This House would treat addiction as a medical condition, not a moral failing.

ethics

The medical framing has dominated public-health discourse for two decades. Opioid-deaths data and the policy response since 2017 has tested it. Where the framing helps and where it hurts is now an empirical question.

Background

The American Society of Addiction Medicine formally classified addiction as a brain disease in 2011. Insurance coverage for treatment expanded after the 2008 Mental Health Parity Act. US overdose deaths still rose from 47,000 in 2014 to 108,000 in 2022 driven by fentanyl. The medical-framing critique now comes from both directions: Sally Satel argues exclusive medicalization removes the patient agency that recovery requires; the harm-reduction left argues medicalization still pathologizes choice. Portugal's 2001 decriminalization model is the cleanest test case; overdose deaths there fell 80% over 15 years.

Government opens with

Criminalizing addiction increases overdose deaths, removes the social supports that aid recovery, and racially distorts enforcement.

Opposition responds with

A purely medical frame removes the agency and responsibility that recovery programs require to actually work.

Take it. Against the AI.

Pick a side. Three minutes per speech. The AI takes the other side in your chosen format. Judge ballot at the end.

Open on this motion →

This week's motions

Thursday, May 28, 2026

This House would require ranked-choice voting in all U.S. federal elections.

Wednesday, May 27, 2026

This House would require children to obtain parental consent to use social media until age 16.

Tuesday, May 26, 2026

This House would mandate open-source release of any AI model trained on public-internet data.

Saturday, May 30, 2026

This House would ban facial recognition in public spaces.

Sunday, May 31, 2026

This House would ban political advertising in the 60 days before an election.