>>692308
>but confession (at least what I see of it in movies and other media) seems like a good thing to do.
That kind of confession you desire is public in nature, neither Romanism nor contemporary low-church Protestantism has this.
>the idea of saying them just to come clean about things seems healthy to me
It is. See Proverbs 28:13, Psalm 32:5, and James 5:16. In fact, it is law: See Lev. 26:40-42, Num 5:6-7, but notice here the confessor is confessing to the whole congregation of Israel, not a single priest.
>And why haven't protestants picked up on this or at least have their own version of it?
Rome is partially to blame. Like I said, confession is a private affair to Rome, which is not conducive to the nature of Biblical society or ecclesiology. Alas, besides the Puritans, much of Protestantism continued to keep confession, if they kept it, a private affair contrasted.
The other side is Protestantism from the 19th century onward took a heavy antinomian view of moral living, thanks to dispensationalism among other doctrines. This neutered the church's teaching on sin, public and private, which de-emphasized the seriousness of sin's infraction against God and fellow man. Naturally, this also neutered the Gospel since if we don't have to follow God's law and if sin does not have to be exposed, why is Gospel so badly needed? Why follow God's desire for the faith to be a public faith?