Definitions of addiction have never been more hotly contested. The advance of neuroscientific accounts has not only placed into public awareness a highly controversial explanatory approach, it has also shed new light on the absence of agreement among the many experts who contest it. Proponents argue that calling addiction a 'brain disease' is important because it is destigmatising. Many critics of the neuroscientific approach also agree on this point. Considered from the point of view of the sociology of health and illness, the idea that labelling something a disease will alleviate stigma is a surprising one. Disease, as demonstrated in that field of research, is routinely stigmatised. In this article we take up the issue of stigma as it plays out in relation to addiction, seeking to clarify and challenge the claims made about the progress associated with disease models. To do so, we draw on Erving Goffman's classic work on stigma, reconsidering it in light of more recent, process oriented, theoretical resources, and posing stigmatisation as a performative biopolitical process. Analysing recently collected interviews conducted with 60 people in Australia who consider themselves to have an alcohol or other drug addiction, dependence or habit, we explore their accounts of stigma, finding experiences of stigma to be common, multiple and strikingly diverse. We argue that by treating stigma as politically productive - as a contingent biopolitically performative process rather than as a stable marker of some kind of anterior difference - we can better understand what it achieves. This allows us to consider not simply how the 'disease' of addiction can be destigmatised, or even whether the 'diseasing' of addiction is itself stigmatising (although this would seem a key question), but whether the very problematisation of 'addiction' in the first place constitutes a stigma process.

The review suggests treatment providers may endorse disease and other models while strategically deploying the DMA for presumed therapeutic benefits. Varying DMA support across workforces indicated service users may experience multiple and potentially contradictory explanations of addiction. Future policy development will benefit by considering how treatment providers adopt disease concepts in practice.

In this article I propose that current research addressing the mediating role of "context" in youth illicit drug use can be complemented by examining drug use "events." Events analyses capture the temporality, dynamism, and multiplicity often lacking in research into contexts of use. Drawing on Actor Network Theory, I conceptualize the drug-use event as a process of successive mediations, whereby shifting relations bring about transformations and actions including drug use. The methodological aspects of "tracing" drug-use events are discussed before an account of an event in which a young man takes MDMA at a music festival in Melbourne, Australia. Building on this account, I illustrate the value of this approach for rethinking how we conceive of contextual influences on drug use, and suggest how analyzing events could assist the project of harm reduction.

Associated with social and individual harm, loss of control and destructive behaviour, addiction is widely considered to be a major social problem. Most models of addiction, including the influential disease model, rely on the volition/compulsion binary, conceptualising addiction as a disorder of compulsion. In order to interrogate this prevailing view, this article draws on qualitative data from interviews with people who describe themselves as having an alcohol or other drug 'addiction', 'dependence' or 'habit'. Applying the concept of 'diffraction' elaborated by science studies scholar Karen Barad, we examine the process of 'addicting', or the various ways in which addiction is constituted, in accounts of daily life with regular alcohol and other drug use. Our analysis suggests not only that personal accounts of addiction exceed the absolute opposition of volition/compulsion but also that the polarising assumptions of existing addicting discourses produce many of the negative effects typically attributed to the 'disease of addiction'.

Personal narratives of alcohol and other drug addiction circulate widely in popular culture and they also have currency in professional therapeutic settings. Despite this, relatively little research has explored the conventions operating in these narratives and how they shape people's experiences and identities. While research in this area often proceeds on the premise that addiction biographies are straightforwardly 'true' accounts, in this paper we draw on the insights of critical alcohol and other drug scholarship, and the concept of 'ontological politics' to argue that biographies produce normative ideas about addiction and those said to be experiencing it. Our analysis compares traditional addiction narratives with the biographies we reconstructed from qualitative interviews with 60 people in Australia who describe themselves as having an 'addiction', 'dependence' or drug 'habit'. We track how addiction is variously enacted in these accounts and comment on the effects of particular enactments. By attending to the ways in which people cope, even thrive, with the kind of consumption that would attract a diagnosis of addiction or dependence, the biographies we produced disrupt the classic narrative of increasing drug use, decline and eventual collapse. Doing so allows for consideration of the benefits of consumption, as well as the ways that people carefully regulate it to minimise harms. It also constitutes individuals as active in managing consumption-an important move that challenges dominant understandings of addiction as a disorder of compulsivity. We conclude by considering the implications of our attempt to provide an alternative range of narratives, which resonate with people's diverse experiences.