Experiential Training in Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy: A Risk-Benefit Analysis

IF 2.3 3区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
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,&nbsp;Crystal Hare,&nbsp;Emma Hapke,&nbsp;Yarissa Herman,&nbsp;Susan E. Abbey,&nbsp;Dominic Sisti,&nbsp;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.

迷幻辅助疗法的体验式培训:风险效益分析》。
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。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Hastings Center Report
Hastings Center Report 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
3.00%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信