A critical review of the harm minimization ideology in Australia

Abstract

Harm minimization as a drug-policy approach represents a major step forward in Australian society's method of dealing with the myriad problems associated with illicit drug use. However, harm minimization lacks a substantial theoretical underpinning and there has been little debate about harm minimization at the sociological level. This article investigates a number of the assertions made within the harm minimization literature and the assumptions on which they are based. These assumptions are critically deconstructed from a number of points of view, including a Foucauldian perspective. Areas investigated include: the use of epidemiological data as a foundation for many harm-reduction strategies, the failure of harm minimization theories to deal adequately with the role of discourse in the drug policy arena, the harm minimization claim to amorality, the use of a utilitarian set of values, the supposed popularity of harm reduction and the idea that the current harm-reduction paradigm clearly acts as an extension of 'surveillance medicine' through the vehicle of governmentality. It is concluded that, whilst harm minimization represents the most promising advance in drug policy in the past, the lack of theoretical rigour in the development of these initiatives results in many of the claims made by proponents of harm-reduction strategies being either overly optimistic or fundamentally flawed.