The Best Online Course for People-Pleasing Recovery for driven women: What Actually Works
LAST UPDATED: APRIL 2026
People-pleasing isn’t a personality quirk. It’s a deeply wired survival strategy that most driven women developed in childhood and have been running ever since. This post examines what people-pleasing actually is at the psychological and neurobiological levels, why it shows up so persistently in driven women despite their considerable other strengths, what genuine recovery requires, and what to look for in a course or program that can support real change rather than just behavioral band-aids.
Last reviewed: June 2026 by Annie Wright, LMFT
- The Meeting She Agreed to Schedule for Someone Else
- What Is People-Pleasing?
- The Neurobiology of Approval-Seeking
- How People-Pleasing Shows Up in driven women
- Why Willpower Alone Doesn’t Fix It
- Both/And: You Can Be Generous and Stop People-Pleasing
- The Systemic Lens: The Social Rewards That Reinforce People-Pleasing in Women
- What Recovery Actually Requires. And What to Look for in a Course
- Frequently Asked Questions
The Meeting She Agreed to Schedule for Someone Else
Jenny is in back-to-back video calls from 8 AM to noon. She’s a product director at a mid-sized tech company, managing three teams and a roadmap that’s already two quarters overdue. Her calendar is a mosaic of other people’s priorities. She notices, somewhere around 10:30, that she’s in a meeting she never should have agreed to. A check-in for a project that doesn’t involve her, added to her calendar six weeks ago by someone who said “I’d love your perspective” and received an immediate yes.
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.
She also notices that she’s annoyed. Not at the person who asked. The asking was reasonable. At herself, for the reflexive yes that committed her to forty-five minutes she doesn’t have.
After the meeting she eats lunch at her desk, responds to a colleague who needs “just a quick favor,” and agrees to review a document for someone else’s presentation by Thursday. By 5 PM she is running on adrenaline and resentment in equal measure, and she genuinely cannot identify the moment in the day when any of this became optional.
Mei has a different version of the same problem. She’s a founding partner at a boutique law firm, technically the person in charge, practically the person who ends every meeting having agreed to take on whatever fell through the cracks. Her partners know. Without having ever explicitly discussed it. That if they leave something undone long enough, Mei will pick it up. It’s not that she can’t see the pattern. She can see it with perfect clarity. What she can’t do is stop it.
If you’re reading this because you Google “how to stop people-pleasing” at 11 PM and then agree to three new things by 8 AM the next morning, this post is for you. Not because the answer is simple, but because you deserve to understand what’s actually happening. And what kind of support actually helps change it.
What Is People-Pleasing?
People-pleasing, sometimes referred to clinically as sociotropy or approval-seeking behavior, is a pattern of prioritizing others’ needs, comfort, and approval over one’s own at the expense of one’s genuine wellbeing, needs, and values. It is associated with anxious attachment styles identified by Mary Ainsworth, PhD, developmental psychologist at Johns Hopkins University, and is frequently understood as an expression of the fawn trauma response described by Pete Walker, MA, psychotherapist and author of Complex PTSD: From Surviving to Thriving, in which compliance and accommodation function as strategies for managing perceived relational threat. (PMID: 517843)
In plain terms: People-pleasing is what happens when saying no. Or having any need that inconveniences someone else. Was learned early on to be dangerous. It’s not generosity, though it often looks like it from the outside. It’s a survival strategy dressed up as kindness: a habitual suppression of your own needs in service of managing how other people feel about you.
The distinction between genuine generosity and people-pleasing is clinically important and often personally confusing. Generous people give freely, from a place of genuine abundance, and can decline without anxiety. People-pleasers give from a place of compulsion. The “gift” is accompanied by internal anxiety about what happens if they don’t give it, and the inability to decline without experiencing something that feels like threat. The behavior may look identical from the outside, but the internal experience is completely different.
People-pleasing also operates along a spectrum. At one end: a general preference for harmony and slight difficulty asserting preferences. At the other: a pervasive inability to say no, a constant monitoring of others’ emotional states, a radical subordination of personal needs to the perceived needs of everyone in the surrounding environment. Most of the driven women I work with fall somewhere in the middle. Capable of genuine assertiveness in some contexts, chronically self-erasing in others.
The fawn response, as first described and named by Pete Walker, MA, psychotherapist and author, is a trauma-derived survival response involving the use of appeasement, compliance, and self-effacement to manage perceived interpersonal threat. Unlike the more widely known fight, flight, and freeze responses, fawning moves toward the potential source of threat. Preemptively giving people what they seem to want in order to prevent a negative reaction. It is frequently associated with childhood environments characterized by inconsistent care, conditional love, or relational volatility.
In plain terms: The fawn response is the reason you say yes before you even have time to check in with yourself about whether you mean it. Your nervous system learned. Probably before you could walk. That disapproval feels like danger, and it has been trying to prevent that danger ever since by making you agreeable, accommodating, and as easy to be around as possible. The exhaustion you feel isn’t from working too hard. It’s from spending your entire life trying to keep everyone else comfortable.
The Neurobiology of Approval-Seeking
Understanding why people-pleasing is so persistent requires understanding what’s happening in the brain when social approval is at stake. This is not a character flaw. It’s neurochemistry, and that distinction matters enormously for how you approach change.
Stephen Porges, PhD, neuroscientist and professor at Indiana University and developer of Polyvagal Theory, has documented how the human nervous system is specifically designed to detect and respond to social cues of approval and disapproval. His research shows that social engagement. Characterized by warm facial expression, modulated voice tone, and reciprocal responsiveness. Activates the ventral vagal state, the nervous system’s “safe and connected” mode. Conversely, social withdrawal, disapproval, or rejection activates defensive states: the same fight-flight-freeze responses triggered by physical danger. (PMID: 7652107)
For someone who grew up in an environment where parental approval was intermittent, conditional, or withdrawn under unpredictable circumstances. The situation that generates the fawn response. The nervous system becomes hypervigilant to social cues. It develops a finely tuned sensor for even subtle signs of disapproval, and it responds to those signs with the same urgency as a physical threat. The result: your body experiences the possibility of someone being mildly inconvenienced by your “no” as a genuine emergency.
Dopamine is also implicated. Social approval activates the brain’s reward circuitry. The same pathways involved in any pleasurable stimulus. Which means that getting positive feedback for being helpful, accommodating, and agreeable produces a genuine neurochemical reward. Over time, the nervous system learns to seek that reward compulsively: helping not just because it’s kind, but because it produces the neurochemical relief of approval. This is why people-pleasing, like all compulsive behaviors, can feel both mandatory and temporarily satisfying. And why simply deciding to stop doesn’t work.
Bessel van der Kolk, MD, psychiatrist and trauma researcher at Boston University, author of The Body Keeps the Score, has written about how trauma responses, including the fawn response, are encoded in the body’s autonomic nervous system and can’t be overridden by conscious intention alone. The implication for people-pleasing recovery is significant: change that happens only at the cognitive level. Deciding to say no, reminding yourself it’s okay. Will be overridden by the body’s automatic threat-response under conditions of relational pressure. Real change requires working at the level of the nervous system, not just the intellect. (PMID: 9384857)
RESEARCH EVIDENCE
Peer-reviewed findings that inform this clinical framework:
- SMD = -0.61 in PTSD symptom severity reduction vs waitlist (10 RCTs, N=608) (PMID: 34015141)
How People-Pleasing Shows Up in driven women
In my clinical practice, the people-pleasing of driven women has a very specific and often paradoxical presentation. These aren’t women who can’t lead, can’t make decisions, or can’t hold a position. In their professional lives, they often do all three extremely well. The people-pleasing tends to be domain-specific, relational-context-specific, and in direct tension with everything else they know themselves to be.
Jenny. Still at her desk at 6 PM, still responding to “quick favors”. Built her career on her capacity for strategic thinking. She can identify a flawed product decision in a thirty-minute meeting and advocate for a course correction without flinching. She has difficult conversations with underperforming direct reports that her colleagues avoid. She is not someone who struggles with directness as a general rule.
But Jenny also has never. Not once. Told her mother that calls on weekday mornings don’t work for her schedule. She hasn’t told her most demanding colleague that she doesn’t have capacity for what’s being asked. She hasn’t pushed back on a project scope expansion that she knew from the first conversation was unmanageable. In those moments, something overrides the strategic clarity, and what emerges is accommodation.
What I see consistently is that people-pleasing in driven women isn’t distributed evenly across all relationships. It tends to be most intense in relationships with the highest emotional charge: authority figures who echo parental dynamics, close relationships where love feels conditional on behavior, and any relationship where the woman senses that her approval is not secure. In those specific contexts, the fawn response can override years of professional confidence in under thirty seconds.
Mei’s people-pleasing takes a specifically leadership-context form that’s worth naming: she cannot tolerate her partners’ discomfort. When her colleagues express frustration or disappointment, even about things that have nothing to do with her, she immediately moves into remediation mode. Taking on what they’ve dropped, smoothing what they’ve ruffled, absorbing what they’ve externalizing. She’s aware that this is happening. She’s done years of therapy and reads more psychology than most clinicians she knows. And still. The moment a partner expresses stress in her presence, something in her body responds to it as her problem to solve.
This is the most sophisticated form of people-pleasing: not the obvious yes to every request, but the internal conviction. Operating below the level of conscious thought. That other people’s emotional states are your responsibility. It runs deep in the developmental history of women who grew up as emotional caretakers in their families, and it requires deep work to change.
Why Willpower Alone Doesn’t Fix It
Let’s be honest about something: you’ve probably tried to just stop. You’ve given yourself pep talks. You’ve set intentions. You’ve written yourself reminders in your phone: It’s okay to say no. You don’t have to fix everyone’s problems. Your needs matter. And then you’ve agreed to the thing anyway, standing there holding your phone, watching yourself do the thing you promised you wouldn’t do.
This isn’t a failure of willpower. It’s a failure of approach. Willpower. The conscious application of determination. Operates in the prefrontal cortex, the brain’s rational executive. The fawn response operates in the amygdala and the autonomic nervous system, structures that are faster, older, and significantly more powerful than the prefrontal cortex under conditions of emotional activation. When the threat of disapproval triggers the fawn response, your prefrontal cortex and its carefully rehearsed intentions simply get offline. The older, more urgent system takes over.
This is why cognitive approaches to people-pleasing recovery. Affirmations, journaling, boundary scripts. Have limited effectiveness when used in isolation. They’re addressing the cortex. The problem lives deeper. Real change requires working with the nervous system through repeated experience, not just improved thinking.
It also requires addressing the underlying beliefs. The deep schemas. That make approval feel essential to survival. These aren’t conscious beliefs, generally. They’re pre-verbal, encoded before language, felt rather than thought. Beliefs like: I am only safe when I am useful. I am only lovable when I am easy. My needs are too much. Disappointing someone means losing them. These beliefs don’t respond to counterarguments. They respond to accumulated experience of a different kind of relationship. One in which having needs doesn’t produce the feared outcome.
This is exactly why trauma-informed therapeutic support is often necessary for real recovery. The therapeutic relationship itself. With a clinician who consistently responds to your needs with attunement rather than withdrawal. Is the corrective experience that begins to update the old beliefs at the level where they were formed.
The people-pleaser’s void is the self she’s been systematically abandoning in service of everyone else’s comfort. The “whatever is near” is the approval she seeks as a substitute for the genuine sense of worthiness she was never allowed to simply have. The recovery isn’t about finding a better strategy for saying no. It’s about rebuilding a relationship with herself that makes her own needs feel real, legitimate, and worth protecting.
Both/And: You Can Be Generous and Stop People-Pleasing
One of the most important clarifications in people-pleasing recovery is the distinction between genuine care and compulsive accommodation. These often get conflated in ways that make women reluctant to change. As if stopping the people-pleasing means becoming someone who doesn’t care about others, who is selfish, or who has abandoned their own values of kindness and service.
This is a false binary, and it’s worth naming directly.
People-pleasing isn’t a virtue. It looks like generosity, but it’s driven by fear. Fear of disapproval, fear of rejection, fear of the internal discomfort that comes with someone else’s disappointment. Genuine generosity is driven by values, by care, by an authentic desire to contribute. The difference isn’t visible in the behavior. It’s visible in the motivation and in what the behavior costs you.
Jenny is genuinely generous. She genuinely cares about her colleagues and enjoys supporting their success. Those traits are real and they’re worth keeping. What she’s recovering from isn’t the generosity. It’s the inability to choose when and how to express it, the compulsion to give even when she has nothing left, the sense that her value in every room depends on what she can provide. She can be both: genuinely giving and capable of saying, from a grounded place, not this time.
Mei cares deeply about her partners and her clients. That care is one of the things that makes her an exceptional lawyer. What she’s working to release is the compulsive reading of others’ emotional states as her emergency, the reflexive absorption of other people’s problems as her responsibility. She can still care. She just doesn’t have to carry it all.
The both/and here is: you can be a warm, generous, other-oriented person who also has clear, enforceable personal limits. These aren’t opposites. In fact, limits are what make genuine generosity possible. Because generosity that comes from a full cup, freely given, is a completely different thing than helpfulness extracted through anxiety from an empty one.
The Systemic Lens: The Social Rewards That Reinforce People-Pleasing in Women
No discussion of people-pleasing in women is complete without an honest reckoning with the fact that women are socially rewarded for it. This isn’t incidental. It’s structural.
Research on gendered social expectations consistently documents that women who are agreeable, accommodating, and responsive to others’ needs are rated more favorably. As more likable, more trustworthy, and more competent in relational contexts. Than women who advocate for themselves, set limits, or decline requests. The same assertiveness that reads as “leadership” in a man reads as “aggressive” or “difficult” in a woman. The same boundary that reads as “professional” in a man reads as “cold” in a woman. These aren’t imaginary penalties. They’re documented in organizational research, interpersonal perception studies, and in the lived experiences of virtually every woman who has ever tried to stop saying yes to everything.
This creates a particularly cruel trap for driven women who are also trying to recover from people-pleasing. The very behavior they’re working to change is the behavior that has been continuously rewarded throughout their professional lives. Being agreeable, being helpful, being the person who says yes when others say no. These patterns almost certainly contributed to their success in measurable ways. The idea that changing these patterns might cost them something isn’t paranoia. In some organizational cultures, it might.
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.
At the family level, the social reinforcement is even more powerful. Women who prioritize others. Who are reliably available, who put the family’s needs first, who never make their needs anyone else’s burden. Are praised as “good daughters,” “devoted mothers,” “team players.” Women who set limits are described as selfish, difficult, too independent. The word “selfish” functions, in many contexts, as a specific deterrent for women considering self-advocacy. It doesn’t carry the same weight when applied to men.
Understanding these systemic forces doesn’t eliminate the need for individual change. But it does contextualize why the change is hard. And why “just decide to stop people-pleasing” is advice that ignores the external pressures reinforcing the behavior at every turn. Real recovery has to account for the environment, not just the individual.
It also raises the question of what kind of course or program actually prepares women for this complexity. Which is what the next section addresses directly.
What Recovery Actually Requires. And What to Look for in a Course
If you’re searching for a course to support people-pleasing recovery, the quality of what you find varies enormously. Here’s what genuinely effective support looks like, and what to watch out for.
What Effective Programs Address
The best programs treat people-pleasing as a trauma-rooted pattern rather than a habits problem. They go beyond behavioral tips (“practice saying no”) and address the underlying drivers: the attachment wounds, the fawn response, the deep schemas about worthiness and safety. They should include psychoeducation about the nervous system, some framework for understanding the developmental roots of the pattern, and practices that address both cognitive and somatic (body-level) dimensions of change.
They should also acknowledge the reality of what women are navigating systemically. The gendered social pressures that reinforce people-pleasing. Without using that reality as a reason to stay stuck. Good recovery programs balance honest systemic analysis with genuine personal empowerment, rather than using one to neutralize the other.
What to Be Cautious About
Be cautious of programs that promise quick transformation. People-pleasing that’s rooted in early trauma and reinforced by decades of conditioning doesn’t resolve in six weeks. Programs that emphasize scripts and techniques without addressing the underlying anxiety and attachment patterns tend to produce temporary behavioral changes that collapse under pressure. Be cautious of programs that don’t acknowledge the embodied, nervous-system dimension of the work. If a program only addresses thought patterns, it’s addressing the wrong level of the problem.
The Case for Fixing the Foundations™
Fixing the Foundations is Annie Wright’s signature self-paced program specifically designed for driven women healing relational trauma. Including the people-pleasing, limit-setting difficulties, and identity fragmentation that so often accompany it. What distinguishes it from generic “stop people-pleasing” courses is its depth: it’s built on a clinical understanding of trauma and attachment, it addresses the developmental roots of the patterns rather than just the symptoms, and it was created specifically for women like Jenny and Mei. Women who are competent and successful in many areas of their lives and are working to extend that competence to their relationship with themselves.
The program works at the level of identity. Not just “how do I behave differently” but “who am I when I’m not organized around other people’s needs?” That question is scarier and more transformative than any list of tips for saying no, and it’s the question that leads to real, durable change.
When Individual Therapy Is the Right First Step
For women whose people-pleasing is deeply entrenched. Particularly those with significant trauma histories, current relationship dynamics that are unsafe, or significant mental health comorbidities like depression or anxiety. Individual therapy is often the right first step before or alongside a course. Reaching out directly to discuss what kind of support fits your specific situation is always available.
Building the Practice
Whatever support you choose, certain practices are foundational. Notice the automatic yes. Not to stop it immediately, but to create awareness. Practice the pause: give yourself twenty-four hours before agreeing to anything significant. Build the internal habit of checking in with yourself before responding: Do I actually have capacity for this? Do I want this? Is this mine to do? Practice small declines in low-stakes contexts, building the neural pathway of surviving the limit. And. Perhaps most importantly. Find a community of women doing the same work. The Strong & Stable newsletter is one such community; it reaches over twenty thousand women weekly with exactly this kind of honest, non-toxic-positive conversation about what it actually takes to build a different relationship with yourself.
People-pleasing recovery is not a personality transplant. You’re not trying to become someone who doesn’t care, doesn’t give, doesn’t show up for the people in her life. You’re trying to become someone who does all of those things by genuine choice, from genuine abundance, rather than out of the ancient anxiety that says your value depends entirely on never saying no. That shift. From compulsion to choice. Is the whole project. And it’s one of the most worthwhile things a driven woman can spend her time and energy on. Take the quiz to get a clearer picture of the specific wound that’s been driving your patterns. That clarity is usually the most useful place to start.
ANNIE’S SIGNATURE COURSE
Fixing the Foundations
The deep work of relational trauma recovery. At your own pace. Annie’s step-by-step course for driven women ready to repair the psychological foundations beneath their impressive lives.
Q: Is people-pleasing a trauma response?
A: For many people. Particularly driven women with histories of conditional love, relational volatility, or childhood emotional neglect. Yes. Pete Walker’s framework for the fawn response situates people-pleasing explicitly as a trauma-derived survival adaptation: compliance and accommodation as strategies for managing perceived relational threat. This framing matters because it changes how you approach recovery. If people-pleasing is a habit, you address it with habit-change strategies. If it’s a trauma response, you address it with nervous-system work, attachment healing, and the kind of corrective relational experience that updates the old data about whether having needs is safe.
Q: How do I stop people-pleasing without becoming selfish?
A: The fear of becoming selfish is one of the most reliable features of women in people-pleasing recovery, and it almost never manifests. People who are genuinely at risk of becoming selfish don’t typically worry about it. The women who ask this question are almost always deeply caring people who are working to add a practice of self-care and self-advocacy onto an already strong foundation of care for others. Setting limits doesn’t turn kind people into selfish ones. It gives kind people the capacity to sustain their kindness over time, from a position of genuine choice rather than compulsion.
Q: Can you recover from people-pleasing with a self-paced course, or do you need therapy?
A: Both can be effective, and the right choice depends on your specific history and the depth of the pattern. A well-designed course like Fixing the Foundations. Built on clinical understanding of trauma and attachment. Can create significant shifts for women whose patterns are moderate and whose lives are otherwise stable. For women with more significant trauma histories, current abusive relationships, or comorbid mental health challenges, individual therapy is usually the more appropriate first step. Many women benefit from both simultaneously: a course provides structure and community, while therapy provides the relational depth that courses can’t fully replicate.
Q: Why do I people-please at home but not at work?
A: Because the attachment stakes are different. Professional relationships carry career stakes. Significant, but manageable, and not existential in the developmental sense. Close personal relationships activate the attachment system, the part of your nervous system that was formed in early childhood around the question of whether love was safe and reliable. When those relationships trigger the fawn response, the professional assertiveness that’s available in lower-stakes contexts often goes offline. The domain-specificity of your people-pleasing is actually important diagnostic information: it tells you where the deepest attachment wounds are concentrated, and therefore where the most productive therapeutic work lives.
Q: What’s the difference between people-pleasing and being a caring person?
A: The cleanest distinction is motivation and internal experience. A caring person gives and helps from genuine desire and experiences it as meaningful, even when it’s effortful. A people-pleaser gives and helps from anxiety. From a compulsive need to prevent disapproval. And experiences it as obligatory even when they’re resenting it. The caring person can decline without significant internal distress. The people-pleaser’s “no” is accompanied by anxiety, guilt, and often retraction. Another useful marker: a caring person’s giving feels good to give. A people-pleaser’s giving tends to produce resentment over time, because it wasn’t chosen. It was extracted.
Q: How long does people-pleasing recovery take?
A: It’s genuinely a process rather than an event, and the timeline varies widely depending on the depth of the pattern, the quality of support, and life circumstances during the recovery period. Many women notice meaningful shifts. More frequent pauses before committing, less resentment after declining, reduced guilt about having needs. Within the first six to twelve months of consistent work. The deeper change. The shift from compulsion to genuine choice in relational contexts. Tends to consolidate over two to three years of consistent practice and therapeutic support. The good news is that the shifts that come first are often the most immediately life-changing: the first time you say no and survive it, the first time you disappoint someone and the relationship holds, the first time you choose yourself without self-betrayal. Those moments arrive sooner than people expect.
Related Reading
- Walker, Pete. Complex PTSD: From Surviving to Thriving. Lafayette, CA: Azure Coyote Publishing, 2013.
- van der Kolk, Bessel. The Body Keeps the Score: Brain, Mind, and Body in the Healing of Trauma. New York: Viking, 2014.
- Neff, Kristin. Self-Compassion: The Proven Power of Being Kind to Yourself. New York: William Morrow, 2011.
- Porges, Stephen W. The Polyvagal Theory: Neurophysiological Foundations of Emotions, Attachment, Communication, and Self-Regulation. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2011.
- Brown, Brené. The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You’re Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are. Center City, MN: Hazelden Publishing, 2010.
References
Peer-Reviewed Research (Vancouver)
- van der Kolk BA, Wang JB, Yehuda R, Bedrosian L, Coker AR, Harrison C, et al. Effects of MDMA-assisted therapy for PTSD on self-experience. PLoS One. 2024;19(1):e0295926. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0295926. PMID: 38198456.
- Porges SW. Polyvagal Theory: Current Status, Clinical Applications, and Future Directions. Clin Neuropsychiatry. 2025;22(3):169-184. doi:10.36131/cnfioritieditore20250301. PMID: 40735382.
Books & Cultural Sources (Chicago Author-Date)
- Ainsworth, Mary D. Salter. Patterns of attachment. Erlbaum, 1978.
- Walker, Pete. Complex PTSD. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2013.
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 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 Forbes, Business Insider, Inc., NBC, and The Information.
