Introduction
In 2022, we were able to witness firsthand how the global order and stability rest on the strength and might of the U.S. military. Any sign of weakness allows other dictatorial regimes to take advantage of our indecisiveness. How can we continue to have this power if we are failing our military servicemen on many fronts, such as homelessness, poverty, and substance abuse? The latter will be the subject of our discussion and analysis. Thesis: Substance abuse in the military is mainly caused by low family engagement issues, which is why the Army Substance Abuse Program should merge with the Army Family Advocacy Program. It should be noted that the U.S. military has a zero-tolerance policy toward drugs (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2019). However, “more than one in ten veterans have been diagnosed with a substance use disorder, slightly higher than the general population” (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2019, para. 3). The same patterns can be observed among active duty personnel as well, which is caused by the “stresses of deployments and the unique culture of the military” (National Institute on Drug Abuse, 2019, para. 1). The issue can be categorized into smoking, vaping, alcohol, opioids, and illicit drugs (Chestnut Health Systems, 2023).
The Current Approach
According to Army Regulations (AR) Record Details for AR 600-85, the U.S. Army has The Army Substance Abuse Program (Department of the Army, 2020). On the basis of these policies, one approach to addressing substance abuse in the military is prevention. Education and training programs are implemented to educate military personnel about the dangers of substance abuse and the consequences of drug use. Another approach outlined in AR 600-85 is to address the root causes of substance abuse. Mental health issues, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and depression, can contribute to substance abuse. An additional way to combat substance abuse proposed by the Department of the Army (2020) is through drug testing. Finally, a newly added approach by Army Regulations includes treatment and support services, which are becoming more available for military personnel who struggle with substance abuse.
The Analysis of Evidence
It was found that “compared with financial distress, relationship problems, and substance abuse history appeared to have much stronger associations with suicidal behavior, as did having a diagnosis of a mood disorder, such as major depressive disorder” (Goodin et al., 2019, p. 286). In other words, the measures reliant excessively on pay increases and bonuses should not be pursued since they are not the major drivers of mental health issues and suicidality. The first category of risk factors includes background elements, such as low education, male gender, young age, unmarried, and low military rank (Brady et al., 2019). It is stated that “in terms of the military context, rates of substance abuse are greater for personnel with combat exposure and a recent or lengthy deployment” (Brady et al., 2019, p. 450). Thus, the second category of risk factors is combat exposure or deployment.
First Course of Action
The first course of action is to merge or closely collaborate the Army Substance Abuse Program with the Army Family Advocacy Program to address family engagement issues and prevent substance abuse. The Army Family Advocacy Program has found that long separations lead to violence and child neglect in military families (Aronson et al., 2018). Prioritizing interpersonal relationships is crucial for military personnel’s well-being, especially for young men who have not had the opportunity to create a family of their own. However, this approach may face bureaucratic challenges, and a lack of resources may hinder its implementation. It is also important to note that some military personnel may not be receptive to this approach or may not see the value in prioritizing family engagement.
Second Course of Action
The second course of action is to design deployment protocols that prioritize family engagement, including shorter deployments with more frequent returns or visits to families. This approach can help reduce the risk of mental health issues and substance abuse, and it can also improve the quality of life and job satisfaction of low-ranking soldiers. However, implementing shorter deployments with more frequent returns may not be feasible in all situations, particularly when operational requirements take priority (Brady et al., 2019). Furthermore, this approach may not address the root causes of substance abuse and mental health issues in the military, and it may place additional stress on military resources and personnel.
Conclusion
The third course of action is to implement more rigorous and random drug testing to deter drug use and identify substance abuse among military personnel. While this approach has its pros, including the ability to identify and address substance abuse, it also has its cons. Random drug testing can be costly and time-consuming, and it may not be an effective way to address the root causes of substance abuse (Brady et al., 2019). Moreover, it may create a hostile and non-inclusive environment, potentially undermining the sense of trust and cooperation among military personnel. Therefore, careful consideration and planning are necessary before implementing more rigorous and random drug testing in the military.
References
Aronson, K. R., Perkins, D. F., Morgan, N. R., Cox, C. A., & Robichaux, R. (2018). Military family advocacy in the U.S. Army: Program service outcomes and family participation. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27, 218-226. Web.
Brady, L. L., Crede, M., Harms, P. D., Bachrach, D. G., & Lester, P. B. (2019). Meta-analysis of risk factors for substance abuse in the US military. Military Psychology, 31(6), 450-461. Web.
Chestnut Health Systems. (2023). Learn the facts: Addiction. Web.
Department of the Army. (2020). The army substance abuse program. Web.
Goodin, C. A., Prendergast, D. M., Pruitt, L. D., Smolenski, D. J., Wilson, N. Y., Skopp, N., & Hoyt, T. (2019). Financial hardship and risk of suicide among U.S. Army personnel. Psychological Services, 16(2), 286–292. Web.
National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2019). Substance Use and military life DrugFacts. Web.