Exaggerating the impact of methamphetamine by overstating its
prevalence and consequences, while downplaying its receptivity to treatment,
tends to obscure its nature while heightening horrors that promote a limited
and inaccurate notion of the nature of methamphetamine addiction.
This essay will explain the criteria for moral panic and apply that
framework to methamphetamine, and its users.
This will include a description of how this moral panic may actually
blind people to the plight of its users, and hinder an addict’s recovery. I will explain how a change in society’s
attitudes towards methamphetamine, its users, and addiction across the board, could
be a more effective form of prevention and treatment.
What is Methamphetamine?
In
New Zealand
What is Moral Panic?
A moral panic is a social condition that becomes
defined as a threat to community values and whose nature is presented in a
stylized and stereotypical fashion by the mass media. (Cohen, 1972). The
official reaction to the social condition is ‘out of all proportion’ to the
alleged threat. Reporting about a moral crisis involves a
continuous exaggeration of the problematic aspects of the social condition and
an ongoing repetition of fallacies. There are five criteria that are essential
to moral panic.
Concern: The first
sign of a moral panic is a heightened level of concern about an issue.
Hostility: Despite
amphetamines being used for over a century to treat ailments such as
narcolepsy, ADHD and obesity, the distinction between who uses meth as opposed
to who uses amphetamines has been determined by a media interpretation of meth
users. Popular descriptors of a meth addict are:
Crack head, P freak, Meth Head, Fiend, Tweaker...The following headline
appeared in the New Zealand Herald in 2011. It describes Marijuana user’s
calling Methamphetamine users “Losers” which shows that even users and addicts
of other harmful substances stigmatise Methamphetamine users and addicts.
Consensus: Consensus is
achieved further by the declarations that meth production is a threat to the environment,
and that meth use victimizes children.
After all, everyone cares about the environment and everyone is
concerned with child welfare.
Disproportionality: Meth is
seen as an epidemic while the harm attributed to other Drugs is minimised. The alleged addictive quality of meth is a
central element of the disproportionality of the claims (Armstrong, 2007). The
following are quotes that have appeared in the New Zealand
"Meth's dangerous, it's devastatingly addictive, it leads to
violence and it destroys lives,“ (John Key, 2008).
“Meth is a seriously addictive, viciously destructive drug” ( John Key,
2009 ).
“This deceptive and very addictive drug has no social
boundaries. It is the modern day plague” (The Stellar Trust, 2009).
”It is the most addictive drug any generation has had to deal with”
(Paul Holmes, 2009).
“People are talking about P, the drug epidemic that is going to steal
our children, fry our brains, hollow out Kiwi society from the inside”(Fairfax
Media, 2008).
Volatility: The element of volatility indicates that moral panic erupts suddenly
then subsides” (Welch, Price, & Yankey, 2002, p. 18).
The Politics of Fear
Fear is the primary tactic used by politicians to motivate voters to
support the elected leader. This is achieved by the leaders generating or
sanctioning a threat to the dominant group’s interests. The threat elicits a
psychological ‘knee jerk’ reaction of support (votes) for the politicians. (Veno, Van Den Eynde, 2007). While privately Richard Nixon
(who was the first the coin the phrase “War on Drugs”) recognised that drug
treatment was more effective than law enforcement, in the lead up to the 1972
election he turned to crime fighting rhetoric in order to boost his polls. New Zealand
Social Stigma
“In one study of the stigma associated with drug addiction, the term
‘‘drug addict’’ evoked images of disoriented, unhealthy, thin, and low-class
individuals with behavioural problems. In another study of public attitudes
toward individuals who use illicit drugs, drug users were viewed as dangerous,
unpredictable, and difficult to communicate with” (Semple et al. 2005).
3 Components of a
Stigmatization Process
1.
Culturally induced expectations of rejection is the first
dimension of stigma. The addict experiences expectations of rejection, being
devalued, and perceived as less worthy because they are identifiable by a
particular characteristic (e.g., their
drug use or mental illness). This type of stigma can occur without ever having
experienced direct mistreatment by others.
2.
Experiences of rejection
represent the second dimension of stigma. Studies of drug users have reported
rejection and discrimination in the workplace and in personal relationships
with family and friends.
3.
The consequence of expectations and experiences of rejection is
the third dimension. Individuals will develop coping strategies for managing
the threat of stigmatization. Most drug
users manage stigma by being secretive.
Other coping strategies for managing stigma involve seeking social
support from individuals who are sympathetic and /or share the stigma (fellow
drug users). They will distance
themselves from their non drug using family and friends and are less likely to
seek treatment for fear of being labelled a “drug addict” (Link et al. As cited by Semple et al. 2005, P. 638-369).
While public stigma is one part of the stigma issue, some people also
learn to self-stigmatise whereby they believe the stereotypes and internalize
the reactions of society (Crocker et al. 1998; Fortney et al. 2004).
Effects of self-stigma include:
•
Reductions in self-esteem
•
Reduced self-efficacy
• Reduced feelings of self-worth
Myth vs. Reality
To argue that the addictive nature and destructive consequences of
methamphetamine have been overblown is not to argue that the drug is harmless.
However, any discussion of effective strategies to treat methamphetamine
addiction requires an honest and straightforward discussion of facts.
Methamphetamine is not instantly addictive for most
people who use it. Not everyone that uses methamphetamine goes on to
become addicted. Individuals differ substantially in regards to the quantity of
use or time frame that it takes to become addicted (Leshner 2001). Far from untreatable, treatment for methamphetamine addiction is similar
to that for cocaine and other stimulants and just as likely to succeed. There
is also evidence that meth users respond as well to treatment as most other
clients. Meth users had treatment durations and completion rates that were
comparable to users of most other drugs (Brecht, Urada, 2011, p. 70).
The idea that meth is a new drug is fundamentally flawed and has
activated a set of social responses that have a harsh impact on those
designated as meth users. Amphetamine was first synthesized in Germany Japan
By 1943, both drugs were widely available to treat
a range of disorders, including narcolepsy, depression, obesity, alcoholism and
the behavioural syndrome called minimal brain dysfunction, known today as
attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The
earliest
cases of clandestine manufacturing of amphetamine and methamphetamine
were
discovered in 1963.
Is Methamphetamine an
Epidemic?
The term epidemic refers to a large number of
people who have been infected with a disease, either in a community or more
broadly. The word “epidemic” is emotionally loaded and lacks precision.
Epidemic and scourge are judgment calls. There is no magic number of users
above which we say there is an epidemic and below which we say there is none. Because methamphetamine and other drug use is illegal users,
manufacturers, and distributors have strong incentives to hide their behaviour.
This means the nature and extent of the problem are difficult to measure. The
absence of any concrete data about the problem makes it easy to either
exaggerate or diminish the impact of the drug on society (Weisheit, White 2009,
p. 4).
De-stigmatising
Addiction
One of the causes of social stigma in relation to
any addiction is the perception that addiction is caused by making bad choices.
It is seen as a moral weakness, associated with loss of control and lack of
willpower.
The attribution–emotion model of stigmatisation
suggests that because addicts are perceived as having brought their problems on
themselves or as criminals, they are more likely to elicit a reaction of anger
or irritation from others than someone who has no control of the onset of
stigma, for example in the case of physical disability (Lavack 2007).
While an addiction may begin as a voluntary
decision to try a drug, by the time a person reaches the point of problematic
use or dependence, the drug use is no longer voluntary and has been
characterised as a brain disorder (Leshner 2001).
Social Marketing to
De-stigmatise Methamphetamine and Addiction | Four Ps of Social Marketing
Product: The Product in this
instance would be the understanding of how the stigma of methamphetamine and
addiction effects our society. The objective would be to convince consumers
(society) that it would be to their benefit to change their attitudes towards
addiction.
Price: The price refers to the cost to society of giving up their pre
conceived ideas regarding methamphetamine addiction. People must be shown the
benefits of living in a society where addicts are unafraid to seek treatment,
because they do not fear being confronted with an embarrassing stigma.
Place: This refers to methods used to reach people with the information or
message that we want to share. The public can be reached with messages in
various ways including the media, face-to-face interaction at community
meetings, through posters in doctors’ offices, health clinics, and schools.
Promotion: This involves the utilisation of tools such as advertising, public
relations, media advocacy, and personal selling. In the case of de-stigmatising addiction,
communication would focus on creating awareness of problems associated with the
stigma associated with addiction, and persuading the public that society would
be improved by the removal of that stigma (Lavack 2007, P. 483-485).
How Can We Reduce
Stigma and Promote Recovery?
•
Through improved public awareness of the scientific realities of
methamphetamine addiction.
•
By encouraging people with drug problems to seek help early in the
progression of their illness, when it is most treatable.
•
Creative campaigns to erase myths and stereotypes and to raise awareness
about the realities of methamphetamine addiction and recovery.
•
Education and teaching people that addiction is an illness, not a moral
failing.
•
Dispelling the sense of hopelessness that is currently attached to
methamphetamine addiction by promoting the fact that people who have been
addicted to methamphetamine have successfully recovered and now lead healthy
and productive lives.
My name is Jackie Sperling. I live in Auckland , New Zealand
I do not support legalisation or
anti-prohibitionist’s attempts to normalise the use of substances that are
scientifically proven to increase risk of / cause mental illness and other
adverse health consequences.
I believe that ending the war on drugs is about ending the
stigmatisation of addicts and helping them make better and healthier life
choices.
Nessun commento:
Posta un commento