Linking Social Theories to Drug Abuse
Introduction
Drug abuse is a common phenomenon in the world today and more so for young people. This paper looks to look into the connection between sociological theories with drug abuse. The sociological theories understand substance abuse as a societal concern, having huge cultural, social and economic connections. Such causes are not found within the body of the person or genetic traits (Vissing, 7). However, these theories direct out focus away from persons to social setups. Through the focus on these social theories that link to drug abuse, one is able to explain drug-related issues with the help of attributes of people.
Labeling and Adopting the Drug Addict Role Theory
Symbolic interactionists like Hughes, Becker, Lemert and Goffman among others have in the past believed that deviance like drug abuse could be well understood as a form of a career or a role that attribute a life trend that runs against conventional societies in certain manner and aligns to others. Basically, drug abuse is an occurrence that varies as time goes by with a start and an end (Macionis, 107). The middle part comprised of enmeshment in nonconformity, with the acquisition of drug-based roles. The aspect of ‘career’ comprises this idea of deviance as a way of life which varies with time.
Interactionists and labeling scholars presumed a social growth and not physical reliance in drug abuse. The interactionists believed that negative social aspects like labeling to drug users motivated to a great extent or less drug use (Burbank & Martins, 26). This is since drug abusers like to internalize the negative labels. This is known as self-fulfilling prophesy and this leads to internalization negative labels and one acquired deviant tendencies. They hence get involved in deviant careers.
Stephens in his work focused on the roles of addicts that comprised deviant tendencies and criminal aspects. He stated that the drug addict role over ruled the deviant culture. Other scholars like Miller and Bourgois added that while drug users were committed to several issues that were negative in the process of their careers, they were able to stay put to the conventional world. With the acceptance of deviant label, drug abusers start acquiring drug addict roles. This shows that the drugs is much more than a substance. Hence the termination of drug abuse calls for redefinition of a person and acquisition of varied roles.
Social and Self Control Theory
Hirschi stated that all criminal behaviour start with a faulty aspect or a form of motivation. A good example is the strain theory by Merton which stated that pressure on the social aspects due to their being no connection between youth’s objectives and ability to acquire them through valid means motivated them to get in drug abuse (Hirschi, 23). The values and methods connected to drug abuse has to be learned through fellow youths and become deviant to the existing system.
Hirschi states that we all at some point in our life acquire traits that make us behave selfish and aggressive that results to criminal tendencies (Rappaport and Thomas, 262). The negative and deviant tendencies are integrate to our innate human attribute, the most vital part is that most of us mange these desires. This theory by Hirschi of why we go ahead and do this deviant tendencies (Hirschi, 31). He adds that this arises from the bonds that people have to prosocial aspects of life like school and individuals. These bonds that we form end up controlling our tendencies when we try to engage in drug abuse. These bonds arise through psychological association where parents and learning institutions are vital. The other bond is commitment that drug abusers would risk through criminal tendencies. Drug abuser are bound to misbehave if they have something to lose. While on the other hand they may not undertake negative tendencies if they risk their bond hence controls them. The third is involvement that connects to opportunity cost like using their time. Like dedicated students in academic would not take time to be involved in such deviant behaviors (Hirschi, 48). The last one is belief, meaning the level that one adheres to values related to behaviors that align to law; assumption one with valuable values are less likely to be involved in drug abuse. However, the most important aspect of Hirschi is based on social bonds that relate in a way that controls our tendencies. Such bonds control out behaviors.
Social Learning
The social learning theory is keen on the bonds formed by youths as stated by Hawkins and Catalano. These theory have been used to describe the frequency and level of drug abuse. Theorists have not studied drug-related tendencies and tendencies of deviant trends. The theories are claimed to be narrow while other state that they are useful in explaining to law makers and locals the actual drug use (Macionis, 84). The theories describe learning theories in regard to deviance and that drug use can be met through generic model.
The theories have evolve over time; the differential association was a theory of deviance that aimed to describe the emerging forms of deviance using uncommon people; law abiding and the great depression (Schaefer, 15). The tendencies are acquired by relating with other individuals who break the law. These tendencies would rise with being involved in deviant groups. These may vary by frequency, intensity and level of association.
The theory advanced to differential reinforcement by Sutherland. Reinforcement was used to define tensions. Akers believed that drug abuse arises from reinforcing impacts of drugs. Drugs that supersede negative attributes deliver negative reinforcement but at times otherwise (Akers, 62). There is also Elliott’s Integrated Model of Delinquency where strong connections with peers leads to deviant tendencies hence criticizes social control. This arises from weak parents, and schools and motivated by prior deviant tendencies (Haynie, Silver and Teasdale, 148). Generally, the theory, however, does not focus on the emerging forms of deviant tendencies.
Social Disorganization Theory
In this theory, Shaw and McKay stated that crime and other deviant tendencies like drug abuse were not there previously. They have hence developed with time. The theory states the model on rates of deviance as being a collective aspect (Schaefer, 16). If there are low self-control and poor choices, they can be used to explain the deviance tendencies in certain areas or that certain regions have higher number of people with such deviant tendencies. Places that have higher numbers of social deviant people the community is socially disorganized (Sampson, Robert & Bean, Lydia). These delinquents are normal youths and the deviant or delinquent tendencies arise due to neighborhood and setting they grow up that may be poverty, crowding or local turnover. This offers a good setting for delinquent tendencies like stimulation for drug abuse. Additionally, they do not allow for strong bonding in the locality hence facilitating crime.
This can be managed through getting the support of authorities and undertaking positive activities so as to make the community strong. This may be in terms of sports and camps. However limitation show that the social disorganizations lead to delinquency however they are signs of social disorganization (Macionis, 13). The theory does not advocate for the use of authorities as it would lead to enemity between the locals and the authorities.
Strain and Opportunity Theory
This theory developed from Emile Durkheim stating about the lack of social connections between individuals to society, a setting where positive and negative tendencies have limited impact on a person’s life. According to Durkheim individualism and preference for communal aspect made social connections weak (Agnew, 32).
Robert Merton stated that that variation in opportunities brought about deviance like drug abuse for many people of consideration were opportunities that were varied and was issued based on one’s status, age, race and religion (Agnew, 21). Cases like drug abuse rose when there were discrepancies. Those with low status were bound to be more strained. He added that this can be attributed to capitalism. Other were bound to align to social conventions if they went through strain; conformists.
Robert Agnew developed the strain theory with social-psychological aspects. He states that people are bound to show variation in opportunity if they have bad feelings that lead to anomie. It can be acquired if one places high effort in something and they feel they cannot acquire success later. It is however criticized by social disorganization theory due its over-prediction.
Social Capital and Social Reproduction Theory
Bourdieu stated that schools were not places where people could acquire skills and grow. However, they reproduced inequality, discouraged enhancement in the school setups through directing working class children to course work that focused on semi-skilled jobs and high class kids to work that was required for college (Sampson, Robert & Bean, 17). Inequality was hence prevalent.
Social capital scholars stated that people had and advanced different shares of capital; social, financial and personal aspects that impacted their life opportunities. As advanced by Marx, young people are reliant on financial capital for several things (Thomson, 422). The rich have varied opportunities while the poor do not have. Hence reliance arises on social supports like loans and sponsorships.
However, social reproduction theorists focused on other forms of capital that raised the inequality bar. A good example is human capital like degrees, education and skills needed to survive. However, when low class youth acquired education and skills they did not have critical capital by the upper classes (Sampson, Robert & Bean, 27). Scholars here have called for tight drug policies so as to manage negative implications. This is held by interactionists who led to a decline in stigma and labeling as a way to limit crime and drug abuse.
Cultural Identity Theory
This theory was advanced by Anderson, it aims to describe the substance abuse as an identity change. Additionally, it uses a career model, stating the starting to use and stopping. These attributes make cultural identity be connected to symbolic interactionism.
The theory starts by defining drug abuse as a trend of regular and heavy use over a period of time and prior attempts to end drug use. At the primary level, cultural identity theory sees drug abuse as a negative tendency that is attributed to motivations and opportunity. Motivation arises person alienation while young and is connected to interactionism. The negative tendencies like death, and withdrawal from school affects the ability to see positivity and acquires a negative identity. They go on to be problematic as they cannot be noticed. Getting involved in drug abuse is seen as a way out and is used by those with poor economic and educational status.
Conclusion
This paper has been able to go through varied theories that relate in one way or the other with drug abuse. The paper has brought clearly the varied opinions stated by scholars and how the deviant tendency gets to develop while one is young to old age and additionally affect others in the society. Measures to manage this have been offered as well as criticisms of some of the theories. The deviant tendency is however a global crisis that calls for social focus and control.
Works Cited
Akers, R.L. and C.S. Sellers. Criminological Theories: Introduction, Evaluation, and Application (4th ed). Los Angeles: Roxbury Publishing, 2004.
Agnew, R. “Revitalizing Merton: General Strain Theory.” Advances in Criminological Theory: The Origins of American Criminology, Volume 16, edited by F.T. Cullen, F. Adler, C.L. Johnson, and A.J. Meyer. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction, 2009.
Burbank, P., & Martins, D. Symbolic interactionism and critical perspective: divergent or synergistic?. Nursing Philosophy, 11(1), 2010, 25-41.
Haynie, D. L., E. Silver and B. Teasdale. Neighbourhood characteristics, peer networks, and adolescent violence. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22(2), 2006, 147−69.
Hirschi, T. Causes of delinquency. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers, 2002.
Macionis, John J. Sociology 14th Edition. Boston: Pearson, 2012, p. 107.
Rappaport, N. and C. Thomas. Recent research findings on aggressive and violent behavior in youth: Implications for clinical assessment and intervention. Journal of Adolescent Health, 35(4), 2004, 260−277.
Sampson, Robert J & Bean, Lydia. “Cultural Mechanisms and Killing Fields: A Revised Theory of Community-Level Racial Inequality” in The Many Colors of Crime: Inequalities of Race, Ethnicity and Crime in America, edited by Ruth Peterson, Lauren Krivo, and John Hagan. New York: New York University Press, 2006.
Schaefer, Richard. Sociology: A Brief Introduction, 8th Edition.. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2009, pp. 14-16.
Thomson, I.T. The Theory that Won’t Die: From Mass Society to the Decline of Social Capital. Sociological Forum, 20, 2005, 421–48
Vissing, M. Introduction to Sociology. San Diego: Bridgepointe Education, Inc. 2011.
