We prescribe drugs too casually (South Park's ritalin episode, the current opioid epidemic, young hiphop performers promoting Xanax) and at the same time the war on drugs is still going on, and the "establishment" doesn't really want to accept effective drugs that have "immoral" side-effects (eg. look at the story of how ketamine treatment for severe clinical depression went down, it passed FDA review, but it requires a separate clinic, it uses the "boring" version of the molecule, and thus might not even worth the cost).

That said, yes, every type of therapy has an enormous risk, because people lay their minds bare at someone's feet, expecting help, and this creates a situation with almost the vulnerability as a parent-child relationship. Abuse in these situations is terrible.

The rule of having a second therapist there (or just have a review session every half a year) is [ought to be] common sense. There's too much paperwork for drugs and too little real outside review/control. But that control factor has to be independent of the therapist. (For example in this case it was her husband. WTF. And yes, I know it's important to have someone the therapist can work with well, but that's exactly why it should be the other kind of control, where the patient gets debriefed in a 1-1 session.)