4.3 Article

Ethics and ego dissolution: the case of psilocybin

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS
卷 47, 期 12, 页码 807-814

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106070

关键词

informed consent; psychiatry; psychopharmacology; psychotherapy; research ethics

资金

  1. Thomas Scattergood Behavioral Health Foundation [R25MH119043]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent trials suggest that psychedelics can benefit patients with mental disorders, but also pose novel risks that require a more comprehensive informed consent process. The unique features of psychedelic experiences, such as a sense of losing self-importance and encountering 'deep' reality, can lead to significant personality and worldview changes in patients.
Despite the fact that psychedelics were proscribed from medical research half a century ago, recent, early-phase trials on psychedelics have suggested that they bring novel benefits to patients in the treatment of several mental and substance use disorders. When beneficial, the psychedelic experience is characterized by features unlike those of other psychiatric and medical treatments. These include senses of losing self-importance, ineffable knowledge, feelings of unity and connection with others and encountering 'deep' reality or God. In addition to symptom relief, psychedelic experiences often lead to significant changes in a patient's personality and worldview. Focusing on the case of psilocybin, we argue that the peculiar features of psychedelics pose certain novel risks, which warrant an enhanced informed consent process-one that is more comprehensive than what may be typical for other psychiatric medications. We highlight key issues that should be focused on during the consent process and suggest discussion prompts for enhanced consent in psychedelic psychiatry. Finally, we respond to potential objections before concluding with a discussion of ethical considerations that will arise as psychedelics proceed from highly controlled research environments into mainstream clinical psychiatry.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据