One Professor Admits to Using Drugs and thinks Society Should Accept Some Drug Usage… (By the way, I’m not talking about me.)

If you wanted to share something with your boss that might help that person and others change their minds about an important situation, but this share could get you fired, would you risk it? What if by sharing this thing, it might save the lives and livelihoods of others?

Enter Carl Hart, Columbia University Professor of Neuroscience. Well respected in his field and community, Carl Hart recently told everybody that he does drugs. Like ALL the drugs. Pot, “Bath Salts,” cocaine, and even heroin. What does it say about our society though that many people will hear “does drugs” in the same surprised and reproachful manner as if I said he attacks people or shoplifts for thrills? By the way, Carl Hart is a black man, which does affect how this conversation will play out. Many in the US have a lot of anti-black-person biases without even realizing it. And by the way, if you just said “Not me,” there’s a strong chance you have some biases buried in your head somewhere (most white people do, even us well intentioned ones).

Carl Hart seems to have shared this personal attribute in order to attempt to change the conversation about demonizing drugs and sending everyone to prisons. Is his disclosure insane? Is it brilliant?

I am NOT advocating people tell their bosses, “Woohoo, I’m a pothead! Suck it!” There is a risk to disclosing aspects of daily life, especially things considered crimes by society. And addiction is real, and many who use drugs, some who simply try drugs once become dependent and addicted. Sharing that people are breaking laws because the laws are flawed does not mean these individuals won’t have to suffer consequences.

However, standing up and saying something is wrong is often the only way to change society. Fifty years ago, it was unlawful for a white person to marry a black person. Six years ago, it was not possible for two people of the same sex to be married (in most states and in the eyes of the federal government). In 1963, it was lawful for states to impose arbitrary tests before any person at their discretion could vote. (Nowadays, some politicians of similar mindsets just reduce access to voting by limiting mail-in ballots or early voting. Same effect. Fewer black people can vote.)

Welcome to the gray area of present-day dilemmas: there is often no clear right or wrong. Is Carl Hart a hero? An idiot? Somewhere in between? Do you think he’s simply doing this for selfish reasons so he can keep doing drugs in peace or do you believe him that he wants change for all those charged and incarcerated for nonviolent drug crimes? Is he an addict and just doesn’t admit it to himself? Is anyone able to make that assessment other than he and his workplace supervisor? What do you think about this or ANY of these issues?

https://www.chronicle.com/article/why-a-columbia-neuroscientist-acknowledged-using-heroin