Harm Reduction

In a sociology course we talked about drug problems.

There is a new policy trend in Europe that people advocate for the "Harm Reduction" model, which stress on tackling the "harm" of drugs, but not to critize or eliminate use of drug. For example, the government may open some designated drug taking areas to gether drug users in one place, so as to minimize the drug users disturbing general public in public areas. Or some Syringe Exchange Program to encourage use of clean syringes. Harm reduction is not legalization. In its model, drug bearing is still legally a crime. The model is mainly to make general public view drug usage in a neutral way.

This put me into deep thoughts these few days.

Our legacy policy stress on solving problem from an ethic and moral standard perspective: drug addiction is wrong behavior. Drug addictors are criminals. Harm Reduction approach takes "drug usage" as a choice, as a human rights. Take drug addictors as a person with this behavior, but nothing wrong. It takes a ethics-free approach.

I can see this approach has its advantages and would be very practical in reduction of harm. However, do we really want to get away from moral standards but to focus on the harm itself? Is it a too target oriented approach? In someway one can argue that this is actually a "love" approach -- we see the people needs, help them, but not criticize them. Aren't the Gospel stress on Love as well?

I wonder if I can get my way out from a Gospel story. A woman was about to be stoned to death. Jesus asked the people around, who didn't commit sin can throw the first stone. Jesus accepts sinners and do help them. Shouldn't we do the same?

However one point to note is, Jesus asks for sinners to confess.

Now it's a problem of: is it sin or not.

Can I take a comparison like this: I personally love Chocolate. Eating too much Chocolate may lead to obessity. So is eating too much Chocolate a sin? or a Crime in model society? Apparently it is not. So what's the difference between eating Chocolate, and Heroin? We may say: heroin addictor would be likely to commit into other crimes when they need money for the drug. A chocolate addictor probably wouldn't. It is correct in some sense, but can the possible consequence be considered as a "crime". This reminds me on the movie "Minority Report".

No conclusion yet. I am still thinking.