How to Talk About Cannabis with Young People Experiencing Psychosis | Research

The takeaway

Both young people in psychosis treatment and their parents want respectful, non-judgmental cannabis conversations with good information, but struggle to understand each other's perspectives.

First-episode psychosis clinicians, family therapists, parent support groups, CSC program administrators

What the researchers found

Four themes emerged: Respect for Developing Client Autonomy, 'Good Information' about Cannabis and Its Effects, Good Communication Process, and Conversations Complicated by Changing Norms. Clients and parents agreed on what makes conversations positive but had difficulty understanding each other's perspectives, with both feeling misunderstood.

Why it matters

Cannabis use is strongly linked to psychosis, yet conversations about it in clinical and family settings often go poorly. Both young people and parents want these conversations — they just need better tools and information.

The numbers in context

15 clients and 16 parents interviewed. Four themes identified. Both groups agreed on positive conversation elements but reported feeling misunderstood by each other.

How the study worked

Semi-structured interviews with 15 clients receiving Coordinated Specialty Care for first episode psychosis and 16 parents. Braun and Clark's six-phase thematic analysis applied to identify communication themes and preferences.

What this study cannot tell us

Small qualitative sample from a specific clinical population. Clients were in Coordinated Specialty Care, which may not represent all psychosis treatment settings. Parent and client perspectives not matched pairs. Social desirability may affect responses.

How to read the evidence

Qualitative study provides rich insights into communication dynamics but cannot quantify prevalence or demonstrate intervention effectiveness.

When this study was published

Published 2026, reflecting evolving cannabis norms and their impact on psychosis care conversations.

The bigger picture

The tension between evolving cannabis norms (it's increasingly legal and accepted) and clinical realities (cannabis can worsen psychosis) creates a communication minefield. Interventions that bridge this gap could improve both treatment engagement and family relationships.

Questions still open

What specific communication interventions would help? How do clinicians navigate changing norms when counseling about cannabis and psychosis? Could structured family sessions improve understanding between parents and young adults?

Common questions

How should you talk to someone with psychosis about cannabis?

Both clients and parents identified key elements: respect their developing autonomy, provide accurate information without judgment, use good communication processes, and acknowledge that changing cannabis norms make these conversations complicated.

Why is talking about cannabis hard in families affected by psychosis?

Both young people and their parents want these conversations but report feeling misunderstood by each other. Changing societal norms around cannabis add another layer of difficulty when clinical evidence links cannabis to psychosis.

Read the original research

Talking About Cannabis: Perspectives of First Episode Psychosis Care Participants and Parents.

Journal of dual diagnosis, 22(1), 37-47

View on PubMed ↗Publisher’s paper ↗

Citation

Lucksted, Alicia; Bencivengo, Donna; Saravana, Arunadevi; Boumaiz, Yasmine; Kreyenbuhl, Julie; Margolis, Russell L; Nayar, Swati; Rinehimer, Kathryn; Rouse, Krissa; Scheinberg, Rachel; Thomas, Elizabeth C; Walker, Denise D; Wolcott, Max; Burris, Elizabeth; Myers, Ladawn; Kelly, Christian; Swigart, Alison; Vatza, Crystal L; Brandt, Allison S; Sarpal, Deepak K; Goldberg, Richard W; Buchanan, Robert W; Moore, Tyler M; Jumper, Megan B E; Fooks, Amanda; Ered, Arielle; Caulkins, Monica E; Bennett, Melanie. (2026). Talking About Cannabis: Perspectives of First Episode Psychosis Care Participants and Parents.. Journal of dual diagnosis, 22(1), 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/15504263.2025.2606020