Harvard University has made a decision to keep the name of the family behind the production of OxyContin, a potent painkiller, on a museum building and another structure despite objections from parents who lost their children to overdoses. This choice contrasts with the actions of various institutions worldwide that have removed the Sackler name in recent times. Tufts University, the Louvre Museum in Paris, and the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York are just a few who have taken steps to erase the Sackler name.
The announcement from Harvard, confirmed recently, has sparked anger among advocates who campaigned for the name change and organizations like Prescription Addiction Intervention Now (P.A.I.N), initiated by photographer Nan Goldin, a former OxyContin addict. P.A.I.N condemned Harvard’s decision, stating that it disregards overdose victims and their families, calling on the university to uphold its values as an academic institution.
A Harvard alumnus who organized a student protest regarding the Sackler name in 2023 expressed disappointment in the university, labeling their choice as “shameful”. OxyContin, introduced in 1996, came under scrutiny due to Purdue Pharma’s aggressive marketing tactics that many believe contributed to the opioid crisis. Despite the majority of opioid prescriptions being generic drugs, OxyContin and Purdue Pharma became synonymous with the epidemic, which has seen a rise in overdose deaths in recent years, mainly due to fentanyl and other synthetic opioids.
In its decision, Harvard questioned Arthur Sackler’s association with OxyContin, noting that he passed away nine years before the painkiller was launched. The university’s report described Sackler’s legacy as complex and subject to debate. The proposal to remove the Sackler name was presented by a campus group in 2022, but Harvard declined to provide further comments beyond what was in the report.
A Harvard committee stated that individuals responsible for promoting opioids abusively should be held accountable and expressed uncertainty regarding Sackler’s potential involvement in the aggressive marketing of OxyContin. The report suggested that an innovator might not necessarily bear responsibility for the misuse of their invention if it was unforeseen at the time of creation. Despite these findings, a spokesperson for the Sackler family did not respond to requests for comments on the matter.
In June, the Supreme Court rejected a proposed nationwide settlement with Purdue Pharma, the manufacturer of OxyContin, which would have shielded Sackler family members from civil lawsuits related to the opioid crisis. The rejected settlement aimed to allocate billions of dollars to combat the epidemic, but negotiations are ongoing to secure a new agreement. If a resolution is not reached, Sackler family members could potentially face legal action.
