia · Washington
Creator of House of Life™ and Fixing the Foundations™
The Everything Years (W.W. Norton)
Founder & former CEO, Evergreen Counseling
Regular contributor to Psychology Today. Expert commentary has appeared in USA Today, Forbes, Business Insider, Inc., NBC, and The Information.
