What Can Safety Learn From Addictions?

For a long time those who were caught up in addictions were demonised by society as bad people, problematic and ‘addicts’. This is because society, led by the myths perpetuated by Christian and Temperance movements, constructed addiction as ‘a choice’. The same idea was connected to evangelical salvation, as a choice. All of this was perpetuated by a simplistic binary understanding of determinism and free will. None of this was supported by any research or understanding in neuroscience or Phenomenology.

The stereotype of the addict was someone who was morally weak, made bad choices because they have a flawed character or personality, and this loss of control was seen as ‘sin’, and those afflicted as sinners. Addiction was painted as a fundamental moral failing and from here was generated the stigma of ‘the addict’.

Attitudes to addiction changed when Medical Professionals named addiction as a ‘disease’ and a ‘mental illness’. Even so, none of this research (strongly influenced by Behaviourism) really tackled the complexities of the psychology of motivation. However, this new language helped lift the stigma attached to addiction as a ‘disease’. Yet it still maintained a biological understanding of addiction as a biological vulnerability.

So much of how we respond to, and ‘treat’ addiction is driven by how it is defined.

When addiction is made a brain-disease, the response is usually with medications and chemicals delivered by Psychiatrists, delivered from the brain-centric worldview of that profession (see Filbey (2019) The Neuroscience of Addiction). Yet, we know from all the research (eg. Svanberg, (2018) The Psychology of Addiction) that most people addicted to something recover without treatment or interventions. Such is the power and energy of Allostasis and Homeostasis (Schulkin, (2011) Adaption and Well-Being, Social Allostasis; Sterling, (2020) What is Health? Allostasis and the Evolution of Human Design).

Recovery from addiction is actually the norm. Most people eventually stop or reduce addictive behaviours themselves, or through the support of their social networks and personal resources.

Many of the attitudes’ people hold on addiction are mythological (a created reality substantiated by semiotics and ritual). Yet, there still remains in society a strong belief that ‘addiction is a choice you make’. Such is the power of linguistics and mythologies associated with addiction.

See any similarities to the myths of Safety? I have written a lot on safety myths previously:

• https://safetyrisk.net/standing-on-the-myths-of-safety/
• https://safetyrisk.net/the-power-of-safety-myths/
• https://safetyrisk.net/creating-myths-and-rituals-in-safety/
• https://safetyrisk.net/understanding-safety-myths/
• https://safetyrisk.net/culture-myths-in-safety/
• https://safetyrisk.net/why-myths-in-safety-work/

Of course, none of the mythology that surrounds addiction or safety can answer the question: why would someone choose to harm themselves? This then is usually followed with more myths about ‘idiots’, binary choice and similar language that helps distance people from taking seriously any of the complex dynamics of addiction. The same occurs in safety.

So much of how we respond to, and ‘treat’ safety is driven by how it is defined.

• If we define un-safety as a habit, we develop ‘habit-safe’.
• If we see un-safety as a mental disease we create ‘brain-safe’ or ‘neuroscience safety’.
• If we see un-safety as a positive/negative reward process, we invent BBS.
• If we see un-safety as a breakdown in systems, we create ‘Human Factors safety’ or ‘Resilience Engineering’.
• If we define ‘safety culture’ as ‘what we do around here’, we invent BBS and construct culture as an engineered system.
• If one defines un-safety by incorrect paperwork, one invents ‘useability mapping’.
• If one defines un-safety as a lack in learning, one invents ‘learning teams’.
• If one defines harm as cause by ‘damaging energies’, one concocts a discourse that attributes energy to objects.
• If one defines un-safety by injury rates, one invents the ideology of zero.

We could go on. So much of what is invented by safety is little more than myth making and doesn’t tackle the complexities of human ‘being’ or personhood.

The silly language of ‘safety is a choice you make’ and ‘all accidents are preventable’ simply fuel the nonsense ideology of zero (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/zero-the-great-safety-delusion/) and stigma associated with injury.

The person who is injured is still demonised and stigmatised by an industry that continues to speak nonsense to people (https://safetyrisk.net/safety-experts-in-speaking-nonsense-to-people/).

None of this is connected to reality or any research into the nature of human decision making, the human unconscious or social unconscious. The safety industry still doesn’t know that Risk Makes Sense (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/risk-makes-sense/).

In SPoR, we demythologise the many myths of safety and provide positive and constructive alternatives that are supported by extensive research, that humanise persons in the challenges of tackling risk.

If you are interested in tackling the complexities of personhood and everyday social resilience (where you will learn about Allostasis and Homeostasis) you can register for the SPoR Conference to be held in Canberra in May (https://spor.com.au/canberra-convention/).

• Bio
• Latest Posts
• More about Rob

Dr Rob Long

Expert in Social Psychology, Principal & Trainer at Human Dymensions

Latest posts by Dr Rob Long (see all)

• Understanding the Nature of Performance and HOP - October 5, 2024
• If You Want to Know About Mental Health, Don’t Ask Safety - September 30, 2024
• Its all About Behaviours - September 20, 2024
• I Wasn’t Thinking Mr Spock - September 20, 2024
• The Seduction of Drift in Safety - September 20, 2024

PhD., MEd., MOH., BEd., BTh., Dip T., Dip Min., Cert IV TAA, MRMIA Rob is the founder of Human Dymensions and has extensive experience, qualifications and expertise across a range of sectors including government, education, corporate, industry and community sectors over 30 years. Rob has worked at all levels of the education and training sector including serving on various post graduate executive, post graduate supervision, post graduate course design and implementation programs.