Background: There is a lack of research and data on the mental health field in Ireland. The history of the provision of mental health services in Ireland involves both the private and public sector. However, this thesis argues that current policy broadly ignores contemporary private sector psychotherapy (PSP). PSP may be defined as counselling and psychotherapy that is provided in private clinic settings to clients who pay for their therapy (including low-cost services provided in private clinics). Aims and objectives: The aim of this study was to explore issues relevant to the future of PSP in Ireland. The objectives of the study were: to use an e-Delphi to establish what level of consensus or dissensus could be achieved in relation to the issues identified, and to inform policy and psychotherapists of relevant emerging issues. Method: The e-Delphi (n=26) was undertaken over three rounds. The first round used open questions to elicit opinions from participants on their views of the future of PSP in Ireland. The second round used first round responses to generate a questionnaire for distribution to participants. For the third (final) round the items from Round 2, which had not reached consensus, were redistributed in order to establish if consensus could be attained. Results: The e-Delphi themes in which consensus was reached were related to: the need for PSP to promote its value (91% consensus), the risk for PSP becoming irrelevant to government policy in Ireland (74%), PSP having adequate links with other professionals (78%), the benefits of collaboration within psychotherapy (65%), the overuse of medication in response to mental distress (82%), the under-utilisation of psychotherapy (82%), a prevailing quick-fix mentality in public sector responses to mental distress (78%) and support for the use of outcome measures in PSP (65%). Dissensus was reached in relation to academic requirements, the credibility of PSP among referral sources, the effectiveness of technology over face-to-face treatment and the impact of low-cost therapy on PSP. Key findings: Key findings related to the possible future irrelevance of PSP in an Ireland policy context (including the porous boundaries of PSP practice), the need for PSP practitioners to be more assertive in promoting the relevance of PSP, and the potentially disruptive future impact of technology on PSP in Ireland, and elsewhere. Conclusion: Study limitations and strengths were discussed. Implications for PSP, research, policy and training were considered. A stance from which PSP might define its boundary was offered.