Etiology
American Psychiatric Association (1994)
(the DSM-IV) lucidly groups all addiction to and abuse of substances into a single
chapter: Substance Related Disorders. There is no single theory which accounts for why
some people abuse substances and others don't (Straussner, 1993), but the presenting
picture is essentially the same regardless of the substance.
In all probability, addiction (like so much
mental illness) has a multifactorial etiology. Thus it must be viewed in a biopsychosocial
framework. Straussner (1993) concludes that,
It may be best to view substance abuse as a
multivariate syndrome in which multiple patterns of dysfunctional substance abuse occur in
various types of people with multiple prognoses requiring a variety of interventions (p.
11).
Here are some of the predisposing factors:
1. the possibility of a biochemical
or genetic factor in intergenerational transmission;
2. familial factors such as early
separation from one or both parents early in life; inadequate parenting during childhood;
physical or sexual abuse, or growing up in a family with multigenerational abuse of
substances;
3. all of the psychological theories posit psychological
factors in the development of addiction. For all the "insight" provided by
these theories, none of them leads to any more effective intervention than the others. In
fact, those willing to be straightforward on this subject admit that psychotherapy of any
ilk is largely ineffective in treating active addiction. If the proof of the pudding is in
the eating, it is then apparent that the following classic psychological bromides are wrong
and/or irrelevant:
The addict uses the substance:
- as a substitute for unacceptable sexual or
aggressive drives, as a substitute for the primal addiction to masturbation, or as a
defense against homosexuality;
- as the result of a fixation in and a
regression to the oral stage of development;
- in response to an underlying neurosis based
on the conflict between dependence and anger, or
- as slow suicide (Straussner, 1993).
Other more modern theoretical perspectives
focus equally ineffectively on poor ego development, pathological narcissism, or a
deficiency in the sense of self (Straussner, 1993).
More useful theories for treating an
individual in later-stage recovery suggested that,
- the addict attempts to medicate emotional
problems such as depression, anxiety and anger;
- express dependency needs;
- compensate for feelings of inferiority and
powerlessness, or
- relate to such things as low frustration
tolerance, high level of impulsivity, or the inability to endure even low-level anxiety
(Straussner, 1993).
Learning and behavioral theorists see
addiction as a conditioned response; it produces a pleasurable high (perhaps very
pleasurable in some, making them more willing to accept the negative consequences of
indulgence) or relieves pain (as suggested above). Because children raised by addicted
non-biological parents are at a higher risk of alcoholism than children raised by
non-addicted non-biological parents, expectancy, modeling, imitation and identification
may also predispose to substance abuse (Straussner, 1993).
4. environmental and cultural factors
in general can play a role in the etiology of addiction, such as:
- availability of the substance (e.g.,
many soldiers became addicted to heroin in Vietnam because of [1] the high stress of war,
and [2] the availability of the substance, but upon return to civilian life a large
proportion of them ceased to have problems with drugs and alcohol);
- lack of rewarding alternatives in life (e.g.,
lack of decent living conditions or opportunity to earn an income, as might be
experienced by persons living in a minority ghetto),
- influence of mass media, or
- social or peer acceptance of use of the
substance.
Finally, regardless of the theory of
addiction or the predisposition of the person to addiction, almost anyone who takes a
mood-altering substance in large quantity for a long enough time will experience physical
and/or psychological dependence (Straussner, 1993).
|