Daniel Rosenbaum, Crystal Hare, Emma Hapke, Yarissa Herman, Susan E. Abbey, Dominic Sisti, Daniel Z. Buchman
{"title":"Experiential Training in Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy: A Risk-Benefit Analysis","authors":"Daniel Rosenbaum, Crystal Hare, Emma Hapke, Yarissa Herman, Susan E. Abbey, Dominic Sisti, Daniel Z. Buchman","doi":"10.1002/hast.1602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><i>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</i>.</p>","PeriodicalId":55073,"journal":{"name":"Hastings Center Report","volume":"54 4","pages":"32-46"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hastings Center Report","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hast.1602","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
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.
训练有素、能力出众的治疗师对于安全有效的迷幻辅助治疗(PAT)至关重要。关于迷幻辅助治疗培训项目是否应要求有抱负的治疗师接受自己的迷幻辅助治疗--通常称为 "体验式培训"--这一问题在该领域受到了广泛关注。在本文中,我们运用罗尔夫-桑德尔(Rolf Sandell)等人开发的有关任何培训疗法功能(治疗、建模、移情、说服和理论功能)的框架,分析了体验式培训在 PAT 中的潜在益处。然后,我们探讨了强制性体验式培训可能产生风险的六个关键领域:生理和心理风险;对治疗技能的负面影响;公正、公平、多样性和包容性;双重关系;隐私和保密;以及不当压力。归根结底,我们认为 PAT 的体验式培训不应该是强制性的。由于许多 PAT 培训项目已经采用了体验式培训方法,我们对潜在危害和益处的探讨可用于制定全面的风险缓解策略。
期刊介绍:
The Hastings Center Report explores ethical, legal, and social issues in medicine, health care, public health, and the life sciences. Six issues per year offer articles, essays, case studies of bioethical problems, columns on law and policy, caregivers’ stories, peer-reviewed scholarly articles, and book reviews. Authors come from an assortment of professions and academic disciplines and express a range of perspectives and political opinions. The Report’s readership includes physicians, nurses, scholars, administrators, social workers, health lawyers, and others.