American Journal of Bioethics
May 2, 2024
Edward Jacobs, B. Earp, Paul S. Appelbaum et al.
29 citations
A workshop on psychedelic ethics, the first Hopkins-Oxford Psychedelic Ethics (HOPE) meeting, was held in August 2023 at the University of Oxford to address ethical issues surrounding psychedelics. The organizers (BDE, DBY, EJ) aimed to foster interdisciplinary discussion on topics such as informed consent, therapeutic use, and societal implications. The report outlines the workshop's structure, key themes, and proposed guidelines for ethical research and practice in the field.
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
Daniel Villiger
7 citations
The paper argues that the unusual features of psychedelic treatments—such as their subjective, mystical-like experiences—do not make them exceptional within medicine, and therefore they should not be granted exceptional ethical or regulatory status. The authors contend that many standard medical treatments also involve profound, subjective, or transformative experiences, and that singling out psychedelics as exceptional is inconsistent. Instead, they suggest that psychedelic treatments should be evaluated using the same ethical and regulatory frameworks applied to other medical interventions, without special exemptions.
American Journal of Bioethics
July 1, 2025
Joel Janhonen, Juuso Kähönen, Joona Räsänen
5 citations
Daniel Villiger argues that a patient's ignorance about the outcomes of transformative treatments does not necessarily undermine their autonomy, challenging the view that such ignorance should prohibit access to these treatments.
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
Jarrel de Matas, A. L. Mcguire, Hasan Yasin
3 citations
Psychedelic medicine raises ethical questions beyond the clinical setting, including issues of equity, access, and the potential for misuse. Cohen and Marks examine these often-overlooked ethical dimensions, arguing that as the field advances, careful attention must be paid to how psychedelic therapies are regulated, distributed, and integrated into healthcare to avoid repeating past injustices and to ensure broad, equitable benefit.
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
Neşe Devenot
3 citations
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration declined to approve Lykos Therapeutics’ application for MDMA-assisted therapy, following the recommendation of its advisory committee. The decision marks a significant regulatory setback for psychedelic-assisted treatments. The text does not provide details on the reasons for the denial or any clinical trial results.
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
T. Findley
2 citations
Measure 110, passed by Oregon voters in 2020, shifted the state's approach to addiction by prioritizing treatment over criminal charges. It directed the Oregon Health Authority to create a statewide network of addiction recovery centers and provide grant funding to existing providers to expand services.
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
Zachary J Verne, Natalie Gukasyan, Jeffrey S Zabinski
2 citations
Psychedelics raise ethical concerns similar to those in other areas of medicine and psychology, not unique ones. The authors argue that treating psychedelics as ethically exceptional distorts risk assessment and policy. They identify several shared ethical considerations—such as informed consent, vulnerability, and adverse effects—that apply to psychedelic therapy just as they do to other treatments. The paper concludes that psychedelics should be integrated into existing medical and ethical frameworks rather than governed by special rules.
American Journal of Bioethics
July 30, 2025
Caleigh Propes, Katherine Cheung
1 citation
Informed consent is intended to give potential study participants clear information about risks and benefits, but participants often misunderstand key aspects of what they are told. The paper examines the persistent problem of participant misconceptions in medical and psychological research, discussing how these misunderstandings undermine the ethical goals of informed consent and suggesting possible reasons and remedies.
American Journal of Bioethics
July 7, 2025
Veronika Gold
1 citation
No Summary
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
Shen Pan, David Wendler
1 citation
Informed consent for psychedelic treatments is complicated because the substances can produce powerful, unpredictable experiences that are difficult for patients to anticipate. The authors argue that standard consent models may be inadequate, as they assume patients can understand the nature and risks of a treatment beforehand. They suggest that psychedelics' unique effects—such as ego dissolution and altered perception—pose challenges to truly informed consent, and propose alternative frameworks to address these issues, including process-based consent and ongoing dialogue.
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
Juuso Kähönen, Joel Janhonen, Joona Räsänen
1 citation
Psychedelic experiences are attracting growing attention from bioethicists, with recent scholarship indicating that these experiences raise distinct ethical questions about autonomy, authenticity, and the nature of the self. The text argues that the altered states induced by psychedelics challenge conventional bioethical frameworks, particularly regarding informed consent and the moral significance of transformative experiences. It suggests that bioethicists must reconsider how to evaluate the risks and benefits of psychedelic therapies, especially when the experiences themselves can fundamentally change a person's values and beliefs. The authors call for a more nuanced ethical analysis that accounts for the unique features of psychedelic experiences.
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
Naomi Scheinerman, Claire Erickson
1 citation
Exceptionalism in bioethics is the concept that certain medical developments or interventions deserve special ethical or legal treatment because of their distinctive characteristics. The work examines how this idea applies across various contexts, arguing that exceptionalism can both protect vulnerable populations and create unjustified distinctions that hinder equitable access or oversight. It explores the tension between recognizing genuine uniqueness in medical technologies or practices and the risk of overemphasizing differences at the expense of broader ethical principles. The authors suggest that careful analysis is needed to determine when exceptionalism is warranted and when it may lead to problematic inconsistencies in bioethical reasoning.
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
K. Blevins
1 citation
The field of psychedelic ethics faces a critical juncture due to the harm caused by widespread exceptionalism—the belief that psychedelics are uniquely beneficial or beyond normal ethical scrutiny. Many are now reconsidering psychedelics not only for urgent medical or therapeutic needs but also for broader philosophical and ethical implications, moving away from exceptionalist frameworks toward more balanced, contextual approaches that acknowledge both potential benefits and risks.
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
Susan Lee, Mikaela Kim, Grayson R Jackson et al.
1 citation
Cheung and colleagues argue against the idea that psychedelics are exceptional—that is, that they raise unique concerns about increased vulnerability and diminished autonomy compared to other medical or research contexts. Drawing parallels to debates about genetic exceptionalism, the authors reject the notion that psychedelics require special ethical or regulatory treatment. Instead, they contend that existing ethical frameworks and safeguards are sufficient to address the risks associated with psychedelic use in research and therapy. The paper thus challenges a growing trend in the field and calls for a more measured, non-exceptionalist approach to psychedelic ethics.
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2026
No Summary
American Journal of Bioethics
January 1, 2025
Katrina Debonis, Walter Dunn, Thomas B. Strouse
The resurgence of psychedelic research raises ethical questions about whether facilitators should have personal psychedelic experience. Some argue that such experience is essential for effective and ethical facilitation, while others contend that it is unnecessary and may introduce bias. The authors examine these competing perspectives, weighing arguments about empathy, trust, and professional competence. They conclude that requiring personal experience could undermine scientific objectivity and equitable access to therapy, but also acknowledge that experiential knowledge may enhance therapeutic rapport. The paper calls for clearer ethical guidelines that balance these concerns without mandating personal use.