
Psychedelic therapy has a sexual abuse problem - laurex
https://qz.com/1809184/psychedelic-therapy-has-a-sexual-abuse-problem-3/
======
DoreenMichele
This piece is linked in the article:

[http://psychwatch.blogspot.com/2014/11/this-woman-went-on-
to...](http://psychwatch.blogspot.com/2014/11/this-woman-went-on-to-set-world-
record.html)

It is by the patient leveling these accusations. It paints an excellent
picture concerning why I hate the "junkies and crazies" explanation for
homelessness. Her care providers doped her to the gills to allegedly try to
fix her while not really doing anything to help her.

If she had taken that much medication by choice without a prescription, she
would be called a _junkie_. Defying her doctors to get off the drugs got her
called _delusional_ and accused of _oppositional defiant disorder._

Prior to reading the above, I had a different line of thought in mind for
commenting here. Sexual situations are incredibly complex and I generally
dislike the way discussions of them typically go. In this case, I will suggest
that's sort of the least of the issue. The amount of drugs she was on was
potentially life threatening and I'm horrified we are only reading about this
because her therapist had a sexual relationship with her.

We prescribe drugs too casually and pass out the label "junkie" too
cavalierly. If you seek help for your problems and they don't really help you,
they just dope you to the gills instead, is it any wonder we have a drug
epidemic going on in the US?

~~~
pas
Damn. This is brutal. She was abused as a child, later raped, then went
through hell with psychiatrists, and then (!) Yensen exploited her and her
therapist (Yensen's wife) failed her.

We prescribe drugs too casually (South Park's ritalin episode, the current
opioid epidemic, young hiphop performers promoting Xanax) and at the same time
the war on drugs is still going on, and the "establishment" doesn't really
want to accept effective drugs that have "immoral" side-effects (eg. look at
the story of how ketamine treatment for severe clinical depression went down,
it passed FDA review, but it requires a separate clinic, it uses the "boring"
version of the molecule, and thus might not even worth the cost).

That said, yes, every type of therapy has an enormous risk, because people lay
their minds bare at someone's feet, expecting help, and this creates a
situation with almost the vulnerability as a parent-child relationship. Abuse
in these situations is terrible.

The rule of having a second therapist there (or just have a review session
every half a year) is [ought to be] common sense. There's too much paperwork
for drugs and too little real outside review/control. But that control factor
has to be independent of the therapist. (For example in this case it was her
husband. WTF. And yes, I know it's important to have someone the therapist can
work with well, but that's exactly why it should be the other kind of control,
where the patient gets debriefed in a 1-1 session.)

~~~
non-entity
>We prescribe drugs too casually (South Park's ritalin episode, the current
opioid epidemic, young hiphop performers promoting Xanax) and at the same time
the war on drugs is still going on, and the "establishment" doesn't really
want to accept effective drugs that have "immoral" side-effects (eg. look at
the story of how ketamine treatment for severe clinical depression went down,
it passed FDA review, but it requires a separate clinic, it uses the "boring"
version of the molecule, and thus might not even worth the cost).

I was talking to someone recently about medical marijuana on our state. We
have it, but it's supposedly a complex process. He brought up something about
"having to exhaust all other treatments for a condition before trying for a
medical card". I hope this isn't true, because it seems absolutely
irresponsible to prescribe opioids or benzodiazepines for a conditon that
could treated with a less dangerous drug.

------
7373737373
The problem with restricting (psychedelic) therapy to supervised, one-on-one
clinical settings is that these places by their nature cannot provide
experiences, intimate connections and understanding that are necessary for
self-discovery, -healing and -improvement.

The transactional institution that doctors, therapists and mental health
hospitals represent can only provide a foundation and safe environment for
such opportunities.

Talking to people who have or had similar life experiences, who truly know how
the pain one suffers feels and what it means to live that way from the inside
is of the highest value.

~~~
anigbrowl
Completely agree. While I'm very, very much in favor of psychedelics as
therapy aid, the idea of therapist-guided trips is extremely offputting. At
best it will Disney-fy the whole experience, at worst create far more
problems.

~~~
travisjungroth
Just for an alternate perspective, there's a therapist I'd completely trust to
be my guide. I certainly wouldn't expect a Disney experience.

------
mgamache
If the argument is based on a few anecdotes with no comparative data (like to
other mental health services or other forms of psychotherapy) it doesn't hold
much weight. I could say that startups have a sexual abuse problem. Therapy
has risks as the relationship between the therapist and patient evolves and
treatment progresses. I would like to see more data. In the meantime, the be
aware that the potential is there (just ask Dr Phil).

~~~
snoman
Yeah, anecdotes aren't altogether useful, but I'm also trying to picture the
scenario where a lack of comparative data makes anyone think it's not a big
deal.

~~~
mgamache
It _might_ be a big deal, but the author wants to convince us that it's bigger
than other forms of therapy. I take it as a possibility, but it has a low
degree of certainty until I see more evidence.

------
throwawaya1
Anecdote time. I had a psychedelic experience not that long ago with
professional guides in a place where it's legal. At some point when tripping I
became very aroused. I felt like I would agree to any suggestion of intimacy
at this point. I was still aware of it, but it took a lot of self discipline
not to initiate improper contact with my guides myself.

The whole guided trip was an amazing experience and I am glad I have done it.
Guides were very professional and made me feel safe. However, the potential
for sexual misconduct on both sides is something that is not really being
talked about, but needs to be addressed.

------
mettamage
I never considered MDMA a psychedelic when I compare it to magic mushrooms. So
I looked it up to see why other people do consider it a psychedelic.

Since this article talks about MAPS, here is a MAPS source on explaining it
[1].

So it's a mild psychedelic at best and not a psychedelic at worst (excuse my
English, non-native, not an intended value judgement).

And the truth probably is that the word psychedelic is used for attention
grabbing purposes only. I get that, but I do want to make that clear.

I'm simply summarizing the source.

[1] [https://maps.org/news/multimedia-library/5545-mdma-the-
movie...](https://maps.org/news/multimedia-library/5545-mdma-the-movie-is-
mdma-a-psychedelic)

~~~
travisjungroth
> So it's a mild psychedelic at best and not a psychedelic at worst (excuse my
> English, non-native, not an intended value judgement).

"at most" and "at least" would work and be more neutral.

~~~
mettamage
Thanks, I can't edit it anymore unfortunately, but I appreciate the tidbit of
knowledge that was escaping me the whole time.

------
bagacrap
Does normal psychotherapy not have an abuse problem? I'm pretty sure
inappropriate relationships between doctor and patient have formed in
traditional settings. Is there an indication that it happens more often when
psychedelics are involved, or is this just one more way to malign them?

~~~
neonate
The article talks about this. Relationships between licensed therapists and
clients are strictly regulated, but not everyone practicing psychedelic
therapy is a licensed therapist who would be subject to these regulations.

~~~
JamesBarney
To illuminate this further. During therapy two people(usually one male one
female) are required to be present to reduce the risks of something bad
happening. But only one is required to have a license. And in this specific
scenario though the person she had the sexual relations with was the
unlicensed individual.

~~~
heavenlyblue
To be fair it does seem like a stupid mistake of the system, not something
inherently bad about it

------
scarejunba
> _Lily Kay Ross said she felt compelled to leave work in psychedelics after
> she spoke out about her rape by an ayahuasca shaman in the Amazon. “I was
> told explicitly that I might single-handedly re-instigate the war on drugs
> and undo all of the advancements in the field of psychedelic research since
> the 1960s,” she said. “There’s the idea that psychedelics are so important
> and so wonderful that the train has to keep going. We can’t slow down to get
> the rapists off the train.”_

Interestingly, this is sort of homomorphic to the viewpoint that drove George
Orwell to write Animal Farm. There the belief was you shouldn't point out the
flaws in the USSR because you might set socialism (a desirable ideology to his
associates) back some amount of time.

It's sort of an interesting view. I, for one, want most of these drugs made
available to me easily. I'd like to have trusted MDMA or LSD, purely for
recreational purposes. But there's no way I want that to come with the baggage
of abusive therapists and all that crap. It's absolutely unacceptable that we
can put people in positions where other people are exploiting them. And I
think we should make these things just as public as they deserve precisely
because of what they are and what they say about how we do things.

Essentially, I think this trickle-down illegal->medicinal->legal route is just
ripe for abuse since you're giving too much power to the people who can let
you have the thing. I wish there were an 'accredited investor' for drugs. Most
people are unable to handle drugs. But I'm different. I've used. I've gone
half a decade without using. I've used again. And I'm healthy by any metric
you could consider.

~~~
luckylion
I agree. Also, if you're _not_ dealing with accusations the proper way, you're
looking like a cult. If you're going to suggest using psychedelics in a
therapy settings and a side note is "oh yeah and we don't report rapes because
that could set back our efforts", you're really just showing terrible
judgement and that you have no business being anywhere in a medical
profession.

On the contrary: being professional and transparent, removing bad actors will
be a good approach. You won't convince anyone that's against psychedelics on
principle, but you also won't turn anyone away by dealing with rape
accusations like every group should. Granted, it's _should_ , there are very
few communities where that ever happens, it's mostly about how powerful the
victim and the perpetrator are.

I like the idea of accredited user, but it's hard to decide. With investors,
you can look at account statements and say "okay, crossed the threshold,
thanks". For personal stability, that's a very different and much more
complicated issue where you'd hand whoever decides a lot of power.

I do think we should have legal drugs anyhow, the harm reduction alone is
worth it.

~~~
lonelappde
Is the Catholic Church a cult? It's well known for not dealing either rape in
a proper way. Also Hollywood.

~~~
luckylion
> Is the Catholic Church a cult? It's well known for not dealing either rape
> in a proper way.

And I assume they do so for very similar reasons. The difference between a
church and a cult is its size & power, if you're large enough, you become a
church and then a religion. If you're small, you're a cult that believes in
obviously imaginary stuff.

I don't think we should have the Pope or some Hollywood star in charge of
medical treatments, and everyone should be skeptical if musicians promise them
a cure for cancer as well.

------
aiphex
I've always said, give someone the psychedelics and a safe place to be, but
let them be on their own. Lots of travelling to do, no need to stay tethered
to this realm by having to converse with a therapist.

~~~
neonate
That's probably not the best way to work with MDMA, which is useful for
exploring relational issues, and which is mostly what the article talks about.

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
I don't see how MDMA can be useful for exploring relational issues. It's
primarily a controller of emotion and mood, not a psychedelic.

So all it's going to do at best is make a client artificially imprint on the
therapist - because the client would experience intense emotional closeness
after it was administered, followed by a real downer after the session.

I'd consider that abusive by definition. It's certainly not going to have the
much broader and risky but potentially more productive ego softening effect of
real psychedelics, which would focus much less on the therapist and more on
the client's interior world.

~~~
lonelappde
Relationships are built on emotion.

------
scarejunba
Wait, is the person making the accusations the same Meaghan Buisson who has
held world records in inline speed skating. Wow.

------
empath75
Mdma is such that you can take it with pretty much anyone and work out your
trauma issues. You don’t need a therapist.

~~~
elric
MDMA can also kill you outright (by means of heart attack) if you have any
underlying heart conditions. Be safe and don't randomly take drugs in the hope
that they will help you with your trauma issues. See a therapist.

------
Ididntdothis
I think a more relevant headline would be "Situations with a power
differential have a sexual abuse problem". This applies to teacher/student,
boss/employee, therapist/patient, parent/child and many other situations.

~~~
superhuzza
I kind of doubt you even opened the article...

1\. The article specifically details why psychedelics are a relevant factor
(because the patient is literally intoxicated, which is not usual in therapy).

2\. The author acknowledges and addresses the fact that abuse happens in other
forms of therapy, but notes that there are specific, relevant differences. For
example, the protections offered by traditional therapy vs psychedelic therapy
(trials including non-licensed 'therapists', the illegality of non-approved
sessions etc.)

3\. Not all of those situations are at all the same. There are different
considerations when it's teachers/students, boss/employees etc. If you
generalize enough, there's no difference between a human and a chimpanzee -
it's all about the desired level of investigation.

~~~
girvo
Although the specific case in the article goes back and forward as to whether
the alleged sexual abuse happened during the psychedelic sessions. MAPS says
yes, the court filing says maybe, unless I’m reading it wrong? It’s damned
plausible, though

------
derefr
I thought this was going to be about the opposite: a study on the use of
psychedelics to treat patients with PTSD _caused by_ sexual abuse. Too bad.

~~~
dang
Ok, we've restored the article title. I had briefly changed it to "Psychedelic
therapy and sexual abuse" as a way of making it less baity, but you're right
that it's misleading.

------
say_it_as_it_is
A doctor abused his position, therefore all of psychedelic therapy has a
sexual abuse problem.

Quartz needs a new editor.

