Glance
From the caseload: who you are seeing, when you last met, and whether anything has come in since.
For clinicians
A continuity layer around your work — not another system to keep
Your caseload, and the four questions you have before every session: who am I seeing, what has happened since I last saw them, what should I remember from last time, and is there anything they want to bring into this hour. Healing Space answers those from what the patient chose to share, and deliberately stops there.
Session Prep, in four depths
Read as much as you need and no more — but never be asked to trust a summary you cannot open.
Brief
The interval since the last confirmed session — what the patient shared, the agenda they wrote, measure movement, agreed goals and how they have changed.
Evidence, then the source
Each line is backed by the entry behind it, and the original entry — whole, dated, attributed — is one step further. No item exists only as a summary of itself.
Why the interval is the unit
"Since we last spoke" should mean something specific.
Anchored to a confirmed session
Not an arbitrary last-thirty-entries window. You confirm whether a session went ahead from the same screen, so the interval the record is organised around stays true.
Assembled by retrieval
The continuity surfaces are counts, dates and comparisons over recorded entries, each carrying its date and the person who recorded it — computed, not composed.
And it holds across months
What a patient recorded, how often, and how a measure moved between two dates — across the whole course of work. If the record does not contain it, you get nothing back rather than a guess.
What reaches you, and what does not
The boundary is not an inconvenience to work around. A patient who cannot keep something private stops writing anything down.
Authorised context only
Reflections are private unless the patient shares them, and an answer about whether something helped inherits the privacy of the item it is attached to — on an unshared reflection, neither the answer nor the fact that one exists reaches you.
Enforced centrally
Access runs through one authorisation policy across every patient route: your assigned patients and nobody else’s. Sensitive reads are logged, and developers hold no standing access to clinical data.
Goal history you cannot quietly rewrite
Treatment-plan goal changes are append-only: previous value, new value, who changed it and when. The database refuses updates to that history rather than trusting anyone to leave it alone.
Where AI is involved, and what governs it
Specific rather than reassuring — you should be able to tell a patient exactly what happens.
The conversation uses a model
A patient can type to Healing Space between sessions; that text is processed by our AI provider (currently Groq-hosted infrastructure, named in the privacy policy). Model training on patient conversations is disabled. The conversation stays on the patient’s side of the platform.
Consequential writes are governed
Where conversation identifies something the patient clearly stated — a mood rating, hours slept, an item for the next session — it is validated deterministically against the patient’s own words and written only after the patient confirms it. A model does not get authority over structured clinical data.
No model writes your brief
Session Prep and the longitudinal surfaces are retrieval and comparison over recorded entries. Where a model does draft anything for a clinician it is advisory and requires your review before any clinical use; no automated decision is made about anyone’s care.
Boundaries, stated plainly
The platform informs your judgement. It never substitutes for it, and it does not quietly take on work you are accountable for.
It does not monitor for you
Healing Space does not watch for concerning patterns on your behalf and does not present a pattern-derived risk picture. Safety monitoring remains yours. Deterministic crisis-keyword and screening-score alerting exists and is described honestly in the Trust Centre.
It does not interpret
No causal inference, no judgement about whether therapy is working, and no matching of separate experiences into one recurring issue. Those are clinical judgements.
It is not an EHR
This is a lightweight layer around existing clinical work, not a practice-management system and not somewhere your service is expected to move its whole operation. FHIR export exists for portability out of the platform.
Where this is honestly up to
We think preserving therapeutic context is worth doing. We have not shown that it makes therapy work better.
No outcome evidence
There is no published evidence for this platform, no independent clinical validation, and no NHS approval. Nothing on this site should be read as claiming any of them.
Being shaped with therapists
We are currently speaking with practising therapists about where this helps most in real practice. Those are working conversations, not endorsements, and we name nobody for credibility.
Disagreement is useful
If you think the premise is wrong, or that a part of it would get in your way, that is genuinely more useful to us than polite interest.
One platform, seen from four sides
The same intervention, described for the people who use it differently.
If you would like to look at this properly
Thirty minutes, with the founder, no sales team in the room — and telling us it does not fit your practice is a useful outcome.