Background: The debate on the non-medical use of prescription medication for the enhancement of cognitive function (e.g., attention, memory, concentration, vigilance), accompanied by heated public discussions in the media, has spurred the interest of scholars and the public. Methods: In this paper, we present qualitative data from a focus group study with university students, parents, and healthcare providers. We identified ethical, social, and legal issues related to the non-medical use of methylphenidate for cognitive enhancement (CE) and closely examined the positions taken on these issues and their supporting arguments. Results: The ethical, social, and legal issues we identified (e.g., authenticity, cheating) were similar to those identified in a previous discourse analysis of the bioethics literature but indicate the existence of moderately and highly contentious issues as well as factors and values underlying these issues. The model we generated from these findings shows how interplay between values (e.g., effort and honesty) and external factors (e.g., regulation and access) may lie at the root of contentious ethical issues in CE. Conclusions: Our discussion points to an unsuspected complexity in understanding values of stakeholders and their unclear relationship to academic discourse and professional societies. We propose deliberative or other democratic processes as a way to recognize and incorporate the complexity of the CE debate.