Abstract
This paper is about assimilating some ways that people try to help those who overuse alcohol or drugs. For example, another approach is referred to as harm reduction, which tries to make the environment for a drug user safer even without the demand to stop using drugs immediately. The other mode is referred to as abstinence-only, which urges people to terminate their access to drugs altogether. This paper argues that harm reduction is a superior strategy since it can reduce undesirable effects that can happen to specific categories of people. Then, we shall examine studies that have been done and find out which reasons make harm reduction so effective.
Introduction
Hallucinations and anxiety are two symptoms frequently experienced by people who abuse alcohol or drugs. Such an issue can badly endanger their health, their families, and their communities. What people don’t know is that people have tried numerous ways to help. Two of such approaches are harm reduction and abstinence-only. The harm reduction implies offering people safety even if they consume some drugs in spite of that. Abstinence-only is the complete and permanent abstention from drugs. This article argues for two reasons why harm reduction is a better choice. It is more adjustable and supports people in a way that they can understand it well. We will base our explanation on studies done by experts, which show the reason behind it.
Harm Reduction Approaches
Overview and Strengths
Harm reduction, in this case, implies that drug use may be made safer for the people who choose to use drugs. It would involve things like offering needles that are clean to people who inject drugs, as well as having facilities where one can use drugs under the supervision of a medical professional. An enormous study done by Ginley et al. (2021) showed that when a harm reduction practice called contingency management rewards people for not using drugs, it assists people in abstaining from using drugs for the long term. This shows harm reduction can actually achieve its goal.
Additionally, harm reduction helps to cut the stigma that people feel towards drug abusers. According to Muncan et al. (2020), people who use drugs feel alienated and mistake the local people for judging them. Harm reduction might assure them that they will feel welcome and not judged. As a result, feeling welcome often leads people to approach others and thus improve their well-being. Furthermore, harm reduction can reach a lot of people because it knows that not all the ones using drugs are ready to fully stop drug use. It is their call and their choice; hence, they are respected. They can do this by making treatment more acceptable to more people and reducing the need to immediately quit using drugs completely.
Limitations
On the other side, not everyone believes that harm reduction is the right thing at all. The others might be afraid this will look like I am telling them it’s all right to use drugs. Rosenberg et al. (2020) point out that in some cases, there are individuals who would not settle for medications that don’t target complete cessation of drug use. They believe maybe it would not overcome the issue. On the other hand, harm reduction has its problems. For instance, not all zones are equipped with harm reduction programs. Additionally, these services may not be perfect and may even lack the resources to help everyone. This implies some of the individuals do not get the assistance they require when they require it the most. But despite all these difficulties, harm reduction is helping a lot of people. It provides assistance that can be customized to fit people’s different life circumstances. This flexibility is a plus because more people have the avenue to access help according to their schedule and convenience.
Abstinence-Only Approaches
Overview and Strengths
Abstinence is attempting to eliminate using drugs or alcohol entirely. According to this approach, teaching people not to use drugs would be the best solution to the problem. According to this approach, the takeaway is that a drugs-free life is the best outcome. Such programs generally consist of lectures, lessons, and support groups that are designed to keep the patient away from the drugs.
Furthermore, this approach is founded on the perspective that not taking any drugs at all is the healthiest way out for all. As explained by Wiggins (2020), educating students about living without drugs can also hold values and help them make better life decisions. The fact that abstinence-only can mean more than just stopping taking drugs presents it as not only an alternative to drug use but as a way of living that’s healthy for the mind and spirit. On the other hand, it’s crucial to note that this way may be functional for some people. This strategy might turn out to be the one for the ones who really want to quit the drugs and are convinced that they can take this challenge. It gives them a clear goal: without a single drug.
Limitations
On the other hand, not everyone has the ability to give up their drug problems right away, or even at all. The abstinence-only method is a huge problem with this. It is not suitable for everyone or all possible cases. Others who prefer a more casual culture may find this practice too rigid for their liking. In addition to that, there is a danger that those who attempted to quit using drugs may then resume taking them as the abstinence-only method was too difficult. It often demotivates them and discourages them even more to give it another try. It demonstrates the fact that for certain people, there might be too much of a burden to quit taking drugs instantly.
Lastly, the abstinence-only method does not provide help for the problems which made people consume drugs in the first place. When someone is using drugs in order to be happy, or their life problem is not addressed, they may continue to do drugs even if they are told to stop.
Comparative Analysis
When we view harm reduction and abstinence-only as separate methods, we can tell that they are quite different. The idea that not all drug users can or are willing to stop using drugs immediately is supported by harm reduction. It tries to keep things more secure for them till they decide on a future for themselves. It’s just like providing a hand of assistance, although one is at the beginning or end of a path. In contrast, abstinence-only has one clear rule: there are no drugs. This can work well for a lot of people but not for everyone. This is saying everyone should meet a similar fate, even if the road is too tough for them. According to Paquette et al.(2022), there are many roadways to deal with drug issues as each individual is different. For some, harm reduction might be the direction. Others might do well with abstinence, and still others could need some middle type of approach. This means that having more options works out better for helping more customers.
Argument for Harm Reduction
In my opinion, the harm reduction strategy appears to be a wise and softer alternative to treat drug problems. It does not require the person to stop using drugs immediately by providing help where it is needed. This can make more people feel like they belong and be ready to get assistance. For instance, Krawczyk et al. (2021), in the time of COVID-19, used nontraditional ways to help people with opioid problems. It demonstrates the agility of harm reduction and its ability to address new challenges while continuing to provide support. In addition, harm reduction is also offered to people who consume psychedelics, as described by Gorman et al. (2021). This is the second illustration that shows how harm reduction is extending its hand to more and more people to support them in different ways.
Conclusion
In conclusion, abstinence-only ways are for a drug-free life, but harm reduction ways are soft and more flexible in helping. It appreciates that people are unique and need different types of support. Through its compassionate and non-judgmental approach that imposes complete abstinence as the condition, it can help more people in a way that fits their needs better. This paper puts forward harm reduction as a solution because it caters to all needs comprehensively and offers help in several ways.
References
Ginley, M. K., Pfund, R. A., Rash, C. J., & Zajac, K. (2021). Long-term efficacy of contingency management treatment based on objective indicators of abstinence from illicit substance use up to 1 year following treatment: A meta-analysis. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 89(1), 58.
Gorman, I., Nielson, E. M., Molinar, A., Cassidy, K., & Sabbagh, J. (2021). Psychedelic harm reduction and integration: A transtheoretical model for clinical practice. Frontiers in Psychology, 710.
Kerber, A., Donnelly, T. T., & Cruz, A. D. (2020). Harm reduction: a concept analysis. Journal of Mental Health and Addiction Nursing, 4(1), e14-e25.
Krawczyk, N., Fawole, A., Yang, J., & Tofighi, B. (2021). Early innovations in opioid use disorder treatment and harm reduction during the COVID-19 pandemic: a scoping review. Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, 16, 1-15.
Muncan, B., Walters, S. M., Ezell, J., & Ompad, D. C. (2020). “They look at us like junkies”: influences of drug use stigma on the healthcare engagement of people who inject drugs in New York City. Harm reduction journal, 17, 1-9.
Paquette, C. E., Daughters, S. B., & Witkiewitz, K. (2022). Expanding the continuum of substance use disorder treatment: Nonabstinence approaches. Clinical psychology review, 91, 102110.
Rosenberg, H., Grant, J., & Davis, A. K. (2020). Acceptance of non-abstinence as an outcome goal for individuals diagnosed with substance use disorders: A narrative review of published research. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 81(4), 405-415.
Wiggins, E. K. (2020). Toward an Integrative Virtue-Based Model of Abstinence Education: Three Abstinence-Only Programs Through the Cardinal Moral Virtues. The Institute for the Psychological Sciences.
write