‘Harm reduction’ philosophy is un-Christian

For decades the argument has been made that preventative approaches that give strong moral guidance to young people do not work. Telling them to steer clear of drugs and to abstain from sex until marriage is now viewed as ‘indoctrination’ and a waste of time. Such approaches have been ridiculed as a simplistic ‘just say no’ message.

Instead, ‘harm reduction’ approaches have been advocated. It is argued, for example, that telling young people not to take drugs or engage in underage sex will not stop them doing it. It is therefore better to allow them to do it and ensure they do so safely. This has led to young people being told how to have ‘safer sex’ and how to take drugs ‘safely’. This is superficially appealing because reducing harm is a desirable goal. As a result, many people have been taken in by this profoundly naïve philosophy. By opposing restraint, contemporary harm reduction approaches actually increase rather than reduce the number of people involved in a harmful activity.

Harm reduction was originally introduced to help drug addicts who were hooked on a chemical substance. As part of a programme to end their addiction, addicts in danger of killing themselves were given advice on how to take their drugs more safely. But the aim was to end the addiction.

This original approach has now largely been abandoned. Heroin addicts are ‘parked’ on methadone for years and harm reduction schemes have been extended beyond just those who are addicts.

From a Christian perspective, sinful behaviour is not just wrong because of its consequences. It is inherently wrong because it is a rejection of our Creator and his good design for all. Scripture is clear that causing people to sin is very serious (Matthew 18:7). But harm reduction greases the tracks of sin, ignoring the intrinsic wrong of the behaviour and simply seeking to mitigate its most obvious harms.

Harm reduction creates an atmosphere of acceptability that encourages more people, particularly young people, to engage in sinful activity and stigmatises those who reject it. It undermines the rule of law and parental authority, leading young people into wrongdoing by sending out the message that taking drugs or engaging in underage sex is acceptable. When ‘safer sex’ education was introduced the number of children engaging in underage sex increased. The levels of sexually transmitted disease also rocketed and it became almost impossible for young people to feel free to say they want to wait until they are married before having sex. ‘Harm reduction’ has increased harm, not reduced it.

By contrast, preventative approaches have seen success. Take, for example, smoking cigarettes. For many years, successive governments adopted a tough anti-smoking stance, telling people in no uncertain terms: “Don’t smoke”. Hard-hitting advertising campaigns shared heart-rending stories of people suffering from lung cancer. Smoking is now banned in almost all workplaces and public buildings. The result of the public education programme has been a substantial decline in smoking. According to the ONS, 10.5% of over-16s in Great Britain were cigarette smokers in 2023, down from 45.6% in 1974.¹

From a Christian perspective, harm reduction greases the tracks of sin. Instead of telling young people that actions inevitably have consequences, harm reduction presents as a paradise what is inherently dangerous.

If we can promote ‘just say no’ to smoking, we can do the same for activities that are illegal and morally wrong.

¹ Adult smoking habits in Great Britain, ONS, October 2024, Table 1 (https://www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/drugusealcoholandsmoking/datasets/adultsmokinghabitsingreatbritain/2023/adultsmokinghabitsingreatbritain.xlsx)