Stop Looking at the Epstein Files and Go Touch Grass.
- Kaitlyn Borris
- Feb 18
- 5 min read
Why Obsessing Over the Epstein Files Isn’t Actually Helping Your Mental Health
Please note, this Blog is written and maintained by non-clinical staff. The contents of this blog should therefore be taken as psychoeducation only and not as medical advice or a replacement for therapy. If you are experiencing a life-threatening emergency, call 911. For non life threatening mental health crises, please call 988.
Into: There's No Missing Piece that Makes the Abuse of Children Make Sense.
If you're reading this Blog, you probably know that a few weeks ago (January 30, 2026), the US Justice Department released approximately 30,000 pages of Epstein files, which have been long awaited. If you're like me, you've likely felt a pull to look at what is inside the files ,to learn more, to try to find a missing piece that makes the systemic abuse of children by global elites make sense.
However, there's no missing piece hidden in the files that makes the abuse of innocent children make sense.
Full stop.
From a mental health and therapeutic standpoint, repeatedly engaging with highly sensational, disturbing material rarely provides the relief people expect. In fact, it often does the opposite.
This article explores why obsessively reviewing the Epstein files (or similar high-profile, disturbing content) is not psychologically helpful—and what is helpful instead.
1. The Illusion of Control Through Information
When something disturbing or morally shocking happens, our brains naturally try to make sense of it.
This is a protective response.
Reading, researching, and analyzing complex case files can create a temporary sense of:
Control
Understanding
Emotional preparedness ("I can keep this from happening to my family")
However, with cases involving extensive speculation, secrecy, and unresolved public narratives, more information does not necessarily equal more clarity. Instead, it can lead to rumination, emotional overwhelm, anxiety spirals, and retraumatization.
From a cognitive psychology perspective, this is known as information-seeking as a coping mechanism—and it becomes maladaptive when it increases distress rather than reduces it.
2. Repeated Exposure to Disturbing Content Can Be Traumatizing
Even indirect exposure to traumatic subject matter can impact mental health .This is called vicarious trauma. This is the type of trauma that many professionals in helping professionals experience (therapists, nurses, firefighters, police officers, etc) - this is not to say that any time you read something disturbing that you are being traumatized.
Constantly consuming content about abuse, exploitation, and systemic wrongdoing can lead to:
Intrusive thoughts
Sleep disturbances
Emotional numbness
Heightened distrust of others
Increased cynicism about the world
For individuals with a trauma history, this exposure can be especially dysregulating. As a trauma-informed therapist would note, your nervous system does not distinguish well between direct experience and repeated graphic exposure. That is, your brain cannot distinguish between past memories of abuse and reading about trauma. Your brain interprets it all as happening now and activates fight-or-flight mode to keep you safe (even if you are very safe in your home staring at tik tok).
3. The Dig Rarely Leads to Meaningful Action or Resolution
Many people justify deep dives into controversial files by saying:
“I just want the truth.”
But psychologically, this pursuit often becomes an endless loop rather than a productive process.
Compulsively checking tik tok or Instagram does not bring justice, it does not protect the victims, and it does not help you protect yourself or your kids. In my experience, looking at so many reels covering the Epstein files has me confused by what is real versus conspiracy, which is precisely the problem: it leads to helplessness, confusion, and burnout.
4. The Algorithm
Social media platforms are designed to keep users engaged (aka, glued to their phones). Content related to scandal, conspiracy, and outrage is highly clickable, which means algorithms promote it more frequently.
This creates a cycle:
You look at one piece of content
The algorithm shows you more
Emotional intensity increases
Curiosity and distress both rise
Over time, your feed becomes psychologically saturated with the same topic, making it feel more urgent and omnipresent than it actually is. Our nervous systems were not really created to deal with this type of stress.
5. Moral Distress Without Processing Leads to Emotional Exhaustion
Cases involving figures like Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell and associated investigations evoke strong collective moral emotions—anger, disgust, and grief.
Rightfully so.
However, repeatedly exposing yourself to triggering material without structured emotional processing can result in:
Compassion fatigue
Doomscrolling patterns
Chronic stress activation
Reduced emotional resilience
You need to take the time to regulate yourself separate from the content you're consuming.
6. The Difference Between Awareness and Obsession
Staying informed is healthy. Obsessive monitoring is not.
Healthy engagement looks like:
Reading credible summaries
Limiting exposure time
Focusing on verified information
Processing emotional reactions intentionally
Unhealthy engagement looks like:
Compulsively searching for “hidden truths”
Consuming hours of speculative content
Neglecting daily responsibilities due to fixation
Heightened emotional reactivity after exposure
7. What Is Actually More Helpful for Your Mental Health
If you notice yourself drawn into distressing content cycles, evidence-based mental health strategies include:
A. Setting Media Boundaries
Limit exposure to heavy topics to specific time windows rather than constant consumption.
B. Nervous System Regulation
Grounding techniques, movement, and mindfulness help counteract the stress response triggered by disturbing material.
C. Redirecting Toward Meaningful Action
If justice and ethics matter to you, consider:
Supporting survivor advocacy organizations
Engaging in local community work
Practicing informed civic engagement
These actions restore a sense of agency that passive consumption cannot.
D. Processing Emotions (Not Just Information)
Talking with a therapist, journaling, or reflective conversation helps metabolize moral distress instead of suppressing it.
8. A Trauma-Informed Perspective
So, the core question is not:
“Should I look at the Epstein files?”
But rather:
“How does consuming this content affect my emotional state, nervous system, and daily functioning?”
If the result is increased anxiety, anger, or fixation, then continued exposure is not serving your well-being. You are not doing a disservice to the victims by not reading or searching for that information. You are protecting your own emotions and peace, which in the long run will allow you to engage in the civic duties required for systemic change.
Conclusion: Protecting Your Mental Health
While public interest in high-profile cases is understandable, repeatedly engaging with distressing, sensational material like the Epstein files does not promote healing, justice, or psychological clarity. Instead, it often fuels anxiety, rumination, and emotional dysregulation.
Being informed is responsible. Being emotionally flooded is harmful.
A balanced, mental health–informed approach means staying aware without sacrificing your peace. In a world of endless information, one of the healthiest choices you can make is not consuming everything simply because it is available.
In short: turn off tik tok and go touch grass. Evil in the world will still exist, but you will be more regulated to bring the light to the world.
If you are struggling with trauma, Caring Conversations offers trauma informed counseling with well-trained, highly skilled therapists. Our therapists understand the complexity of trauma, PTSD, and the ripple effects it has on our lives. Call us today to get started. 724.201.9815.
Tags: Epstein files, mental health and media consumption, trauma and sensational news, psychological impact of conspiracy content, emotional regulation and news exposure, therapeutic perspective on high-profile cases