The Nation of Law that “Must” Follow “the” “Science”
As a licensed professional, it is implied (and was told to us once by a legal authority) that licensees (and implying that citizens also) “must” follow the law before science. This implies the belief that we (all citizens) need follow the law above their own personal moral objection, moral intuition, gut feeling, and professional ethical obligation to advocate for their clients against systems of injustice. With the law tiered services and science, there is also the expectation with Good Samaritan, Good Faith Estimates, Gag Orders, Non-disclosure agreements, and Whistleblowing laws against immoral professional character being displayed in society. Thus, professionals are legally held to a higher standard that the law does not understand, have to follow, or even know about.
To follow the law above “science” is the ignorance and dependence issue that society needs to be reevaluating as yet another populace movement is continuing to grow. Based on psychological science providing more than what those in power could have hoped for (O’Brien, 2023a), we offer this work to highlight what they don’t know yet (O’Brien, 2025). With “science” being involved in legal, rational, and psychological matters, we see the feminine social science of psychology not valued in the same way that the more masculine dominant interpretation of what their science is (it has change over history and been called many names).
\What is science? Science is not the practice of objectivity, but the integration of subjectivity, objectivity, and qualitative or historical context as to what dependent variables are doing what to impact the outcomes so knowledge can be agreed upon. Our question and research answers who is interpreting which science and how well their interpretation measures up to the standard of recovery and who is going to agree on everything. Hence, because the field of psychology can measure level of pathology, recovery, cognitive, emotional intelligence, and emotional and moral development can be applied to professions and professional behavior, implicit actions (and in-actions), and their associations/organizations. In the absence of professional unions to fight for systemic change, moral integrity is determined by those who know what properly diagnosing looks like (O’Brien, 2023a). Science is the asking of questions and research is how we get the answers. If the law and science are written and open for interpretation, then who is able to interpret science, law, and moral character is significant. How and who is interpreting is what our work answers, thus identifying implicit bias as lived experience that supports implicit wisdom.
Because it is also our ethical responsibility (as licensees), civic responsibility (as citizens), and having the legal right (freedom of speech) to both advocate against injustices, unjust laws, misappropriation of science, crimes against humanity, and violations against clients and against any vulnerable population, we see the need to re-educate those who don’t know, remind those who conveniently forgot, and be there for those who have lost their way and forgot what they were taught in college (and what we see diagnostically) is that a nation of laws is the immature reasoning of a 7-12 year old. Be forewarned, continuing to read this may demonstrate the reader’s professional level of moral character, emotional maturity, professional implicit bias, roots of dependency, and explain why those who don’t know science don’t know which science they are following. If the reader did not know that there are different sciences to follow, then the reader must not know which science is which or which one they are following. For our purposes here, we will define the main branches of science as quantitative and qualitative or medical and psychological; although our work also speaks to macro/micro, self/other, spirituality/religion, and male/female (yin/yang) (O’Brien, 2023a).
In an era of “Equal Rights Amendment”, the question then becomes which science says that social science is not equal, valid, or needed to the legal or the establishment’s interpretation of the legal science. As we have shown that they are dependent on their implicit bias, they demonstrate their level of or stage of development and with their cognitive reasoning, emotional intelligence, and moral integrity. If one’s interpretation of the law can be measured through the lens of recovery, then remembering what psychology says about this level of development and the stage of awareness that those who live by a nation of laws implies. How can this be when psychological science says that moral character is more cognitive and emotionally then both ethics and the law?
According to Piaget, Kohlberg, and Erikson, the level of development that morals requires is not equal to ethics and law, but one has to know the law and ethics to be moral. A more profound question may be “why were professions not created equal to begin with? Which leads to the question of why are professions “separate but not equal”. Beneficially set up by the law, educational departments, and Boards of trust, the systemic dependence on whose interpretation of science, law, and ethics becomes all that must be more important when moral character is in question as well. Equating law to required ethical behavior is to not understand history, memory, psychology, philosophy, abuse, or moral development. To remind professionals of their ethical obligation to be moral before ethical and legal, this is why we developed the advocacy efforts of Moral-Ethics (O’Brien, 2025).
If the law says that others must follow their interpretation of the science above our own moral character, then the law appears to be out of line, denying, or ignoring what medical science, psychological science, and social sciences are saying about this arrangement. This is why we answer the question of what is the science of the law in a previous blog post. Particularly the field of psychology, which is not just a social science because it is rooted in biological and medical process that we identify as a hard science now with our observation that the physical body is the psychological unconscious, this denial demonstrates their level of dissociation, addiction to more power and control, level of awareness, cognitive abilities, emotional intelligence, and degree of moral development (O’Brien, 2025). This reasoning is why we are questioning what the science of the law is and what is it based on?
Science, as it has been known to be capable of, is thought of as imparational and seeks objective ways of observing truth through the use of scientific method. Science also seeks to minimize implicit bias with such methods, methodologies, and philosophical arguments designed to create a stronger construct, product, outcome, and resolve. But what if implicit bias is lived experience? What if it is emotional wisdom? What if qualitative science is the science of lived experience? What if following the science of choice goes against the natural law and professional codes of ethics? What if the body is the unconscious? What if what is not rational is not emotional? What if everything you thought was wrong were because you thought your feelings weren’t your thoughts?
As we were once told by a legal professional that we “must” follow the law before science, common sense, and our moral character as licensed professionals, we have to question their ethical intention, implication, and resolve. If this is true, then why the credentialing process? Why college education then? Why the license? If one could prove that the law must follow the science before a licensed professional needs to follow the law, then would the law be able to understand, respect, and follow their own moral character, as they require of citizens, licensed citizens, and free citizens? The license to think for ourselves is dependent upon an agreed upon science, of which, WHI believes we have presented well enough.
To the point, if the field of psychology has to follow the science of medicine above the science of psychology or psychology has to follow the science of law above the science of psychology, then fields of medicine and the practice of law have to recognize where they fit into the science of psychology and be willing to follow the science of psychology to its logical conclusion. Separate and equal is the only way forward. Piaget, Kohlberg, and Erikson have all identified that the developmental age of legal logic, legal reasoning, and level of moral growth afforded to the rational mindset only is that of a 7-12 year old. Therefore, a nation of laws, according to the science of psychology, is like listening to a traumatized 7-year-old who believes they know more than the moral or common sense of another citizen. However, there are some smart 7-year-olds out there so please do not get us wrong; it is the awareness of what this means that is important to us that the reader understands. From our dissociative point of view, if your 7-year-old is behaving more developed than you, then how old are you? See our qualitative math HERE
And if psychology gets to choose if they have to listen to medical and legal science or the interpretations of their opinions. If the law is written to be interpreted by the professions who use the law as their way to wield power and control over their citizens and licensed professions, obstandabley preventing healing from occuring in the population, then those who in power and those who have the control have the responsibility to follow the science of common sense, common logic, reasonable expectations, and their code of ethics. If they choose to follow their logic to its rational end, then they will know what is meant by our observations, where their irrational beliefs stem from, and what they are living dependent upon. If we were to follow the science of law we would arrive at this conclusion.
If we were to follow the psychological science, then this is what we would find: the cognitive, emotional, and moral development of the law is 7-12 years old. And if it is our ethical responsibility and measure of our moral character to follow the law above all else, then what is psychology saying or implying that they know about psychology? We are taught to revere the law as a majestic, objective, and mature science—a system of rational thought designed to ensure justice for all. Yet, what if this widely accepted truth is, in fact, a profound and dangerous illusion? What if the very foundation of our legal system operates not with the wisdom of an adult, but with the rigid, black-and-white logic of a traumatized child?
Psychology, as the science of human behavior and development, holds a mirror to this reality. By following its logical conclusion, we find that the fields of medicine and law must fundamentally redefine their roles. As the research of developmental psychologists like Piaget and Kohlberg suggests, the legal mind’s reliance on fixed rules, absolute authority, and rational thought places it squarely at the developmental age of a 7-12-year-old. A nation of laws, in this context, is like a society governed by the beliefs of a traumatized child who insists they know best, dismissing the common sense and emotional wisdom of others.
At a developmental age of 7 to 12, a child’s moral reasoning is rooted in a “conventional” stage. The world is a place of unyielding rules, and “right” is defined simply as what the law says is right. Authority is obeyed because it is authority, and the consequences of actions are viewed through a strict, often punitive, lens. There is little room for nuance, context, or a higher moral compass. This is precisely the framework of our current legal and medical systems.
This immaturity is evident in:
- “Legal-Ethics” over “Moral-Ethics”: The law operates on a rigid “Legal-Ethics” that prioritizes procedure and precedent above universal principles of compassion and justice. It conflates legality with morality, allowing for policies that are perfectly legal but profoundly unethical, as seen in historical laws that sanctioned slavery or segregation. This blind adherence to rules is a hallmark of a system that has not progressed to a post-conventional stage of moral development.
- The Inability to Evolve: A developmentally delayed system, like an individual, struggles to adapt to new information. This is why the law is so slow to recognize scientific advancements that challenge its core tenets, such as the mounting evidence for the therapeutic benefits of psychedelics or a trauma-informed understanding of addiction. It is, as Dr. Adam O’Brien suggests, a system “addicted to control” and “addicted to not knowing because she fears pain and death”.
Power as a Traumatic Compulsion
When a system is developmentally immature, its efforts to maintain control often manifest as a form of coercive abuse. As Evan Stark’s work on coercive control demonstrates, power can be used to intimidate, isolate, and degrade, fitting within societal norms to remain “invisible in plain sight”. In a legal and medical context, this power is wielded by professions that interpret the law in ways that subjugate citizens and licensed professionals, thereby preventing healing from occurring.
Consider the following examples:
- The “War on Drugs”: This policy is a perfect illustration of systemic coercive control. Rather than addressing addiction as a trauma-related health crisis, the system launched an undeclared and illegal “war on healing”. It used punitive measures to control a population, militarizing law enforcement and perpetuating a cycle of trauma and dependence. Dr. Gabor Maté, a renowned addiction expert, argues that a society that generates trauma will then seek to control and pathologize the symptoms of that trauma, creating a toxic feedback loop that mirrors the core dynamics of addiction.
- Professional Hierarchies: The creation of “separate but unequal” professions, such as the disparity in diagnostic privilege between licensed social workers and mental health counselors, is a clear instance of a system using its power to maintain a hierarchy. This is not a logical or scientific decision; it is a political act of an insecure system that fears genuine collaboration and equality.
- The Dismissal of Emotions and the Unconscious Body: Our systems’ preference for rational thought over emotional logic is a form of control. By labeling emotions as “irrational” , the system invalidates the wisdom of the body and the felt experience of its citizens. This dissociation from emotional reality, as Dr. O’Brien explains, creates a “societal psychopathology” and mass psychosis, where the collective is disconnected from the very truths needed to heal.
From Legal Logic to Psychological Science
If the law’s logic leads to such self-destructive and pathological outcomes, then the time has come to follow psychological science to its logical conclusion. The law, medicine, and psychology cannot operate in their own sparate realities. Psychology, with its deep understanding of trauma, emotional development, and moral growth, must take a leading role.
The path to healing, as Dr. O’Brien’s work and the wisdom of recovery movements suggest, involves a shift from a mind-only approach to a holistic and unifying one. It means remembering where we came from—a time of wholeness and connection—by integrating modalities that access our deepest wisdom:
- Mindful Dissociation: Using practices like breathwork and meditation to engage with the body’s unconscious processes in a safe, intentional way.
- Somatic Healing: Recognizing that the body “keeps the score” of unresolved trauma and that healing must involve a physiological, not just a cognitive, process.
- Psychedelic Care: Utilizing plant healing and psychedelics to access “unconscious informed consent” and facilitate memory reconsolidation, thereby allowing the mind to integrate the traumatic memories held by the body.
If we do not exist because we do not know where we came from, then it is time to remember. It is time to replace a system ruled by a traumatized 7-year-old with one guided by the mature wisdom of a trauma-informed healer. If it is our ethical responsibility and a measure of our moral character to follow the law above all else, then what is psychology saying that they know about psychology? The answer, it seems, is that it knows enough to realize that the path to true justice is paved not with blind obedience to a rigid legal code, but with the courage to lead with heart, empathy, and truth.
Considering their history, a citizen saying no to their government should be the most respected opinion that a government official to take. Just like when my customers, clients, and children, when they speak I listen. Again, if the reader is different than the speaker, how would which part of you know the difference and how would you know?
Following the law and one gets more poisonous and addictive medicines and drugs (e.g., prescription, alcohol, cigarettes). Follow qualitative science one gets literal healing from the body and from within (endocannabinoid system). There is a difference between us and that is knowing the body is the unconscious and what that feels like.
For more on our work and cause, consider following or signing up for newsletter or our work at woundedhealersinstitute.org or donating to our cause: HERE.
References
O’Brien, A. (2023a). Addiction as Trauma-Related Dissociation: A Phenomenological Investigation of the Addictive State. International University of Graduate Studies. (Dissertation). Retrieved at woundedhealersinstitute.org/courses/addiction-as-dissociation-model-course/
O’Brien, A. (2023b). Memory Reconsolidation in Psychedelics Therapy. In Path of the Wounded Healer: A Dissociative-Focused Phase Model for Normative and Pathological States of Consciousness: Training Manual and Guide. Albany, NY: Wounded Healers Institute. Retrieved at woundedhealersinstitute.org/courses/addiction-as-dissociation-model-course/
O’Brien, A. (2023c). Path of the Wounded Healer: A Dissociative-Focused Phase Model for Normative and Pathological States of Consciousness: Training Manual and Guide. Albany, NY: Wounded Healers Institute. Retrieved at woundedhealersinstitute.org/
O’Brien, A. (2024a). Healer and Healing: The re-education of the healer and healing professions as an advocation. Re-educational and Training Manual and Guide. Albany, NY: Wounded Healers Institute. Retrieved at woundedhealersinstitute.org/
O’Brien, A. (2024e). Path of the Wounded Healers for Thrivers: Perfectionism, Altruism, and Ambition Addictions; Re-education and training manual for Abusers, Activists, Batterers, Bullies, Enablers, Killers, Narcissists, Offenders, Parents, Perpetrators, and Warriors. Re-Education and Training Manual and Guide. Albany, NY: Wounded Healers Institute. Retrieved at woundedhealersinstitute.org/
O’Brien, A. (2025). American Made Addiction Recovery: a healer’s journey through professional recovery. Albany, NY: Wounded Healers Institute. Retrieved at woundedhealersinstitute.org/
O’Brien, A. (2025a). American Made Addiction Recovery: a healer’s journey through professional recovery. Albany, NY: Wounded Healers Institute. Retrieved at woundedhealersinstitute.org/
O’Brien, A. (2025b). Applied Recovery: Post-War on Drugs, Post-COVID, and What Recovery Culture and Citizens Require Moving Forward. Albany, NY: Wounded Healers Institute. Retrieved at woundedhealersinstitute.org/
O’Brien, A. (2025c). Recovering Recovery: How Psychedelic Science Is Ending the War on Drugs. Albany, NY: Wounded Healers Institute. Retrieved at woundedhealersinstitute.org/
*This is for informational and educational purposes only. For medical advice or diagnosis, consult a professional.
