"Banning versus Embracing"

What do you do when faced with complex issues at work and home?

What’s your approach to problem-solving as you deal with tough situations, as well as people?

Do you find yourself stuck on the confrontational wheel struggling to tackle tough and unpleasant issues? I have been weighing on these questions over the week following an intense conversation with my daughter Aditi.

Talks with my daughter are always full of surprises and new learnings. Like most young people of her age, Aditi speaks with conviction. And this conversation was no different as it reminded me yet again that conflicts be it personal, professional or vices afflicting society can be better managed by opting for an “embracing” approach as opposed to taking an offensive or “banning” approach.

The conversation started with my daughter discussing a project/debate that she had just completed/prepared on how Portugal dealt with its drug menace. Though the conversation started with how a nation went about fixing its drug problem, the talk went further adding to my years of experience as a professional and leader.

Drawing upon her extensive readings on the subject, Aditi said, “Portugal tackled the rising substance abuse by abandoning its “Wars on drugs” approach and instead embracing (acknowledging) the problem.”

Seeing that I was interested to know more, she emphasized that the world can learn a lot from Portugal’s experience which demonstrates the benefits of banning vis-à-vis embracing strategy.     

Processing the powerful remarks made by my daughter, I asked her “What exactly did Portugal’s move to abandon the war on drugs entail?” 

Smiling, she unraveled the concept of banning versus embracing for me.

Digging a bit of history for me, Aditi elaborated that in 2001, Portugal dropped stricter laws against drug peddlers and users. The lawmakers decriminalized possession and consumption of all illicit substances. And guess what? It worked. 

Drug consumption, crime and poverty rates in the country dropped drastically in the years to come.

“But what exactly led to this achievement?” I asked.

She put the entire story together for me.

According to her in situations where most countries would attempt to stage a crackdown on drugs, practicing exclusionary policies and isolating users from the rest of society, Portugal took a humanitarian and inclusive approach of integrating abusers with the society.

For instance, it dropped rigorous jail terms and instead the government introduced graded warning systems for those caught with drug supplies and put in place an extensive counselling programme for abusers. A reformist approach worked over banning, ostracizing and shunning drug addicts, concluded my daughter.

Impressed by her well-laid out arguments, I asked, how does she foresee society and businesses benefitting from the “Banning versus Embracing” approach?, “How can governments, courts and powerful businesses adopt this approach to deal with critical and complex issues such as managing free speech, promoting equality and fairness in different spheres of our lives.”

Referring to recent developments around the world, Aditi, said, “Managing free speech is a key concern for many countries, lawmakers and big corporations. Some of the stakeholders enjoy disproportionate power and influence. And a few may fumble in taking critical decisions which could have far-reaching consequences as they rethink their strategy to manage free speech.”

To avoid such trappings, the starting point for all the stakeholders is to commit to the idea that there is no case or scope for them to compromise on free speech, said Aditi. Making her point powerfully, she quoted French writer and philosopher, Voltaire, who said, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

A proud father I couldn’t agree more with her.

Let me know if you see merit in the “Banning versus Embracing,” approach as you deal with vexing problems? And what’s your version of fixing things that are broke and need mending?