Experiential Training in Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy: A Risk-Benefit Analysis.
Daniel Rosenbaum, Crystal Hare, Emma Hapke, Yarissa Herman, Susan Abbey, Dominic Sisti, Daniel Z. Buchman
Hastings Cent Rep July 1, 2024 DOI: 10.1002/hast.1602 (opens in new tab)
Study at a glance
AI-extracted from the abstract| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Topics | Psychedelic-assisted therapy |
| Keywords | Psychedelic therapist training Experiential psychedelic training Therapist psychedelic experience Psychedelic-assisted therapy education Psychedelic therapy education Therapist professional development Therapist development Clinical skill enhancement Empathy in therapy Therapeutic understanding Professional growth Ethical psychedelic practice Ethical frameworks Risk mitigation Professional ethics Ethical guidelines Patient care enhancement Enhanced patient care Compassionate therapy Therapeutic efficacy Effective patient care Patient care improvement |
| Citations | 10 |
| Key points | Argues that experiential training in psychedelic-assisted therapy should not be mandatory, based on analysis of potential benefits and risks across six domains. |
Abstract
Well-trained, competent therapists are crucial for safe and effective psychedelic-assisted therapy (PAT). The question whether PAT training programs should require aspiring therapists to undergo their own PAT-commonly referred to as "experiential training"-has received much attention within the field. In this article, we analyze the potential benefits of experiential training in PAT by applying the framework developed by Rolf Sandell et al. concerning the functions of any training therapy (the therapeutic, modeling, empathic, persuasive, and theoretical functions). We then explore six key domains in which risks could arise through mandatory experiential training: physical and psychological risks; negative impact on therapeutic skill; justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion; dual relationships; privacy and confidentiality; and undue pressure. Ultimately, we argue that experiential training in PAT should not be mandatory. Because many PAT training programs already incorporate experiential training methods, our exploration of potential harms and benefits may be used to generate comprehensive risk-mitigation strategies.