The Sackler Family: The Hidden Legacy of Power, Wealth, and Controversy

The Sackler family has become synonymous with one of the United States' greatest public health crises: the opioid epidemic. This devastating crisis, responsible for nearly 50,000 deaths annually, stems largely from addiction to prescription painkillers such as OxyContin. The roots of this epidemic trace back to Purdue Pharma, the pharmaceutical company owned and operated by the Sackler family. Through aggressive marketing, lobbying, and misinformation, they amassed a multibillion-dollar fortune while fueling widespread addiction, leaving countless lives in ruin.

The Rise of the Sackler Empire

The story of the Sacklers begins in 1952, when three brothers—Arthur, Mortimer, and Raymond Sackler—purchased Purdue Pharma, a small pharmaceutical company. Arthur, a psychiatrist and an advertising pioneer, revolutionized pharmaceutical marketing by promoting medications for broader, often fabricated, medical conditions. He was instrumental in turning Valium into the first drug to surpass $100 million in sales, marketing it as a cure for "psychic tension," a term he coined to expand the drug's use beyond anxiety sufferers.

This approach laid the groundwork for the Sackler family’s future endeavors. By the 1980s, Purdue Pharma had introduced MS Contin, a morphine-based painkiller marketed to terminally ill cancer patients. Although addiction was less of a concern for end-of-life care, Purdue's success with MS Contin inspired them to develop a more broadly applicable pain medication. The result was OxyContin, a drug with oxycodone as its active ingredient—50% stronger than morphine.

The Birth of OxyContin and the Epidemic

OxyContin debuted in 1995, marketed as a groundbreaking solution for chronic pain. Purdue Pharma assured doctors and patients that its time-release formula made the drug less addictive, a claim approved by the FDA despite evidence to the contrary. Internal Purdue studies from 1999 revealed an addiction rate of 13%, far higher than the advertised "less than 1%." Tragically, this misinformation fueled OxyContin's widespread prescription and subsequent misuse.

Purdue's aggressive marketing strategy played a pivotal role in OxyContin's proliferation. Sales representatives were instructed to downplay the drug's addictive potential while emphasizing its benefits. Doctors were offered financial incentives to prescribe OxyContin, including lavish trips and speaking engagements disguised as medical seminars. Purdue also provided rebates to distributors, refunds to pharmacists, and even coupons to patients for starter supplies, creating a seamless supply chain that ensured the drug's dominance.

The Human Cost of Greed

The fallout from OxyContin’s widespread availability was catastrophic. Patients who initially relied on the drug for legitimate pain relief often found themselves addicted. As prescriptions became harder to obtain, many transitioned to cheaper, more potent alternatives like heroin or fentanyl. Statistics reveal a strong correlation between regions with high opioid prescription rates and overdose deaths. Shockingly, four out of five injectable drug users began their addiction journey with prescription opioids.

By 2017, the opioid epidemic had reached such alarming levels that then-President Donald Trump declared it a national emergency. Yet, even as the crisis unfolded, Purdue Pharma continued to profit. The Sacklers’ wealth, estimated at $14 billion, was funneled into prestigious institutions, including museums, art galleries, and universities, cementing their legacy while obscuring their role in the epidemic.

The Sacklers’ Legacy and Accountability

Despite their philanthropic efforts, the Sackler name has become a symbol of corporate greed and public harm. Purdue Pharma has faced numerous lawsuits, revealing the extent of the Sacklers’ culpability. Evidence shows that the family not only knew about OxyContin’s addictive potential but actively sought to expand its market. Richard Sackler, who served as Purdue’s president, micromanaged the company’s operations, prioritizing profits over ethics. Under his leadership, Purdue even secured FDA approval to market OxyContin to children as young as 11.

The Sackler family's contributions to the arts and academia, from the Sackler Courtyard at the Victoria and Albert Museum to the Sackler Wing at the Louvre, stand in stark contrast to their involvement in the opioid crisis. While these donations were likely intended to burnish their image, they have increasingly become a point of contention, with many institutions now refusing Sackler funding or removing their name from buildings.

The Legal Fallout: Purdue Pharma's Role in the Opioid Crisis

As the crisis escalated, Purdue Pharma's actions continued to wreak havoc across the nation. The company, already under fire for its aggressive marketing of OxyContin, found itself facing a mounting wave of legal actions. Lawsuits from individuals, families, and entire states began to surface, accusing Purdue of contributing to the opioid epidemic through deceptive practices. Purdue’s denial of the drug's addictive potential, despite clear evidence to the contrary, was a key factor in the devastation that followed. For many, Purdue’s misleading marketing was not just a corporate misstep; it was a deliberate attempt to prioritize profits over human lives.

The Human Toll: Addiction and Suffering

As these legal battles raged on, the consequences of Purdue’s actions became even more apparent. People who had initially been prescribed OxyContin for legitimate pain management were now caught in the grip of addiction. And while the drug was marketed as a solution to chronic pain, the reality for countless patients was a descent into dependency. The long-term effects of this dependency were far-reaching. Families were torn apart, communities shattered, and lives lost to overdoses, a tragic outcome that Purdue seemed to be doing little to address.

Reformulation and Its Shortcomings

While Purdue did attempt to reformulate OxyContin in 2010 to make it harder to abuse, this move was largely seen as an effort to placate public outrage rather than an actual solution to the addiction crisis. The reformulation had little impact on the broader epidemic; many former users simply turned to heroin or illicit fentanyl, more potent and dangerous alternatives. Purdue’s failure to take meaningful steps to prevent abuse and its continued attempts to downplay the severity of addiction only prolonged the suffering of those affected.

The Sacklers and Their Continued Profits

As the opioid epidemic spread, the role of Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family—the individuals behind the company—became an ever more controversial issue. The Sacklers, despite facing numerous lawsuits and public backlash, continued to profit from the sales of OxyContin, amassing wealth while the crisis spiraled out of control. This stark contrast between their financial gain and the devastation caused by their product fueled widespread anger and calls for accountability.

Legal Settlements and Inadequate Accountability

By 2019, Purdue Pharma finally filed for bankruptcy, but not before the company had settled multiple lawsuits, including a $270 million deal, which many saw as insufficient given the scale of the damage. Even as the company’s financial situation worsened, the Sackler family remained largely untouched, continuing to protect their wealth through complex legal maneuvers and keeping their involvement in the crisis largely out of the public eye.

Lasting Consequences: The Ripple Effect of Purdue’s Actions

The consequences of Purdue’s actions have been felt far beyond the courtroom. Entire communities have been ravaged by the opioid epidemic, with addiction rates soaring and overdose deaths climbing to staggering levels. The healthcare system, too, has struggled to cope with the fallout. Doctors, often unwittingly complicit in the over-prescription of opioids, now find themselves navigating the difficult terrain of addiction treatment and withdrawal management. Many, like Travis, a bioethics professor at Johns Hopkins University, have shared their personal stories of opioid dependency, shedding light on the horrifying physical and emotional toll of addiction.

A Personal Account: Travis’s Struggle with Withdrawal

Travis’s own experience with opioid withdrawal, after being prescribed opioids following a motorcycle accident, exemplifies the systemic failures that allowed this crisis to flourish. Despite the intense pain of withdrawal—fever, vomiting, uncontrollable crying—Travis found himself without adequate support from his doctors, who failed to warn him about the severity of the process or provide him with the resources needed to navigate it. This neglect reflects the broader problem: Purdue and other pharmaceutical companies prioritized profits while leaving individuals and healthcare providers ill-equipped to manage the addiction that resulted from their drugs.

The Road to Recovery: Justice and Accountability

The opioid epidemic has led to untold suffering, and while steps are being taken to address the damage, the road to recovery remains long and fraught with obstacles. Purdue Pharma’s role in creating and perpetuating the crisis is undeniable, and the company’s legal settlements have done little to undo the harm caused by its actions. As the country grapples with the legacy of Purdue’s decisions, it is clear that holding the company and its executives accountable is a crucial step in addressing the broader opioid crisis. Yet, for many who have lost loved ones or battled addiction, true justice remains elusive. The lessons learned from this epidemic must guide future efforts to prevent such a tragedy from occurring again, and to ensure that those responsible for the suffering are held to account.