Analyze These Controversial Issues Based On Your Review

Analyze These Controversial Issues Based On Your Review Of This Weeks

Analyze these controversial issues based on your review of this week’s required Learning Resources. In your Assignment, do the following: Present an argument for your stance with respect to the first controversial issue regarding substance-related disorders: Is it possible for individuals with substance-related disorders, such as those who abuse alcohol, to moderate their use instead of taking the abstinence approach to treatment? Support your argument with evidence from this week’s required Learning Resources. Present an argument for your stance with respect to the second controversial issue—namely, is a substance-related disorder a disease? Again, support your argument with evidence from this week’s required Learning Resources.

Paper For Above instruction

The discussion surrounding substance-related disorders is complex and multifaceted, involving debates about treatment approaches and the very nature of these disorders as diseases. This paper presents reasoned arguments regarding two controversial issues based on this week’s Learning Resources: whether individuals with substance-related disorders can moderate their use instead of pursuing abstinence, and whether substance-related disorders qualify as diseases.

Can individuals with substance-related disorders moderate their use?

The question of moderation control versus abstinence has generated extensive debate among clinicians, researchers, and individuals affected by substance use disorders (SUDs). Proponents of moderation argue that complete abstinence may not be necessary or feasible for everyone. They suggest that some individuals can develop controlled drinking or drug use patterns, especially if they possess certain motivational factors and capacities for self-regulation (Marlatt & Donovan, 2005). For instance, some studies indicate that a subset of individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD) can successfully reduce their intake and maintain stable, healthier patterns without complete abstinence (Rehm et al., 2009). Moreover, the harm reduction approach—aimed at minimizing the adverse consequences of substance use rather than eliminating use entirely—endorses moderation as a viable goal in specific contexts.

However, there is significant evidence supporting the idea that moderation is often unrealistic for many individuals with SUDs. The neurobiological changes associated with substance dependence reduce an individual's capacity for self-control, increasing the risk of relapse and uncontrollable use (Koob & Volkow, 2010). The addictive process involves brain circuits that regulate reward, stress, and executive function, which are compromised in SUDs (Koob & Le Moal, 2008). Clinical observations also suggest that for individuals with a longstanding history of addiction, moderation may be an illusion, as substance cravings and compulsive behaviors tend to overpower controlled efforts (Marlatt, 1996). Consequently, many treatment programs advocate for abstinence, particularly for those with severe or chronic disorders, to prevent relapse and ensure recovery.

Is a substance-related disorder a disease?

This question addresses the fundamental classification of SUDs within the broader medical model. Evidence from neuroscience, genetics, and epidemiology supports the conceptualization of substance-related disorders as chronic diseases. Neuroscientific research reveals that repeated substance use induces neuroadaptive changes in brain structure and function, similar to other chronic diseases such as diabetes or hypertension (Leshner, 1997). These changes affect reward pathways and contribute to the compulsive seeking and consumption behaviors characteristic of addiction (Volkow et al., 2016).

Genetic studies further bolster this view, demonstrating heritable components that increase susceptibility to SUDs (Vanyukov et al., 2012). Additionally, the chronic and relapsing nature of substance dependence aligns with diagnostic frameworks such as the DSM-5, which categorizes SUDs as mental disorders with biological underpinnings (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Classifying substance use disorders as diseases has important implications for treatment, promoting approaches that include medication-assisted treatment (MAT), behavioral therapy, and long-term management, similar to other medical conditions. Critics, however, argue that labeling addiction as a disease may diminish personal responsibility or stigmatize individuals, yet most medical and addiction professionals agree that the disease model provides a comprehensive understanding of the complexities involved.

Conclusion:

The evidence from this week’s resources indicates that while some individuals may attempt moderation, the neurobiological aspects of SUDs often make abstinence the safest and most effective approach for enduring recovery, especially in severe cases. Furthermore, substantial scientific research underscores that substance-related disorders meet the criteria of a disease, justifying treatment approaches rooted in medical paradigms. Recognizing SUDs as diseases helps reduce stigma, improve access to effective treatments, and supports ongoing research into neurobiological mechanisms.

References

- American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). APA.

- Koob, G. F., & Le Moal, M. (2008). Neurobiology of addiction. Elsevier.

- Koob, G. F., & Volkow, N. D. (2010). Neurocircuitry of addiction. Neuropsychopharmacology, 35(1), 217-238.

- Leshner, A. I. (1997). Addiction is a brain disease, and it matters. Science, 278(5335), 45-47.

- Marlatt, G. A. (1996). Harm reduction: Pragmatic strategies for managing high-risk behaviors. Guilford Press.

- Marlatt, G., & Donovan, D. (2005). Relapse prevention: Maintenance strategies in the treatment of addictive behaviors. Guilford Press.

- Rehm, J., et al. (2009). Global burden of disease and injury and associated risk factors. The Lancet, 376(9743), 1984-1994.

- Vanyukov, M. M., et al. (2012). Liability index for substance use disorder: A new approach to the genetics of addiction. Addiction Biology, 17(4), 565-574.

- Volkow, N. D., Koob, G. F., & McLellan, A. T. (2016). Neurobiologic advances from the brain disease model of addiction. The New England Journal of Medicine, 374(4), 363-371.