top of page
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • Instagram
  • Snapchat

Hippocratic Harm

Psychedelic Negligence in SLC

This section examines a series of cases involving physicians and academic leaders whose actions—or in some instances, inaction—raise important ethical questions within the context of medical practice and professional responsibility. Drawing from the author’s account, these narratives explore situations in which individuals are alleged to have either participated directly in harmful conduct or failed to intervene when credible concerns were raised. Within medicine, the Hippocratic commitment to “do no harm” extends beyond individual patient care to include a broader duty to protect colleagues, trainees, and the community. When that duty is not fulfilled—whether through action, omission, or delayed response—it invites scrutiny regarding ethical consistency, accountability, and moral responsibility. This section does not seek to assign definitive judgment, but rather to examine how ethical compromise can emerge within complex institutional systems, and to encourage reflection on the standards that guide professional conduct and the protection of those who depend upon it.

Gradient With Circle

Hippocratic Harm

This section introduces several key individuals referenced throughout Psychedelic Ethics Review, each of whom played a role within the University of Utah and Huntsman Mental Health Institute ecosystem during the period described. Dr. Benjamin Lewis is presented as a faculty member and leader within the local psychedelic and psychiatric community, whom the author alleges participated in episodes of retaliation and failed to appropriately respond to reported harms. Parth Gandhi, PhD, is described as an individual involved in the psychedelic community who, according to the author’s account, was the subject of multiple safety concerns prior to a tragic murder-suicide in May 2023. Stamatios Dentino, MD, is identified as a psychiatrist whom the author reports was involved in a June 2020 sexual assault and later rose to a leadership position within the institution. Dr. Paul Carlson is described as Program Director of the psychiatry residency, positioned in a leadership role during key events in which the author alleges opportunities for intervention were present. Dr. Brent Kious MD is described as a psychiatrist, ethicist, and Chair of the University of Utah Psychiatric Association Ethics Committee, who is understood to have been aware of aspects of these events and remained largely neutral within the institutional context. Mark Rapaport, MD, is a nationally recognized psychiatrist, former Chair of Psychiatry and CEO of the Huntsman Mental Health Institute, and current President-Elect of the American Psychiatric Association, who held institutional authority during the timeframe in which these concerns were raised.

​

Across these cases, the author presents a unifying ethical concern: that harm may occur not only through direct actions, but also through failures to intervene, delays in reporting, or prioritization of institutional considerations over community safety.

The Men of Our Story

Ben Lewis.jpg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

UPSI Founder and HMHI Psychiatrist; Retaliation and Alleged Cover-Up

Parth Gandhi.jpg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Former Psychedelic Therapist who Committed Murder-Suicide May 13, 2023

Stamatios Dentino.jpg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

HMHI Medical Director and Alleged Rapist

Picture1.jpg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

U of Utah Adult Psychiatry Residency Program Director; Failure to Intervene

Brent Kious.jpeg
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

HMHI Psychiatrist, Chair of UPA Ethics Committee 2016 - Present

Mark-Rapaport.JPG
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

APA Presidency Elect 2025-2026; Omission of Intervention in Position of Responsibility

Gradient Glass Cube

Are You A Survivor of Psychedelic Abuse?

Gradient Background

Disclaimer

 

Content on Psychedelic Ethics Review reflects the author’s perspectives and is for informational purposes only. Some statements describe alleged events based on personal accounts and available information and have not been proven in a court of law unless stated otherwise.

 

Under U.S. law, all individuals are presumed innocent unless proven otherwise in a court of law. Allegations of this nature can be difficult to substantiate without corroborating evidence or testimony, and individuals may choose not to provide statements or may deny such claims.

 

This site does not provide medical or legal advice. Content is shared in good faith to support discussion of ethics, accountability, and safety.

bottom of page