Is Addiction a Choice or Illness/Disorder? (Research Paper Sample)

Student’s Name
Professor’s Name
Course
Date of Submission
Is Addiction a Choice or Disease?
OUTLINE
THESIS: The reasons given by those supporting the treatment of drug addiction as a disease or disorder are weak; the health department should not be involved in the process since this is purely a judicial system matter.
1 The view that drug addiction is a choice gained ground in 1914 after the United States Congress came up with a law that gave the federal government the authority to regulate the distribution of opiates and cocaine.
* The judicial system jails drug users while the medical system treats drug users by taking them to medical facilities
* A 1997 study by Albert Leshner notes that drug addiction is not a police problem
* Punishment and imprisonment of addicts is as cruel and pointless as similar treatment for person’s infected with syphilis.
2 Drug abuse is not a medical problem
* The theorization that the brains of drug addicts are significantly altered has no scientific proof.
* The brain scans presented by various researchers as proof are quite normal
* Addictive drugs share the common property of increasing the effectiveness of dopamine, a transmitter that is associated with reward and movement
* Dopamine is the common denominator of drug addiction
* Nearly all drug addicts plan well ahead of time on the quantity of drugs that they would take
* The UK has known that addiction is not a disease for many years
* America finds it hard to accept the fact that addiction is a choice
3 Conclusion
* The question of whether addiction is a choice or a disorder has been a subject of debate for many years
* All evidence points to drug addiction being a choice and not a disease
Is Addiction a Choice or a Disease?
Introduction
The debate on whether addiction is a choice, or a disease has been the subject of research for many years. The focus of this discussion has been that drug addiction should be viewed as a disease just like cancer or diabetes and that the mode of treatment should be the same. However, this approach has shortcomings since no one needs to qualify diabetes or cancer since everyone knows and treats it as such. While drug addiction can be addressed by merely altering one’s choices, there is no scientific evidence to prove that diabetes or cancer can be treated by altering one’s choices. If drug addiction is to be qualified as a disease, then it is obvious that the meaning of the term disease has to be redefined. This paper proposes that drug addiction is indeed a matter of choice and cannot be qualified as a disease.
In his book titled Addiction: A Disorder of Choice Gene Heyman states that the view that drug addiction is a choice gained ground in 1914 after the United States Congress came up with a law that gave the federal government the authority to regulate the distribution of opiates and cocaine. According to Heyman, " since then official U.S. policy regarding addictive drugs and addiction has involved both the judicial system and the country’s health institutes" (6). The judicial system jails drug users while the medical system treats drug users by taking them to medical facilities. This creates a challenge as incarceration, and medical care have never been prescribed for the same condition. This according to Heyman makes addiction "the only psychiatric syndrome whose symptoms-illicit drug use-are considered an illegal activity" (6). This also makes drug use the only illegal activity that has a highly ambitious research and treatment modalities.
The emergence of addiction as a specialized area of study saw experts beginning to find fault with the responsibility of the judicial system. Albert Leshner in his 1997 seminal study noted, "drug addiction is not a police problem" (5). This implies that bringing the police in the discussion is, therefore, an exercise in futility. To Leshner, drug addiction " is first and last a medical problem" (45). This is the same position taken by Daniel Rosenbaum, who notes "punishment and imprisonment of addicts is as cruel and pointless as similar treatment for person’s infected with syphilis" (815). Rosenbaum continues to note that the manner in which addicts are treated in the United States is "on no higher plane than the persecution of witches in other ages" (816). Even though the opinions of these two researchers has been quoted widely, this has not undermined the role of the justice system in addiction and today the number of people in jail for drug offenses has grown significantly.
In his article published in the Neuron Journal, John Bierut links drug addiction to cell physiology. Bierut likens drug addiction to cancer where the "mutated cells are sufficient proof of physiological abnormality" (618). Bierut continues to state that this is the same case with diabetes where the "insulin cells fail to utilize insulin in the right manner" (619). Bierut notes that drug addiction can be understood using these two diseases as a case study. However, Bierut’s proposition has a problem in that if an individual has either diabetes or cancer, there is no way that they can do to control the physiological deformity in a direct manner. While some treatment options can stop the symptoms, such measures are not curative as combating the diseases requires a complete lifestyle modification.
Bierut’s theory has been disputed by McClellan and McKay, who state that there is no proof to support the concept of physiological malfunction in drug addiction. In their research, McClellan and McKay try to show reasons why presenting brain scans as the evidence for physiological malfunction among drug addicts are not sufficient evidence to support this point. According to McClellan and McKay, "there are really no notable changes" (447) in the brain scans that are usually presented as evidence. The other reason that these two scientists present to disprove the concept of physiological malfunction is the fact that people are still able to change even after their brains have changed due to continual drug use. McClellan and McKay also claim that proponents of the treatment option fail to present any evidence to support their assertion that "the behavior of addicts is compulsive" (450).
The theorization that the brains of drug addicts are significantly altered has also been disproved by Robert Smith. In his seminal research published in the BMJ journal, Smith notes that the brain scans presented by various researchers are quite normal as it has been seen on subsequent brain scans. According to Smith, the insistence by treatment proponents that drug abusers have altered brains "is nothing but an attempt to validate a theory that has no basis" (883). According to Smith, this lie needs to be "dressed a little bit because no one can believe it in its current form" (884).
In their book titled Choice, Behavioral and Addiction, Vuchinich and Nick have used the concept of The Great Lisbon Earthquake of 1775 to explain why addiction is a choice and not a disease. According to Vuchinich and Nick, this earthquake was termed by the church as an indication "that God was unhappy with the sinful behavior of the residents of that city" (100). For the enlightenment intellectuals, this was sufficient proof that nature was not guided by reason. In the recent past, various Internet sites have likened Hurricane Katrina as a wake-up call to the "sin-loving and rebellious citizens of New Orleans and environs to repent" (Vuchinich & Nick 101). The elucidation of events by the church and the Enlightenment cannot be questioned since it matched the popular thought of that age. While the interpretations seem to indicate that a greater purpose guides nature, such an interpretation would be anachronistic in today’s setting. Today, students are taught to explain hurricanes based on physical forces and as such God, nor reason do not play a significant role. What the science-based events analogies bring out is that extreme environmental events do not denote supernatural causes or even special principles. Instead, such occurrences are explained using the physics of heat exchange, atmospheric pressure, moisture, and wind. Today, the common understanding is that these factors are the ones that can explain the transition from a warm, quiet afternoon to a cool, breezy evening as well as the high and drenching rains of a hurricane. What Vuchinich and Nick are trying to explain here is that while the traditional causes of drug addiction are understandable, today’s explanation that drug addiction is a mental disease calls for questioning.
Robins Leen undertook a study that can be used to explain Vuchinich and Nick’s concepts in better terms. In one of his most quoted studies, Leen sought to understand why some people get addicted while others do not. In his observation Robins notes, "chocolate is delicious and widely available, yet surveys suggest that only about 1 percent of the population eats chocolate everyday" (1041). In contrast, Robins notes that close to 50 percent of the enlisted men stationed in Vietnam during the duration of the war tried an opiate just once went on to become addicted. Robins notes that this group of soldiers reported cravings and withdrawal symptoms, "and when it was time to leave Vietnam, many kept using despite penalties such as forced stay in detox and delayed departure for home”(1044). It is highly improbable that many chocolate lovers would put their love for chocolate ahead of leaving war-torn Vietnam and going back to friends and family. Another group would want to argue that the reaction of these war veterans was a way of responding to the extreme conditions that they had been subjected to. But studies have also shown that 50 percent of young pe...