Thoughts?
Should they have tried it, or is theoretical understanding enough to approach practicing this therapy?

1000% mandatory to have practical experience with the entheogen they are practicing with

Its not just unethical, but illogical for them to have no experience.

I wouldn't want a doctor that didn't go to medical school, a virgin as a sex counselor, a non-meditator as a psychotherapist, or a chef that has never cooked before.
Would you?

There are pros and cons on both ends, and it depends on the needs of the individual who is seeking therapy, not the needs of the practitioner!

1000% is quite exaggerated. And no, you don't need a psychedelic experience under your belt as a legal requirement into a working practitioner position (in fact, no requirement exists afaik), but it may be preferred to the individual seeking clinical assistance. And if that's the case, modifications should be in place to have that set up properly and accordingly.

It's unethical and illogical to suggest that legally trained professionals cannot work somewhere just because they decide not to use psychedelics. If I was running a clinic, I'd be more than happy to hire someone who is simply compassionate, respectful, patient, kind, and hard-working, regardless of their personal affinities towards drugs.

To sum up, anyone can be an integral part of something much bigger than all of us.

Just my two cents.

I find it absurd that a practitioner would presume to know how psychedelics work if they have never tried them. These experiences can't be understood by just reading and learning. In my opinion, you cannot understand set and setting without tripping yourself. That being said, there's problems on the other end of the spectrum where practitioners think they know everything, and hold the prerogative claiming they know to a certainty whether a drug will be good or bad for another person just because they have experienced whether it is good or bad for themselves. Another big assumption is that they know how to dose and administer the drug properly. This is occasionally observed in reports from Ayahuasca circles, and highly observable by 5-MeO-DMT practitioners.

I assume needs of typical seeker of a psychedelic therapy treatment is using psychedelic substances for healing.


Okay, does "mandatory" sound better? If there is no legal requirement for that, there probably should be.
Some people who have no prior entheogenic experiences may go into therapy now knowing what it is.
I don't think it's good for them to be treated by equally clueless people.
Do you think people can be trained theoretically (and legally) in psychedelic experiences?


No, it's unethical to call yourself psychedelic therapist when you have no first hand experience of psychedelic therapy yourself. I am not saying therapists should be dosing with patient, I am saying that they should know what the experience feels like. Just like you can not really know what DMT trip is like, unless you experience it.

Closest to psychedelic practitioner we had traditionally, are shamans. Would you suggest that it is a good idea go into ceremony involving ingesting entheogens, with shaman who hasn't ever taken his own medicine?


Everybody has a place under the sun, not everybody can be let toying with your mind.

I feel it depends on the practice capacities where there can be different types of practices such as ones licensed to administer or ones only offer council...etc. If a therapist is to offer the therapy within a defined scope, then it's possible to not need to have first hand experience. It boils down to what a patient or client needs & the capacity the therapist is to take I suppose.

It also begs the question what and whether psychedelics experience can be achieve to some degree through non substance induced. Well, the answer probably is yes where there are different methods one can achieve alter state somewhat similar to psychedelics since ancient time.

Have you ever tried explaining your trips to someone who's never tried psychs? I have—I'm the only person I know who's had the experience. Now imagine that in reverse!

"Oh, a wave of infinitely complex geometry washed your body away? A feminine presence taught you to love everyone you meet? Yes, yes, that makes sense... well, sometimes life can be hard..."

Also try to imagine how absolutely damn terrifying it would be to experience this overwhelming, powerful, indescribable, possibly (as far as you know) dangerous thing by yourself, with the person supposedly there to guide you and keep you safe never having done it themselves.

Yes, of course. I didn't state it was not the case that healing is indeed important, it is, especially if people can relate, absolutely.

No, I don't believe it should be mandatory. Everybody knows something you don't, regardless of our healing experiences, back-rounds, interests, jobs, positions and so on. It should be open and available to anyone interested in learning and helping others, and yes, potentially taking part in a psychedelic experience, that should always be open to everyone, but why the force? Psychedelic researchers and therapists is a diverse field, they shouldn't be forced to do something they may not be ready for yet, or perhaps not want yet.

I think people can be trained to assist others, for sure. And are we talking about clinical settings or Shamanistic settings? I've been referring to clinical settings. It isn't clear whether you're talking about clinical or Shamanistic settings.

Just look at Brian Muraresku. A great example of what can be done using long term work and research study in psychedelics and ancient history as the ultimate precursor to a psychedelic experience! That man has earned it. Same can be said with those studying psychology, therapies, meditation, hypnosis, and psychedelics.

Psychotherapists are required to undergo psychotherapy as part of their training.

While I agree one doesn't necessarily have to have had the experience to suitably perform therapeutic work with psychedelics. Given their safety profile, and assuming the prospective therapist is healthy and doesn't have any predispositions toward mental illness, there isn't really any good reason not to have them undergo the experience.

MAPS is having all their potential therapists undergo an MDMA session as part of their training process, and I expect this protocol will become foundational to training the next generation of psychedelic therapists.

Without actually answering the OP, I think it brings up a larger one. What, exactly, is psychedelic therapy?

Is it facilitating a spirtual awakening in someone, ala something modeled after a new-age concept of shamanism?

Or is it pharmaceutically assisted psychotherapy?

Or is it a combination of both or something completely different?

Is there any kind of road map or model or are facilitators just relying on Zendo trip-sit manuals and making up a practice as they go?

For transperency's sake, as a voting resident of that state, I did not support the recent Oregon psilocybin measure. Hopefully I don't just come off as snarky or facetious. Voters in my state just yesterday approved a law to allow the use of psilocybin in therapy sessions and I don't thik there is any real concensus on what it even is, besides a well-funded local legislative lobby body.

And to answer OP- most certainly, for many reasons.

Not to push this discussion too far off topic, but I can address this:


My understanding is the psilocybin model will closely mirror the FDA approved MDMA protocol.

Excellent questions btw null! I'm not sure this area is really fleshed out yet, so hopefully that means there is still a lot of opportunity to set the standard. I have heard discussion of a mixed approach involving both traditional healers and trained psychotherapists which kind of seems to be the ideal that MAPS is ultimately working towards.