Introduction
Despite numerous attempts to address the problem, drug addiction remains a serious health concern for contemporary society. Many thousands of individuals suffer from this issue and face the high risk of reduced quality of life or death. Although there is a long history of the problem, the is still a difference in opinions on whether drug addiction should be viewed as a disease requiring treatment or an individual’s choice. Today, numerous investigators offer their perspectives on the problem, supporting their assumptions with solid evidence and arguments. These views impact the attitudes to treatment, rehabilitation, and recovery.
Argument For
The idea that drug addiction should be viewed as a disease is supported in the article “Addiction as a brain disease revised: why it still matters, and the need for consilience.” Heilig et al. (2021) assume that denying the fact that addiction is a severe brain disease might cause serious damage to populations suffering from this condition, as they will have limited access to healthcare services. The central idea introduced by the authors is that addiction promotes specific alterations in the brain’s work, meaning that it is critical to address the issue from the perspective of neuroscience (Heilig et al., 2021). It will help to acquire positive results and ideas for better treatment.
The premises of the authors’ argument are strongly supported by the existing research. Heilig et al. (2021) show that even if the initial decision to use drugs was conscious, a person acquires specific changes in brain function, leading to the development of the chronic and relapsing form of the disease. This statement is supported by the facts from neuroscience and recent investigations. As a result, the argument offered by the researchers is strong, and their assumption is justified by the existing body of knowledge, which makes it a potent source.
Moreover, the authors follow the logic while presenting the main arguments and discussing them from various perspectives. For instance, Heilig et al. (2021) say that following the traditional definition of the disease, drug use might not be viewed as an illness. Moreover, they appeal to the ideas introduced by Jellinek in his classic book, who views the state as a condition that should be analyzed and investigated (Heilig et al., 2021). However, the given assumption is followed by the existing evidence from the field of neuroscience, stating that addiction can be considered a chronic relapsing disease because of the observed changes in the brain and its function (Heilig et al., 2021). It helps to resist the opponents of the idea and refute their arguments.
Finally, another strength of the paper is that the authors avoid making narrowed conclusions. They accept the strengths of other parties’ arguments and offer the idea of considering drug addiction a critical problem that might benefit from combining various approaches to its management (Heilig et al., 2021). As a result, it is possible to compromise and agree on a multi-dimensional approach, which might help move forward and improve the current understanding of dependence and how to help individuals with this condition.
Argument Against
The opposing argument to the position described above is introduced by Lewis in the article “Addiction and the brain: Development, not disease”. In the academic, peer-reviewed article, the author speaks about the brain disease model, which is cultivated by medical authorities, and offers his counterarguments. The central idea offered by Lewis (2017) is that the disease model fails because the brain changes observed in addicted individuals are similar to those emerging during the development of deep habits, or Pavlovian learning. In other words, a person using drugs cultivates specific changes in brain function by his/her actions.
In such a way, the author emphasizes the idea that drug addiction should be viewed as a choice of an individual. The given assumption is linked to the ideas of self-organization and personality development. The author avoids introducing arguments without strong support from the current body of literature and appropriate research. Using the brain disease model as the basis for his cogitations, Lewis (2017) moves forward to introduce counterarguments and explain them by appealing to the existing studies in the field of addiction. It makes the ideas offered by the researcher stronger and helps to understand his central claims.
Moreover, the premises of the argument offered by the researcher are supported by the conclusion and the main ideas offered by him. Thus, Lewis (2017) moves from the idea of addiction as a brain disease to the opposite perspective by considering existing claims and factors supporting every statement. For instance, he says that the short duration of addictive rewards promotes the emergence of negative emotions and makes the learning cycle more effective (Lewis, 2017). It evidences the idea that similar to the acquired habit or skill, drug addiction evolves under the impact of an individual’s decisions and his/her willingness to continue.
In such a way, the author does not leave any assumptions unproven. Offering a particular argument, Lewis supports it with credible evidence from various sources, appealing to other authors or researchers working in the same field. It makes the work more meaningful and allows using it as the argument in the debate linked to the nature of addiction. Moreover, the researcher builds his arguments logically, moving from the discussion of the opposing view to the acceptance of a new one, which helps to understand his claims better. As a result, an enhanced understanding of the issue under research is acquired.
Evaluation of Arguments
Evaluating the offered arguments, it is vital to admit several important aspects differentiating scholarly sources from popular ones. First of all, the authors use the previous research and support their assumptions with the facts proven by other researchers. For instance, the popular article about addiction lacks this aspect as it offers generalized ideas and leaves many premises unsupported by arguments (“Why is addiction a disease?” n.d.). As a result, popular sources’ quality, credibility, and relevance suffer. For this reason, scholarly papers such as those mentioned above can be used to discuss the problem of drug addiction and conclude about it.
Conclusion
Altogether, the problem of whether drug addiction can be viewed as a disease or a choice remains topical. The selected sources helped to acquire a better understanding of the issue. The arguments offered by the authors are robust and supported by credible evidence. Analyzing these studies, it is possible to conclude that viewing addiction as a disease seems more relevant; however, it is also critical to consider the fact that it depends on a person’s desire to stop using drugs and acquire the necessary treatment. The problem remains complex, and it is necessary to ensure the combined approach is used to address it to help patients.
References
Heilig, M., MacKillop, J., Martinez, D., Rehm, J., Leggio, L., & Vanderschuren, L. (2021). Addiction as a brain disease revised: why it still matters, and the need for consilience. Neuropsychopharmacology, 46(10), 1715–1723.
Lewis M. (2017). Addiction and the brain: Development, not disease. Neuroethics, 10(1), 7–18.
Why is addiction a disease? (2021). Web.