Ethical Ramifications of Using Psychoactive Drugs as Mental Health Treatment Options in Light of Inconclusive Research

There are current trends in politics and the legal system that are supporting the use of marijuana, psilocybin (mushrooms), and ketamine as mental health treatment options. However, all of the research that has been done on the efficacy of these drugs is conflicting. Some research supports the idea that they alleviate symptoms of depression, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and substance abuse disorders in treatment-resistant cases. Some others state that it is inconclusive on a case-by-case basis where others deny any benefit provided by these drugs at all. The question becomes whether or not mental healthcare providers should continue to prescribe psychoactive drugs in light of this inconclusive and confusing evidence. The hippocratic oath states that healthcare providers can do no harm which implies a certain quality of the care patients will receive. Is it a violation of the oath all healthcare providers make to use a drug that yields inconclusive results as a treatment option? I would like to present my findings from this literature review as a speech at the Scholar’s Symposium. I feel that in a speech I could not only adequately present my findings but also enforce certain ethical points in a more impactful manner. As a hotly debated topic in the mental health field, I feel that this speech would act as a call to action to encourage healthcare providers to do the hard work to ensure the quality of care remains high for all patients.