Cheyenne Bryant, known to many as Dr. Bryant, sits in front of a wall of commendations in a recent interview. The background is a blur of framed accomplishments from organizations including Forbes and the NAACP, but the one of most interest, the one that appears to be the size and shape of a diploma, is positioned directly behind her head, making it impossible to read.
Weeks before this video interview aired, Bryant, who considers Atlanta a second home and received a proclamation in 2025 naming March 6 as Dr. Cheyenne Bryant Day, faced scrutiny over her professional credentials.
In late April, she publicly acknowledged that she was not a licensed clinician, though in interviews she has referred to herself as a therapist, a doctor, a psychology expert and a life coach, using those terms interchangeably.
In a recent podcast, Bryant conflated licensure with insurance, saying it is “really only needed so you can bill insurance.” She also said private practice offers greater financial benefit and stated she is not bound by rules and ethics in the same way licensed practitioners are.
These are all red flags coming from someone who purports to be an advocate of mental wellness and the news prompted internet sleuths, including some of Bryant’s 4 million social media fans, to ask questions: Did she earn a doctorate? Can she show her dissertation? Is it misleading to use an honorific that signals licensure in a field in which she is unlicensed?
We have entered a cultural moment in which traditional health treatments and protocols are questioned and anyone, if they speak with enough confidence, can appear to be an expert.
But charisma is not the same as credentials, and people who present themselves as something they are not must be held accountable.
This week, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution published the first installment of the investigative series “Risky Medicine.” While the series focuses on the state’s lax oversight of alternative medicine and wellness clinics that promote expensive and unproven health treatments, the crux is essentially the same with Bryant — turning a blind eye to questionable credentials and practices can do public harm.
The AJC report features a wellness clinic in Marietta, owned by Katherine Igah-Phillips, who attended Xavier University School of Medicine in Aruba but isn’t a licensed physician. In an interview with the AJC, Igah-Phillips acknowledged she can’t treat patients as a doctor. She said she is certified as a “holistic health practitioner” and provides health coaching to clients.
On her website, she wears a lab coat and stethoscope and proclaims the center to be among Atlanta’s “most renowned Integrative Medicine Practices.” She told a reporter she thought it was OK to use the title of “Dr.” in her promotional materials.
After the interview, Igah-Phillips said she realized she needed to make changes. Her multiple business websites appear to have been deactivated, and her social media account is private.
The next step should be to address public concerns, take full accountability for her actions and find ways to restore trust.
Bryant should take a similar approach. Instead, when her credentials came into question, she doubled down on her claims and invoked God as her only judge and jury.
Her explanation of why she couldn’t or wouldn’t produce credentials was a convoluted tale involving a shuttered online university, limited transcripts and no dissertation.
The wording of Bryant’s bio on her website stops short of stating that she earned any advanced degrees, only indicating that she was enrolled in degree programs.
Even without a full accounting of her educational credentials, Bryant spent years crafting a persona and was rewarded with a massive platform.
“As a young girl, I found myself organically coaching, guiding, and helping others process their pain pockets and trauma,” Bryant said in a 2024 profile in CanvasRebel magazine. “The only difference now is that I have four credentials, education, experience, and I’m a Doctor!”
Bryant trademarked the name “Dr. Bryant” back in 2018. Her supporters say it isn’t fair to question her use of “Dr.” while allowing other personas like Dr. Phil, Dr. Oz, Dr. Seuss and Dr. Dre off the hook.
But anyone with internet access can dig up the scrutiny Drs. Phil and Oz have faced over their credentials, and just for the sake of argument, Drs. Seuss and Dre are in the clear since they aren’t professing to be doctors of the fields in which they ply their trade.
Bryant argues that her experience should be proof of her expertise. She pointed to public “sessions” with celebrities such as Nick Cannon, Shannon Sharpe and Cam Newton as evidence of her ability to obtain “results” with “clients.”
The issue is not whether Bryant obtained a doctorate or not — maybe she did, maybe she didn’t. But if you are using terminology such as “clients,” “sessions” and “psychology” in conjunction with “Dr.,” you are creating an appearance of legitimacy that may not be applicable. Pretending those two letters make no difference in the context of healthcare is deliberate ignorance.
I know how exhausting it can be to always feel as if you must show your credentials to prove your value, but with Bryant, the request feels less like skepticism from haters (as she has framed this entire episode) and more like the desire for reassurance from a community that has embraced her.
Bryant could have been a life coach without trademarking herself as a doctor. She has charisma, she may even have some credentials, and she likely could have built the same following. But using a cheat code has damaged her credibility and now she owes it to the public, and her supporters, to be fully transparent and make amends.
Read more on the Real Life blog (AJC.com/opinion/real-life-blog/), find Nedra on Facebook (facebook.com/AJCRealLifeColumn) and X (@nrhoneajc), or email her at nedra.rhone@ajc.com.
About the Author
Keep Reading
The Latest
Featured
