Abstract
Questions remain about the best approaches to treatment for the subset of patients with severe and long-standing Anorexia Nervosa, commonly described in the literature as "Severe and Enduring Anorexia Nervosa." When discussing the optimal strategies and goals for treating this group, there is uncertainty over whether to focus on refining current treatment methods or exploring alternative approaches. One such alternative is "harm reduction," which has generated a wave of positive interest from patients and clinicians alike because of its emphasis on individual autonomy, personal goals and quality of life. While harm reduction can provide an attractive alternative to seemingly endless cycles of ineffective treatment, this narrative review builds on previous work to highlight the inadequate terminology and possible dangers of considering harm reduction as the endpoint of treatment. In conjunction with perspectives from a lived experience author, we consider wider contextual and ethical issues in the field of eating disorders, which should inform the role of harm-reduction approaches in this patient group.