The label of mental illness has long been recognized as one of the most powerful of all stigmas. Public stigma, the common societal reactions to people who seek help for psychological distress, can be distinguished from self-stigma, the internalized impact of public stigma. This study examined how awareness and endorsement of public stigma may influence self-stigma. It also examined how both types of stigma are connected to attitudes and intentions to seeking counseling. Awareness and endorsement of public stigma were found to predict self-stigma. Endorsement of sympathy for a person with mental illness was especially predictive of self-stigma, while endorsement of public stigma and self-stigma were independently related to attitudes to seeking counseling. Finally, attitudes were most proximally related to intentions to seek counseling. These results suggest that different aspects of stigma play different roles in influencing attitudes to seeking mental health counseling.

The current study examined reports of stigma toward mental health services, depressive symptoms, flourishing, and mental health service use among a sample of 8,285 college students across the United States who completed the Healthy Minds Study. The study aimed to: (a) identify profiles of public and personal stigma against mental health service utilization, and (b) examine the demographic predictors of stigma group membership and mental health service utilization. Latent profile analyses revealed 3 distinct groups based on public and self-stigma (i.e., "High Self, High Public Stigma," "Average Self, High Public Stigma," and "Low Self, Low Public Stigma"). Subsequent analyses examined demographic characteristics and mental health across the 3 groups. Results indicated significant differences in age, gender, race/ethnicity, mental health, and mental health service use across the 3 groups. Results further showed that students with high perceived need for mental health services, identifying as male or Asian, and belonging to the "High Self, High Public Stigma" group had lower likelihood of seeking mental health services in the past year. Implications for future research and clinical practice are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record

After a two-decade hiatus in which research on psychedelics was essentially halted, placebo-controlled clinical trials of psychedelic-assisted therapy for mental health conditions have begun to be published. We identified nine randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials of psychedelic-assisted therapy published since 1994. Studies examined psilocybin, LSD (lysergic acid diethylamide), ayahuasca (which contains a combination of N,N-dimethyltryptamine and harmala monoamine oxidase inhibitor alkaloids), and MDMA (3,4methylenedioxymethamphetamine). We compared the standardized mean difference between the experimental and placebo control group at the primary endpoint. Results indicated a significant mean between-groups effect size of 1.21 (Hedges g), which is larger than the typical effect size found in trials of psychopharmacological or psychotherapy interventions. For the three studies that maintained a placebo control through a follow-up assessment, effects were generally maintained at follow-up. Overall, analyses support the efficacy of psychedelic-assisted therapy across four mental health conditions-post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety/depression associated with a life-threatening illness, unipolar depression, and social anxiety among autistic adults. While study quality was high, we identify several areas for improvement regarding the conduct and reporting of trials. Larger trials with more diverse samples are needed to examine possible moderators and mediators of effects, and to establish whether effects are maintained over time.

Psychedelic-assisted therapy may represent an upcoming paradigm shift in the treatment of mental health problems as recent clinical trials have demonstrated strong evidence of their therapeutic benefits. While psychedelics are currently prohibited substances in most countries, the growing popularity of their therapeutic potential is leading many people to use psychedelics on their own rather than waiting for legal medical access. Therapists therefore have an ethical duty to meet this need by providing support for clients using psychedelics. However, incorporating psychedelics into traditional psychotherapy poses some risk given their prohibited status and many therapists are unsure of how they might practice in this area. This paper explicates such risks and describes ways in which therapists can mitigate them and strive to practice within legal and ethical boundaries. A harm reduction approach will be emphasized as a useful framework for conducting therapy around clients' use of psychedelics. It is argued that therapists can meet with clients before and after their own personal psychedelic experiences in order to help clients minimize risk and maximize benefit. Common clinical scenarios in this growing clinical area will also be discussed.

The concept of integration has garnered increased attention in the past few years, despite a long history of only brief mention. Integration services are offered by therapists, coaches, and other practitioners, or may be self-guided. There are many definitions of psychedelic integration, and the term encompasses a range of practices and techniques. This seems to have led to confusion about what integration is and how it is best practiced. The primary focus of this manuscript is the presentation of the first extensive review and concept analysis of definitions, practices, and models of psychedelic integration. We provide a synthesized definition of integration, synthesized model of integration, and comprehensive summary of integration practices to bring clarity to the subject.