The National Academy of Sciences is asking a court to allow it to reuse about $30 million in donations from the wealthy Sackler family, which controlled the company at the center of the opioid epidemic, and to remove the family’s name from the funds.
The petition filed by the Academy in the Supreme Court in Washington, DC, on Thursday aims to modify the terms of the donations so that the foundation can use them for scientific studies, projects and educational activities.
The move follows a New York Times report last year that looked into donations from several Sackler members, including an executive at Purdue Pharma, which made the painkiller OxyContin long blamed for fueling the opioid crisis that has claimed thousands of lives.
“The reputation of the Sackler name has made it impossible for the Academy to carry out the purposes for which it originally accepted the funds,” Marcia McNutt, president of the National Academy of Sciences, said in a statement released Thursday.
Daniel S. Connolly, a spokesman for the Raymond Sackler family, said he supported the National Academies “using the funds as they see fit” and would support the change.
“We would say yes if asked, as we will continue to say yes despite this unnecessary court filing and false allegations about us,” Mr Connolly said in a statement.
Those gifts, initially valued at $19 million, flowed into the foundation, which serves as a federal advisory body and convenes committees to offer guidance on opioid policies to authorities such as Congress and federal agencies. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine derives 70 percent of its funding from Congress and was established by Abraham Lincoln to be an objective adviser to federal officials.
The groups weighing in on the pain policy included some experts criticized for unknown conflicts of interest that included ties to Purdue Pharma. In one case, a team presented findings indicating that chronic pain was largely undertreated, a claim used to justify calls for more opioid prescriptions and drug approvals.
Many prominent institutions and universities had publicly distanced themselves from the broad Sackler years ago. A number of organizations, including Tufts University and the World Health Organization, have undertaken reviews to examine family influence on curriculum or instruction. It’s a step the Academies could consider, said Dr. Caleb Alexander, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University who has studied opioid overdose.
“It is equally important for the National Academies to understand how and why the Sacklers—and others with financial ties to opioid manufacturers—were able to wield such influence in the first place and establish mechanisms to ensure this never happens again.” he said in an email. Dr. Alexander was a paid plaintiff’s expert in opioid cases.
Members of the Sackler family gave the endowment funds to support scientific conferences, awards and studies that would bear the family name.
The donations began in 2000, when Dame Jillian Sackler, whose husband, Arthur, died years before OxyContin hit the market, began giving sums that by 2017 had reached $5 million, according to reports from the Academies’ treasurer.
Members of the Sackler family involved in managing Purdue Pharma donated the remaining $19 million in endowments beginning in 2008, when Dr. Raymond Sackler, his wife, Beverly, and the couple’s foundation began contributing, according to reports treasurer. Dr. and Ms. Sackler died in 2017 and 2019. A family spokesman said the donations were clearly described publicly as having nothing to do with Pain or Purdue Pharma.
After the media and prosecutors began to shed light on the roles of Sackler family members in boosting opioid sales, the funds sat in National Academies coffers and gained value as investments.
The Times article caused an uproar last year among members of the National Academies – elite scientists, engineers and doctors elected by their peers. In a letter, a group of 75 members, including eight Nobel Prize winners, called on the organization to explain why it has failed for years to return or reuse the money.
“NAS’s long history of collaboration with the Sacklers has tarnished its reputation for years to come,” Robert Hauser, one of the letter’s authors, said in an email Friday. “I hope the NAS will be able to remove the Sackler name from their contributions and reposition them appropriately.”
Dr McNutt, the chairman, said in the statement on Thursday that the money would be used to counter misinformation or propose solutions to the unintended consequences of innovations in science.
“We intend the new fund to be used to bring our expertise and evidence-based approach to many challenges facing society, including the opioid epidemic, which has such a terrible toll on individuals, families and our communities,” said Dr . McNutt said.
The Supreme Court has yet to rule on the controversial bankruptcy settlement for Purdue Pharma that would have funneled billions of dollars into fighting the opioid epidemic in exchange for protecting members of the Sackler family from related civil lawsuits.
Under the watch of an independent monitor, Purdue no longer markets the opioids it makes, and the company would be dissolved if the bankruptcy plan is confirmed. The Sacklers have not been on the Purdue board since 2018.
