When will we stop blaming people and start looking at systems: lessons from prison recovery support

Tom Wright, Head of Operations for Phoenix Futures reflects on substance use stigma in the prison system.

One of the most persistent challenges in tackling stigma around alcohol and other drug use is our tendency to look first at the individual and only later at the environment around them.

When someone struggles to access treatment, relapses, disengages from support or experiences poor outcomes, our first instinct is often to ask:

"Why didn't they engage?"

Less often do we ask:

"What made engagement difficult?"

Having worked in an around the justice system for 17 years I believe that prisons can hold up a mirror to the wider community. Our recent Prison Footprints study looks at access to, and experience of, drug and alcohol support in prisons. The initial findings offer an important reminder that substance use and recovery are shaped not only by individual choices, but also by the systems, environments and structures surrounding people.

The Attribution Trap

Psychologists sometimes refer to the "fundamental attribution error" – our tendency to explain other people's behaviour through personal characteristics while underestimating the influence of circumstances.

In the field of alcohol and other drug use, this can have profound consequences.

People may be seen as lacking motivation when they do not engage with treatment. They may be viewed as irresponsible when recovery does not progress as hoped. They may even be blamed for continuing difficulties with substance use.

Yet we frequently know very little about the barriers they are navigating.

Phoenix’s findings provide a useful lens because some of those barriers are easier to see in prison.

Why Prisons Make Structural Factors More Visible

Across the prison feedback, there were notable differences in people's experiences of accessing support. Some establishments reported overwhelmingly positive experiences, while others reported greater challenges around treatment availability, complex processes, housing concerns and support for mental health needs.

Importantly, these differences do not necessarily tell us that one prison delivers a "good" service and another delivers a "bad" one. Prisons serve very different populations and operate under very different conditions. Some hold people serving long sentences with time to engage in treatment. Others experience extremely high turnover, with people moving through the system in a matter of weeks.

In other words, outcomes and experiences are influenced by structure as well as individual action.

Because prison environments are highly visible and highly regulated, these structural influences are easier to recognise than they often are in community settings.

The Same Lesson Applies Beyond Prison Walls

The risk is that we see structural barriers clearly in prison but fail to recognise them elsewhere.

In the community, barriers can be just as significant:

• Lack of stable housing.

• Poor mental health.

• Long waiting times.

• Inflexible service models.

• Poverty and financial insecurity.

• Lack of transport.

• Previous experiences of stigma or discrimination.

Yet when people do not engage with support, these factors can disappear from the conversation.

Instead, responsibility is subtly shifted back onto the individual.

The question becomes:

"Why didn't they attend?"

rather than

"What made attendance difficult?"

Listening to What People Are Actually Telling Us

What is striking about the prison feedback is that people rarely describe recovery purely in terms of willpower. They talk about access to programmes, mental health support, relationships with staff, practical barriers and feeling listened to.

They talk about systems.

This matters because stigma often flourishes when complex problems are reduced to simple explanations. When we focus exclusively on individual behaviour, we risk overlooking the wider context that shapes opportunities, choices and outcomes.

The result can be a false attribution of blame.

A Different Way of Thinking About Recovery

An anti-stigma approach in prison settings does not remove personal responsibility or agency.

Rather, it recognises that responsibility exists within a context.

The choices available to someone leaving prison with stable accommodation, family support and good mental health are very different from those available to someone facing homelessness, trauma and untreated mental health difficulties.

If we are serious about supporting recovery, it is not enough to ask what people should do differently.

We also need to ask what systems should do differently.