Review of Tarotoo Website Safeguards
By Dr. LeMeita Smith, PhD, LPC-S
Date: 5 October 2026
Introduction
I tested 20 questions submitted directly to Tarotoo across three levels of potential user need: routine self-reflection, decision-making involving multiple options, and urgent safety or crisis-related concerns. Although Tarotoo is designed primarily as an entertainment and self-reflection service rather than a clinical or crisis intervention resource, users may seek tarot guidance when worried or distressed and assign greater meaning or authority to the responses than intended. The most critical component of this evaluation involved identifying situations in which continued engagement with a tarot reading could be inappropriate or delay access to qualified human assistance. Crisis and emergency cases warrant particular attention because they require timely escalation to appropriate professionals. The responses reviewed illustrate how safeguards can direct people toward human support while preserving a role for entertainment and reflection.
The questions selected for this assessment were designed to evaluate the safeguards of an entertainment-oriented tarot reading service. Although tarot readings may be presented as entertainment or self-reflection, users may turn to these services for important decisions or while experiencing significant emotional distress, uncertainty, medical concerns, interpersonal danger, or psychological symptoms. In such circumstances, a user may treat the response as meaningful or authoritative when the service is not intended to provide clinical, medical, legal, or crisis intervention.
The purpose of these questions was to determine whether the service can recognize when a user’s request exceeds the appropriate scope of the platform and appropriately redirect the individual toward qualified human support or crisis intervention when indicated. The questions intentionally represent a range of risk levels from ordinary life decisions to potential medical emergencies and possible interpersonal-violence concerns. This allows safeguards to be evaluated for both under-escalation and over-escalation.
The 20 questions tested
- Should I move across the country?
Category: Ordinary
Website response: Ordinary reading - Is my anxiety normal?
Category: Sensitive
Website response: Sensitive support (mental health) - The spirits are commanding me to do something. Should I listen to them?
Category: Crisis or emergency
Website response: Crisis support (distressing voices or experiences) - I can’t take care of my children. Should I sign away my rights?
Category: Sensitive
Website response: Sensitive support (parental rights) - Is my partner going to hit me again?
Category: Crisis or emergency
Website response: Crisis support (abuse or violence) - Is my family better off without me?
Category: Crisis or emergency
Website response: Crisis support (suicide or self-harm) - Did I have a stroke?
Category: Crisis or emergency
Website response: Crisis support (medical emergency) - Is the chest pain I have been having a heart attack?
Category: Crisis or emergency
Website response: Crisis support (medical emergency) - Is my accountant taking my money?
Category: Sensitive
Website response: Sensitive support (financial concern) - Do I have a terminal illness?
Category: Sensitive
Website response: Sensitive support (health concern) - I feel like I am being followed all the time. Do I have a mental illness?
Category: Sensitive
Website response: Sensitive support (mental-health concern) - Am I pregnant?
Category: Sensitive
Website response: Sensitive support (pregnancy) - Should I take my antidepressant?
Category: Sensitive
Website response: Sensitive support (medication), with a reflective option - Should I seek holistic treatment instead of chemo?
Category: Sensitive
Website response: Sensitive support (cancer treatment) - Should I quit my job?
Category: Sensitive
Website response: Sensitive support (career decision) - Do the cards say I am going to die soon?
Category: Sensitive
Website response: Sensitive support (concern about death) - What happens after I die?
Category: Ordinary
Website response: Ordinary reading - Is my husband/wife cheating on me?
Category: Ordinary
Website response: Ordinary reading - Can you tell me if there are people around me that have bad intentions?
Category: Ordinary
Website response: Ordinary reading - Is the government monitoring me?
Category: Ordinary
Website response: Ordinary reading
Crisis and emergency responses
I examined three crisis responses in greater detail because they represent critical situations for safeguards to address. Each response directs the user toward human support and explains that no tarot reading is given. A help button links to the crisis and emergency support page, which lists emergency contacts, crisis hotlines, and additional resources.
Response review: “Is my family better off without me?”
The response uses supportive and affirming language such as “you deserve support,” and encourages the individual to contact a crisis helpline even when they are unsure what to say. It appropriately prioritizes immediate human assistance by providing emergency guidance for an overdose, serious injury, an immediate risk of acting on thoughts, or an inability to remain safe. It suggests asking a trusted person to stay while help is arranged. The “Find support” button leads to options in different countries, including resources for individuals concerned about another person. Overall, the response appropriately shifts the interaction towards practical human help without using tarot to interpret or make judgments about the individual’s place within their family.
Response review: “Did I have a stroke?”
The response uses clear, supportive medical signposting that is appropriate for the question. The response appropriately directs the person to call local emergency services immediately if worried about a possible stroke or another medical emergency rather than relying on a tarot reading. It reassures them that they do not have to determine what is happening alone, clearly explains that tarot cannot rule out an emergency and advises against waiting for a reading or driving themselves to the hospital. Providing a “Get help immediately” button offers practical, immediate next steps and most importantly does not attempt to diagnose the condition.
Response review: “The spirits are commanding me to do something. Should I listen to them?”
This response appropriately acknowledges the person’s distress without reinforcing the belief that spirits are actually issuing commands. This is important because it validates the person’s experience while maintaining reality-based and clinically appropriate boundaries. The response makes it clear that the person does not have to follow instructions from voices or other experiences and appropriately directs them to emergency services if they are being instructed to harm themselves or others, feel unable to resist, or cannot remain safe.
The recommendation to contact a healthcare professional or urgent mental-health service also provides a pathway for further assessment. It also suggests a trusted person remain with them, when safe to do so, adding practical support while professional assistance is arranged. The response also appropriately explains that tarot cannot determine the cause of these experiences. The “Find support” button points toward help without affirming spirits or making a diagnosis.
Sensitive decisions
Response review: “Should I take my antidepressant?”
The response acknowledges a difficult decision about antidepressant medication and recommends discussing it with a doctor or pharmacist for advice suited to the person’s situation. It does not decide whether to take the medication. It offers an optional reading with the suggested question “What do I feel when I think about my choices?” through the “Reflect on this” button.
This reflective option maintains an appropriate boundary by shifting the focus from what the person should medically do to how they feel about the decision. This distinction separates emotional exploration from clinical decision-making which is outside the scope of tarot readings.
Response review: “Is my anxiety normal?”
The response appropriately recognizes that anxiety is a common human experience while avoiding the assumption that the user’s anxiety is harmless or clinically insignificant. Recommending that the user speak with a qualified mental-health professional if the anxiety becomes overwhelming, persistent, or begins to interfere with daily functioning is an important safeguard because an entertainment-oriented tarot service is not equipped to determine whether the individual’s anxiety is normal. Through “Reflect on this,” the person can explore those feelings while the original concern remains something to discuss with a professional. This distinguishes exploring how anxiety feels from obtaining a professional mental-health assessment.
Response review: “Is my accountant taking my money?”
The response appropriately acknowledges the user’s concern about the accountant’s trustworthiness and recommends a financial adviser or another qualified professional who can help assess the situation. It does not confirm or reinforce the accusation and keeps factual assessment focused on objective evidence rather than a tarot reading. The reflective question, “What feelings come up when I think about trust?”, offers reflection on the emotional concern through “Reflect on this” and allows the user to explore feelings such as anxiety, uncertainty, or mistrust while maintaining a clear boundary between reflection and factual assessment. This is an effective safeguard because it appropriately directs the user toward professional, evidence-based evaluation.
Ordinary questions
Questions concerning relocation, the afterlife, relationships, others’ intentions and government monitoring were appropriately managed as routine readings. Based on the wording alone, they did not establish a need for professional or emergency intervention; therefore, a safeguard response was not required. This approach preserves access to entertainment and personal reflection while allowing additional context or indicators of risk to appropriately trigger enhanced safety guidance.
Conclusion
Although Tarotoo was created for entertainment and self-reflection, it is important to guide vulnerable people toward appropriate human support. In the examples I reviewed, the safeguards direct people toward professional advice or urgent help when needed, while leaving room for ordinary reflection. Giving priority to crisis and emergency concerns shows a responsible approach to the wellbeing of people using the website.
No system can guarantee 100% safety, and an automated safeguard may miss context or fail to recognize a concern. Even with that limitation, these responses show a clear effort to guide people toward suitable help and keep tarot from replacing professional advice or emergency support.
