The Ethical Perspectives of Drug and Alcohol Use - Term Paper Example

Drug and Alcohol Use I. Introduction Of all the topic that has been discussed in the book, this paper will tackle the mostrelevant issue among students which is drug and alcohol addiction today and its prevalence of use among college students. This is very relevant because there is a growing number of drug and alcohol addiction among college students that discussing the issue from the various ethical point of view might help for the issue to be seen in a proper perspective. The ethical perspective that will be compared and contrasted to will be the disease model and the autonomy model. These two perspectives were selected to hightlight the two because they are diametrically opposed to each other in principle; the disease model views addiction as a disease and therefore should be treated while the autonomy perspective posits that there is no such thing as addiction because any individual with “reasonable firmness” can overcome addiction. II. The ethical perspectives in comparison In the issue of drug and alcohol use, there are two clashing point of views which are often associated with their issue. First is the prohibition of its use and the enjoyment of its use. Those who argued against drug and alcohol use primarily disapprove of it because of its addictive property. For them, the mere fact that drugs and alcohol are addictive and destructive, it is therefore a disease that stunts a human being’s full development and thus, should be eliminated. This disagreement on the use drugs and alcohol was articulated in the disease model that drug addiction is not just a social or psychological issue but a medical problem. This was first articulated by Elvine M. Jellinek of the Yale Center of Alcoholic Studies that addiction is like diabetes and cancer and should be considered as an illness. It impairs the individual’s physiological, psychological and social function and should be treated. According to this point of view, drug and alcohol dependents are not supposed to be punished but should receive treatment because they are not in their usual self being under the influence of drugs or an alcohol. In a study conducted in accordance to this model, it was reported that addiction can only be arrested by abstinence, it cannot be totally cured because there are “addictive personality” and such addiction is biologically based. Inferring from this report, it can be deduce that addition should therefore be treated just like a regular illness (Boss 285-286). While this may be true, it was also reasonably disagreed to by the likes of Szasz and Husak who argued that prohibiting recreational use of drug and alcohol violates our autonomy. According to them, the “right to self-medication is a fundamental right”. Curtailing this “right to self-medication” infringes the people’s liberty rights. For them, there is no such things as drug addicts because any person of “reasonable firmness” can stop drugs (Boss 288). III. The persuasive point of view The two issues were chosen to be compared because I believe each issue highlights the other because their point of directly rejects the other. The disease model implies that addiction impairs our physiological, psychlogical and social faculties to the point that it makes it us dysfunctional. Szachs and Husak rejects this saying that there is no such thing as drug addicts because any person of “reasonable firmness” can stop drugs (Boss 288). If Szash and Husak were right, there should have been no drug related crimes. If they indeed can medicate us, there should have been no alcohol related accidents and people who became dependent either to drugs or alcohol should not suffer from “withdrawal” from them. I need not go to details on the number of rehabilitation centers in the country to attest that no person of “reasonable firmness” can stop drug addiction. Study has shown that alcohol and drugs has addictive properties that when their use is abused, they can induce dependency. Speaking of people’s liberty rights, there is no such thing as absolute liberty. At some point, the state has to intervene to set its limit especially when it has the potential to be destructive to others especially in the case of drugs and alcohol. Drug addicts and incorrigible inebriate’s impaired judgment does not only curtail other people’s rights with their destructive behavior but can in fact also harm other people. While I strongly agree that addiction is a disease that should be treated as posited by the disease model, I also find its point of view with addiction as simplistic. It is because it removes the psychological and social aspect that prompted the addiction. In this model (disease), addiction is attributed solely to biology and “addictive personality that cannot even be cured but can only be arrested through abstinence. It failed to consider other aspect that led or induce the addiction which Kant was able to identify in his categorical imperative. That addiction did not start merely from an “addictive personality” but as an individual’s means to fix our disquiet malaise disposition. Therefore it provides an escape and relieves us burden, frustration, boredom in our search to the meaning of life (Boss 287-288). For me, this assessment of Kant is very relevant and quite accurate especially to young people who have the tendency to seek refuge in alcohol and drugs when they have a problem with their personal lives. Drug addicts and alcoholics did not become dependent to the substance because it is in their genes or personality to be addicts but there are circumstances that led them to become dependent. Of course, they have to be treated just like any other diseases for them to quit the habit or addiction. Only that we have to bear in mind that the cause of their addiction is not primarily pathological just like other diseases, but rather more of psychological and social in origin. IV. Conclusion Drugs and alcohol by itself is not necessarily bad or unethical. Especially with drugs, whose proper use does not only enhance life, but can also save it. But when it is abused, it can be destructive and can stunt our full development and can even impair our faculties to make us dysfunctional. It is argued in the paper that since drugs can be addictive, it can therefore be unethical and thus should be prohibited. Given for the sake of argument that this line of reasoning is followed, imagine the world without drugs. For sure it will eliminate addiction because there are no drugs to be had in the first place. But the damage that it will cause to society would be far more greater than the addiction that it is trying to prevent. Diseases which could have been easily treated by proper medication of drugs will become lethal and will cause us death. Lives which could have been otherwise easily saved by the healing properties of drugs will be wasted. Clearly, society is better off with the use of drugs. On the other hand, when drugs are abused, it can be a menace to society. It does not only stunt our development as human beings but more dangerously, can impair our faculties and judgment. Contrary to the argument of Szash and Husak that they can be had for recreational use and state should not enforce against it, its use should instead be stringently regulated. Protecting other people from drug abuse’s menacing effect is not a curtailment of right but a duty of state to protect. The same is true with alcohol consumption. True, there is an increasing number of alcoholics and the dependency for alcohol is equally menacing as drugs. Alcohol too stunts our full development as human beings and can impair our faculties and judgment. It has been argued in the book that since alcohol is addictive, it therefore should be treated as a disease and thus be removed from our consumption. But this approach is very simplistic. When consumed moderately, credible studies such as those conducted by Harvard University showed that people who are moderate drinkers live longer and healthier than those who refrains from consuming alcohol. By this study, we can conclude that alcohol in itself is not destructive and can even enrich lives if taken moderately. Just like drugs, the issue is not with alcohol but by its excessive use. So how does one resolve this ethical about the drugs and alcohol dilemma? The middle ground is always ideal, moderation is to be desired because anything that is taken in excess is bad. What was unethical is not the substance but on how it was used. Work Cited Boss, Judith. “Analyzing Moral Issues, 5th Edition”. Web. http://www.coursesmart.com/0077326407/287#X2ludGVybmFsX1BGUmVhZGVyP3htbGlkPTAwNzczMjY0MDcveGk= Read More