Substance abuse and family violence/Socialization and Subculture theory - Assignment Example

Substance abuse and family violence Alcohol affects the cognitive processing and can thus be a potential cause of violence between different family members in general and intimate partners in particular (Langhinrichsen-rohlin, 2005, p. 108). After experimentation, Langhinrichsen-rohlin (2005) found that “the odds of physical aggression were 8 times higher on drinking days for men from the domestic violence treatment program and 11 times higher on drinking days for domestically violent men in the alcohol treatment program.

” Substance abuse particularly alcohol causes violence in family gatherings by making the drinker overact and over-react. Having drunk alcohol, the individual loses the ability to control emotions and displays extreme anger unaccompanied with sensible talk. Although the emotions are at their extreme, yet a lack of sense prevails and is easily predictable from the attitude of the drinker. Violence is caused when the drinker speaks out things he/she would never in the normal state of mind. Stalking between partners is another potential unfavorable outcome of overconsumption of alcohol.

Tjaden and Thoennes (2000) determined a strong link between the perpetrator’s alcohol use and the victim’s injury. “[S]ome of the inhibitors that may prevent persons from hurting others under ordinary circumstances are relaxed when persons are under the influence of drugs or alcohol” (Tjaden and Thoennes, 2000, p. 43). Therefore, the social support for alcohol can be understood as a potential hurdle in the eradication of violence between intimate partners. The Wraparound model encapsulates immense capacity to prove successful in family intervention directed at reduction of substance abuse and eradication of its impacts.

Wraparound is a care philosophy which has a well-defined process of planning meant to develop support networks and optimistic relationships among individuals having any kind of disability and their families. Unique teams are assigned to the individual with disability and his/her family which tends to achieve the intended quality-of-life indicators. Ego identity and role diffusion in juvenilityEgo identity and role diffusion have been identified by Erik Erikson as the possible outcomes of one of the developmental stages (Davis and Clifton, 1995).

In the age of juvenility, juveniles have an intrinsic desire and motivation to explore the world, to experience new things and know what they didn’t as children. A desire to look and feel like an adult is one of the most typical features of this age. In an attempt to break free of restrictions that they faced as children, they tend to develop a combined force. As a result, groups of juveniles form wherein each member has a defined role. More experienced juveniles tend to be the leaders of groups while the rest tend to benefit from his/her experience.

The ultimate motive of all is enjoyment and independence. The sense of association with the group which the ego identity brings the juveniles is important for them as it not only provides them with protection against external restrictions, but also reaffirms the idea that substance abuse is correct as not one but many are doing it. Role diffusion is even more dangerous than achievement of ego identity in substance abuse. Jones and Hartmann (1988) conducted research to explore developmental differences among the diffused, moratorium, achieved and unclassified adolescents.

They found that in comparison to the rest, “[d]iffused adolescents were about twice as likely to have tried cigarettes and alcohol, three times as likely to have tried marijuana, four times as likely to have tried inhalants, and five times as likely to have used cocaine than their foreclosed peers” (Jones and Hartmann, 1988). While ego identity promotes a healthy culture at least in that the juvenile can associate himself to a group, juveniles experiencing role diffusion become socially excluded and get on the drugs individually.

This not only increases their tendency to experience more hazardous drugs, but also to have more negative impacts of substance abuse on their psychology and personality. References:Davis, D. and Clifton, A. (1995). Psychosocial Theory: Erikson. Retrieved from http://www.haverford.edu/psych/ddavis/p109g/erikson.stages.html. Jones, R. M., and Hartmann, B. R. (1988). Ego identity: developmental differences and experimental substance use among adolescents. Journal of Adolescence. 11(4): 347-360. Langhinrichsen-rohlin, J. (2005). Top 10 Greatest “Hits”: Important Findings and Future Directions for Intimate Partner Violence Research.

Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 20(1): 108-118. Tjaden, P. and Thoennes, N. (2000). Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence. NIJCDC. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181867.pdf.