In the Hammer et al (2010) reading, 'Addiction: Current Criticism of the Brain Disease Paradigm', which one of the following critiques of the brain disease model of addiction was not presented in the reading?
Question 1Answer
a.
Addiction is not a pathology limited to the organ contained within a human skull, but rather a biopsychosocial phenomenon, a dynamic entity with variable narrative arcs particular to periods of time, population and location. Therefore, the addiction as a brain disease paradigm – if applied too narrowly – can ignore a number of important variables and factors.
b.
The disease model of addiction is wholly rejected by everyone who uses psychoactive drugs and thus has lived experience of their effects. People do not gain anything from being diagnosed as addicted due to biological changes. It is simply an incorrect theory that has no bearing in reality.
c.
The addiction as a brain disease model still lacks diagnostic robustness and epidemiological utility. This means that diagnosing addiction remains heavily reliant upon subjective interpretations of behaviour, including tolerance, preoccupation with the substance, and continued use despite harmful consequences.
d.
Understanding addiction as a brain disease, while potentially helpful in many ways, ‘bears just as much potential for wielding stigma and creating marginalized populations’, because such people may be understood as inherently ‘weak’.