Images on the Dangers of Smoking and Its Effectiveness on Smokers - Essay Example

IMAGES ON THE DANGERS OF SMOKING AND ITS EFFECTIVENESS ON SMOKERS Introduction Any kind of addiction, smoking or alcoholism, takes a toll on both the physical and mental well-being of the individual who is the victim. Smoking is considered to be most injurious to health as it affects the lungs and the heart with a high probability of causing heart attacks or cancer. Therefore it is the moral duty of the government to act in its limited scope to spread awareness about its ill effects without curbing individual right to personal choice. However the whole issue of this statutory warning on cigarette packet seems extremely ironical. But it is perhaps one of the many ways regular smokers could be made conscious. The recent attempt of the UK government in providing graphic warning images on cigarette packets are commendable in this respect. The success rate of this attempt in bringing down the addiction level remains a matter of speculation, for both theoretical analysis and empirical facts vary on the efficacy of such methods. Health psychologists believe that addiction is a behavioural disorder and proper health aware ness along with behavioural treatment (Baban & Craciun, 2007) among people might be instrumental in dealing with such addictive behaviour. How far is it an effective intervention method? Addiction to smoking is considered to be health-risk behaviour and calls for intervention. Effective intervention strategy and its implementation on the part of the government establishment are most helpful and fruitful in such cases of public awareness. The style and nature of intervention actually makes the difference in the success rate of goal achievement. Therefore it is imperative that the organisation, government or otherwise adopts the intervention device that could motivate and help the individual addict to get over the addiction permanently. Intervention is generally made by means of a number of intervention models namely the motivation model, behavioural enactment model and the multi-stage model (Baban & Craciun, 2007). What becomes most important is the connection between intervention based behaviour change and improvement in the general perception of a healthy life as pointed out by Abraham and Michie (2008). This particular effort on the part of the government to create better awareness by highlighting on the adverse effects of smoking could be termed as motivational intervention. In this case the objective of the intervention by means of some kind of a threat to one’s happiness is to induce a behaviour change and also by so doing motivating one to give it up. The health belief model The health belief model which is a form of motivational model suggests that any kind of behavioural pattern like addiction to smoking is a result of one’s belief in it as something indispensable. It has been seen in most cases that regular cigarette smokers hold that smoking is relaxing for the nerves and helps in intellectual stimulation. These individuals completely overlook the threats it might cause to him or to others as being subjected to passive smoking. There are methods of generating mass consciousness about the ill effects of smoking but those very rarely influence an addict. In most cases the individual never gives up an addiction due to external influence. But if he gives it up, it is because of personal reasons that might be health failure, lifestyle change or personal tragedy (Baban & Craciun 2007). In this respect experts suggest that if their health belief could be subverted then perhaps positive response could be obtained. In fact the protection motivation theory conceptualised on these lines emphasises that self-protection should be the motivating factor in adopting preventive and pre-cautionary measures (Baban & Craciun, 2007). Everybody knows that smoking is injurious to health but unless the effects or the consequences are graphically presented and shock-waves created the addicts hardly consider them to be victims and keep on endangering their lives. At this juncture the common health belief should be changed through proper interventions in order to build up quality and healthy living conditions and lifestyle. To this purpose the UK government has adopted the given intervention measures expecting to induce behavioural change. But it remains to be seen whether the measure brings any radical change or not. And it is also a matter of critical observation whether the measure adopted by the UK government is a genuine and research based attempt or just a casual one. The UK government policy: a behavioural change intervention Technique It is apparent that by having a graphic presentation on the cigarette packets the government wants to make the consumers sit up and take notice. It seems to be a subtle yet meaningful technique where the main intention is to build up a certain inhibition towards smoking by means of the graphic warning images. Inhibition from addiction would definitely be a landmark change if the strategy becomes successful. It could be called a kind of an intervention that aimed at producing behavioural change. In this respect mention must be made of Abraham and Michie (2008) who had commented that techniques leading to behavioural changes are most important and also primary requirements in such cases. They also suggested that BCTs or behavioural change techniques have to be categorised by proper definition and hence classified. This would make intervention programmes a lot easier and result oriented. Behaviour intention It has been theorised that behaviours and intentions are correlated as an individual’s behaviours are most often governed by his intentions but there are exceptions when a person cannot work or act as per his intentions. Therefore this theoretical assumption cannot be generalised and is also a matter of much critical research (Webb & Sheeran, 2006). But at the same time it is also believed that if change of intention could be brought about then it probably might lead to behaviour change. This should be the main area of concern for the government. It must be able to ensure that the intervention technique that it has employed can bring about change of intention and therefore attitude of the addicts or smokers towards the addiction. Raising consciousness The new intervention strategy of the UK government in beating addiction like smoking could be called the initiating stage of the change procedure that would eventually lead to therapeutic treatment and cure. It is the tactics to raise mass consciousness through self-realisation (Prochaska et al, 1992). Just when people have become mentally immuned to the stereotypical statutory warning, the introduction of the new set of warning is an essential move by the government. It cannot be denied that though motivation to change should come from within, there has to be the push from external sources for one to realise the problem area and act accordingly. The UK government has tended to give the push and now it remains to be seen how far the push brings about positive results. Fluctuation between motivation and de-motivation Time and again it has been emphasised by Knowles, reputed cardiologist and health professional, that it is not only the right but moral obligation of individuals to take care of their health (1977). But contrary to his wishes and vehement appeal statistics show that a big percentage of smokers find it difficult to give up their addiction. It has been recorded by Prochaska et al (1992) that a good many number of smokers are either at the thinking stage or preparatory stage with only a handful reaching the action stage of quitting smoking forever. They keep on relapsing back after achieving partial success. In fact it is not uncommon to find people who even after giving up smoking for as long as a couple of months resumed it. Something might have gone wrong at the motivational level. Overcoming any addiction requires tremendous self-will and faith and of course a strong motivating agent in any form. The new method of visual representation of warning against the dangers of smoking might do the needful in motivating the target population to at least reach the second stage that is of contemplation of leaving the unhealthy exercise. Conclusion In conclusion it might be said that the propaganda undertaken by the UK government in bringing positive changes in the lifestyle of people and in generating mass consciousness about a healthy and quality life is in itself praise worthy. As health psychology points out to a number of essential dos and don’ts on the issue of dealing with addictive behaviour, it is a matter of time that would actually show the efficacy of the new technique of intervention implemented by the government. This particular intervention technique focuses on changing the target individual’s outlook, attitude and belief on the question of smoking as an addiction. In an age of absolute freedom of choice the best that the authoritative establishment can do is to provide options in the most effective manner and leave it to the person to decide for himself. This is exactly what the government has done to draw attention to the morbidity of smoking and to what it leads to. Taking into consideration the conditions posed by the theories and empirical data the success rate of this step might not be sky rocketing but it would definitely create a small ripple which is more than enough for a beginning. References Abraham, C. & Michie, S. (2008). A taxonomy of behaviour change and techniques used in interventions. Health Psychology, 27, 379-387. Baban, A. & Craciun, C. (2007). Changing risk behaviours: A review of theory and evidence-based interventions in health psychology. Journal of Cognitive and Behavioural Psychotherapies, 7, 45-66 Knowles, J. H. (1977). The responsibility of the individual. Daedalus, 106, 57-80. Prochaska, J. O., Declemente, C. C. & Norcross, J. C. (1992) In search of how people change: applications to addictive behaviours. American Psychologists, 47, 1102-1114 Webb, T. L. & Sheeran, P. (2006). Does a changing behavioural intention engender behaviour change? A meta-analysis of the experimental evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 229-268 Read More