Pavlina is not exactly a reputable source. His ex-wife and business partner is a telephone psychic, and he takes her 'job' seriously in many blog posts.
They're either both cranks, or scammers. In either case you shouldn't take him seriously.
They're either both cranks, or scammers. In either case you shouldn't take him seriously.
(a) a psychic true-believer, who also cares about the caller
(b) a psychic true-believer, who simply wants to maximize their own income at the caller's expense
(c) a non-believer willing to pretend they are psychic, but who also cares about the caller's welfare
(d) a non-believer willing to pretend they are psychic, who simply wants to maximize their own income at the caller's expense
The 'psychics' of (a) and (b) are irrational/superstitious (or maybe even outright insane): that is, 'cranks'. The 'psychics' of (b) and (d) are amoral criminals: 'scammers'.
But (c) is kind of an interesting case. They're telling pleasing lies to someone, but that might be the best the caller can get. (Compare the 'white lies' often told to children, or people in psychological distress.) But the 'psychic' is still sane and empathetic. For example, they're not going to tell someone with a real health issue to skip professional treatment for just 'manifesting health'. They might give reasonable advice... under cover of 'psychic insight'. They won't view the solution to every issue as 'pay our hotline more money until you're broke'.
I have no idea about the details of Mrs. Pavlina's practice. I just think that given the existence of devoutly-believing psychic-seekers, and the existence of magical-thinking (a)- and (b)-type 'psychics', and cynically exploitative (d)-type psychics, the most compassionate response by rational and ethical people might not be just debunking/avoiding the whole enterprise. It might involve some practicing (c)-type 'psychics'... a little like harm-reducing clean needles for drug addicts.