Carl Hart: Why I Think We Need To Move Beyond The Term “Harm Reduction”

[Joey]

Why I Think We Need to Move Beyond "Harm Reduction"

We need to refresh a concept that emphasizes the negatives of drugs; and to treat overdose statistics with skepticism.

filtermag.org

...the idea of harm reduction. It doesn’t capture the complexity associated with grown-up activities such as love or war or drug use. Instead, it preoccupies us with drug-related harms. And the connection between harms and drug use is reinforced repeatedly through our speech. This connection in turn narrows our associations, conversations, feelings, memories and perceptions about drugs and those who partake. Perhaps even worse, it relegates drug users to an inferior status. Surely, only a feebleminded soul would engage in an activity that always produces harmful outcomes, as the term implies.

I recognize that I have no authority to coin a phrase for an entire field, especially one comprising many experts who have been doing this work long before I even knew the field existed. That isn’t my goal. Frankly, I think there need not be a specific term for harm reduction. We already have such terms: common sense, prevention, education, and the like. I don’t much care which term is used, just as long as it doesn’t box drug use into an exclusively harmful category and it recognizes the positive features of the experience.

Unfortunately, simply replacing the term harm reduction won’t do much to combat sensationalist media headlines that too often give the impression that death is the only outcome associated with drug use. Panic-stricken coverage of the so-called opioid crisis is an acute example. “Opioids Responsible for Two-Thirds of Global Drug Deaths in 2017: UN”was the title of a typical article on the subject. In the piece, the author concluded that opioids were “responsible for two-thirds of all drug deaths worldwide.”

Really? I doubt it. I am not suggesting that fatal drug overdoses don’t occur; they do. Nor am I suggesting that we, as a society, should not be concerned about such cases; we should. My point is that the evidence for this claim is weak at best. Events leading to drug-related deaths are often far more ambiguous and complex than media reports would have you believe.

 

[neversickanymore]

Thanks for posting.. incredibly well written article that essentially presents nothing substantial to dispute a significant trend of opioid related overdoses. As far as harm reduction, I agree. I have always been in favor of wellness promotion.

 

[Burnt Offerings]

He writes some stuff I agree with and some stuff that I think "meh...", this is definitely something I can get behind 100% though. I've often found myself feeling the same way regarding the phrase "harm reduction", it does feel limiting & like you've already put yourself on the defensive by highlighting "harm" (although, considering the way the topic is covered in the American media, and within the context of prohibition, some of that is probably unavoidable)...the general philosophy behind HR is one I very much support, and is also quite popular when presented to others in an intelligent way, but there's definitely some room for improvement as far as the terminology goes...not trying to police language or anything, just advocating for some phrasing which captures the complexity of drug use as a social phenomena, when advocating for some of the HR reforms that I endorse.

 

[Joey]

Thanks for posting.. incredibly well written article that essentially presents nothing substantial to dispute a significant trend of opioid related overdoses. As far as harm reduction, I agree. I have always been in favor of wellness promotion.

Yeah, honestly the 3 parts I cherry picked were pretty much the only substantial parts of the article.