A Qualitative Exploration of Relational Ethical Challenges and Practices in Psychedelic Healing
Interviewing 23 practitioners who administered MDMA or psilocybin in underground contexts, the study identifies distinctive relational ethical challenges—such as client nudity, use of non‑sexual touch, and expectations that therapists must have their own psychedelic experiences—and organises these into descriptive themes. It also outlines prescriptive themes (supervision, boundary‑setting, staying within one’s competence) and discusses implications for training and regulation as psychedelic therapies move toward clinical approval.
Authors
- Katherine MacLean
Published
Abstract
As both 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA)- and psilocybin-assisted psychedelic psychotherapy near U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and gain acceptance as efficacious clinical approaches, concerns have been raised about the likelihood of sexual violation of a client and other relational boundary transgressions. In the current study, 23 practitioners who have administered MDMA and psilocybin to clients in underground (i.e., extralegal) healing contexts were interviewed about their experiences navigating multiple relationships, nonsexual touch, and sexual boundary-setting in their work. Of these practitioners, 12 had undergone formal, graduate-level training in psychotherapy, 10 identified as female, and 13 identified as male. A phenomenological research design was used to assess what unique relational challenges they have faced in this work and what practices they have found helpful in doing so. Two sets of themes addressing these two questions were developed from the data. Descriptive themes represent the unique challenges that psychedelic practitioners have encountered in their work, and prescriptive themes are made up of the practices they have found most useful in confronting these challenges. Some themes are unique to psychedelic work (e.g., client nudity, the use of touch, the belief that therapists must continue to have their own psychedelic experiences), while others represent a psychedelic-specific take on standard ethical considerations (e.g., transference, supervision, staying within one’s scope of competence). Discussion of these results includes implications for the training of psychedelic psychotherapists and other regulatory decisions facing the field. Editor’s Note The manuscript “A Qualitative Exploration of Relational Ethical Challenges and Practices in Psychedelic Healing” by Brennan et al. presents a descriptive psychological study of ethical challenges faced by “underground” practitioners of psychedelic healing approaches. The manuscript is a descriptive study of the healers’ subjective experiences and related ethical challenges; its purpose is not to validate or normalize these underground practices. Importantly, some practices of underground practitioners are explicitly disallowed by ethical guidelines in the mental health professions. Licensed psychologists and other mental health professionals should abide by the ethical codes and guidelines for research and practice in their relevant professions, including but not limited to the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct ( https://www.apa.org/ethics/code ), the American Counseling Association Code of Ethics ( https://www.counseling.org/docs/default-source/defaultdocument-library/ethics/2014-aca-code-of-ethics.pdf ), and the American Medical Association Code of Medical Ethics ( https://code-medical-ethics.ama-assn.org/principles ). Please see the addendum to this article for more information.
Research Summary of 'A Qualitative Exploration of Relational Ethical Challenges and Practices in Psychedelic Healing'
Introduction
Research into the therapeutic potential of psychedelics has resurged, with MDMA and psilocybin identified as likely forthcoming adjuncts to psychotherapy given accumulating evidence of efficacy for conditions such as posttraumatic stress disorder, major depression, and substance use disorders. Brennan and colleagues note that this momentum brings renewed attention to relational ethical risks historically associated with psychedelic work — in particular sexual boundary violations, problematic touch, and non‑sexual multiple relationships — and that current ethical training for psychologists may not adequately prepare practitioners for these distinctive dynamics. The study sought to address this gap by asking: what experiences have underground psychedelic practitioners had in navigating relational ethical challenges, especially around sexual boundary‑setting, therapist‑client touch, and non‑sexual multiple relationships? Using a phenomenological approach, the investigators interviewed experienced underground guides who have administered MDMA and psilocybin in extralegal settings to surface the unique challenges of this work and the practices practitioners find helpful in responding to them. The authors frame this inquiry as potentially informative for the development of training and ethical guidelines as psychedelic therapies move toward legal, clinical implementation.
Expert Research Summaries
Go Pro to access AI-powered section-by-section summaries, editorial takes, and the full research toolkit.
Study Details
- Study Typeindividual
- Journal
- Compounds
- Topics
- Author
- APA Citation
Brennan, W., Jackson, M. A., MacLean, K., & Ponterotto, J. G. (2021). A Qualitative Exploration of Relational Ethical Challenges and Practices in Psychedelic Healing. Journal of Humanistic Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1177/00221678211045265
References (19)
Papers cited by this study that are also in Blossom
Agin-Liebes, G. I., Malone, T., Yalch, M. M. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2020)
Amoroso, T., Workman, M. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2016)
Belser, A. B., Agin-Liebes, G. I., Swift, T. C. et al. · Journal of Humanistic Psychology (2017)
Bogenschutz, M. P., Forcehimes, A. A., Pommy, J. A. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2015)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Bolstridge, &. M., Day, C. M. J. et al. · Psychopharmacology (2017)
Carhart-Harris, R. L., Bolstridge, M., Rucker, J. et al. · Lancet Psychiatry (2016)
Davis, A. K., Barrett, F. S., May, D. G. et al. · JAMA Psychiatry (2021)
Dos Santos, R. G., Osório, F. L., Crippa, J. A. et al. · Therapeutic Advances in Psychopharmacology (2016)
Feduccia, A. A., Jerome, L., Yazar-Klosinski, B. et al. · Frontiers in Psychiatry (2019)
Griffiths, R. R., Johnson, M. W. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2016)
Show all 19 referencesShow fewer
Grob, C. S., Danforth, A. L., Chopra, G. S. et al. · JAMA Psychiatry (2011)
Johnson, M. W., Richards, W. A., Griffiths, R. R. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2008)
Mithoefer, A. T., Mithoefer, M. C., Feduccia, A. A. et al. · Lancet Psychiatry (2018)
Mithoefer, M. C., Wagner, M. T., Mithoefer, A. T. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2010)
Mithoefer, M. C., Wagner, M. T., Mithoefer, A. T. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2012)
Moreno, F. A., Wiegand, C. B., Taitano, E. K. et al. · Journal of Clinical Psychiatry (2006)
Nielson, E. M., Guss, J. · Journal of Psychedelic Studies (2018)
Ross, S., Bossis, A. P., Guss, J. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2016)
Rucker, J., Young, A. H., Jelen, L. A. et al. · Journal of Psychopharmacology (2016)
Cited By (8)
Papers in Blossom that reference this study
Evans, J., Aixalà, M., Anderson, B. T. et al. · Psychiatric Research & Clinical Practice (2025)
O'Donnell, K., Okano, L., Alpert, M. et al. · Frontiers in Psychology (2024)
Luoma, J. B., Allen, L. R., Gold, V. et al. · Psychedelic Medicine (2024)
Peacock, C., Mascaro, J. S., Brauer, E. et al. · PLOS ONE (2024)
Jacobs, E., Murphy-Beiner, A., Rouiller, I. et al. · Neuroethics (2023)
Buchborn, T., Kettner, H., Kartner, L. et al. · Frontiers in Neuroscience (2023)
Turkia, M. · Psyarxiv (2023)
Williams, M. L., Korevaar, D., Harvey, R. et al. · Frontiers in Psychiatry (2021)
Your Personal Research Library
Go Pro to save papers, add notes, rate studies, and organize your research into custom shelves.