After thousands of years of people suffering from drug addiction, its etiology is still unknown. There are many models that try to explain the process of addiction and help in developing treatment methods and prevention programs. The moral model suggests that people become addicted to substances because they prefer to be. He opposes the idea of biological, genetic and medical factors contributing to drug addiction. Unlike the Moral model, the neurobiological model involves a change in brain chemotherapy caused by the use of psychoactive substances, explains the addiction. This model suggests that addiction is reversible with a combination of psychosocial therapies and possibly medications (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2008). This article will compare and contrast the two theories of the etiology of drug addiction: the moral model and the neurobiological model. It will also discuss how the possibility of a physiological basis supports or refutes these models.
The moral model is an interesting explanation of dependence, because, despite the fact that today most scientists are not perceived by most scientists, it continues to be a driving force in our criminal justice system and government policy. With the high cost of treatment associated with the use of psychoactive substances, it seems that the moral model may be a convenient reason to withhold insurance coverage and simply restrain drug users. The moral model suggests that people use drugs and alcohol because of the inherent sinful nature of man (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2008). This theory proclaims that people have the ability to refrain from drugs if they choose, and that moral weakness is a factor contributing to the use of psychoactive substances. The moral model sees no biological or psychodynamic basis for dependence. On the other hand, the neurobiological dependency model suggests that individuals may become addicted to psychoactive substances due to altered brain chemistry. Recent technological advances in nuclear medicine have allowed researchers to objectively confirm the effect of drugs in the brain. The neurobiological model concludes that psychoactive substances reach the reward / strengthening center of the brain, and the brain tells the person to continue using the drug again and again (Inaba & Cohen, 2004). Neurotransmitters such as dopamine, adrenaline, endorphins and norepinephrine are so negatively altered that stopping the use of a substance may seem impossible without appropriate intervention methods. For example, when a person starts using methamphetamines, the brain is flooded with dopamine. Over time, the brain is depleted of dopamine and adapts to these new low levels. It may take several years for the brain to return to normal. In the meantime, drug addicts may experience depression, anhedonia and lethargy. These unresolved symptoms are often enough to cause a relapse.
The neurobiological model suggests that brain chemistry can be brought back to normal with medication and counseling. The moral model and the neurobiological model contradict each other in most areas. The moral model suggests that individuals simply have to choose to stop using substances, whereas the neurobiological model assumes that the brain is reprogrammed and tells the person to continue using. The moral model denies that biological and genetic factors play a role in addiction, and the neurobiological model suggests that there may be a genetic predisposition and an obvious biological effect on addiction. The similarity between the two models is the ability to effectively treat drug addiction. The moral model has little understanding of the concept of dependence, so it is limited in use when formulating treatment methods. In the end, the model recommends that people can just stop if they want. On the other hand, the neurobiological model also considers the propensity to be reversible, but is aware of the importance of toxotherapy for altering cognitive processes, as well as the possible use of pharmacological interventions to repair damaged brain chemistry.
In conclusion, the moral model and the neurobiological model are very different theories on the etiology of drug addiction. As a new chemical dependency counselor, it will be useful to explore a wide range of models, since our clients will be extremely diverse. A combination of approaches based on different etiologies may be necessary to ensure that the treatment is client specific. The moral model may have some value in its emphasis on choice, while the neurobiological model gives us a true understanding of the complex nature of the effect of the drug on the brain. Fortunately, both models conclude that dependency can be realized.
