Critically discuss what Howard Parker et al (1998) mean by the normalisation of recreational drug use. How convinced are you by this explanation of the contemporary drug situation?
This essay is going to look at Howard Parker et al’s (1998) theory of ‘normalisation’ and critically evaluate whether or not it still relevant in contemporary society. The essay will begin by explaining the theory in relation to how and where it developed from. The essay will move on to focus on specific aspects such as globalisation and how certain issues have affected the ‘normalisation’ of recreational drug use. The focus will then move onto describing the seven dimensions of ‘normalisation’ that Howard et al (1998) developed; drug availability, drug
…show more content…
The first dimension looks at drug availability and accessibility, without which Parker et al (2002) claim ‘normalisation’, could not take place. Over the past decade the availability of a variety of drugs has increased. With more and more drugs becoming available on the streets, prices are falling lower than ever. However purity levels are remaining the same, causing drug use to increase. Nowadays most youngsters obtain their drugs through social networks and friends of friends, who know the local dealers supplying on a small-scale level (Parker et al, 2002). Although this would therefore mean a huge population of young Britons have breached the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, this type of dealing is extremely common and also very difficult for the police to detect, as it is concealed between small networks of users buying usually ‘recreational’ drugs for personal use (Parker et al. 2002). Such behaviours between these groups of friends have become so ‘normalised’ that they do not see what they are doing as breaking the law, most of the users will otherwise live a fairly law-abiding lifestyle where drugs have a purely recreational purpose (Parker et al, 2002).
The next dimension looks at drug trying and how rates have increased (especially during the 1990s) among adolescent Britons over the past few decades (Parker et al, 1998). Drug trying rates are younger than ever with young Britons being the most involved drug
A great deal of harm is caused by illicit drugs, particularly to dependant users. Drug use damages the user and diminishes an individual’s social cohesion. An individual’s dependency on illicit drugs places a heavy burden on the Australian legal system, welfare(Centrelink), the justice system(lawyers) and the medical system. The many burdens caused by the manufacture, supply and use of illicit drugs effect the efficiency of Australia. The Drugs misuse and trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) applies to over 240 drugs, including
Years ago, the common image of an adolescent drug abuser was a teen trying to escape from reality on illegal substances like cocaine, heroin, or marijuana. Today, there is a great discrepancy between that perception and the reality of who is likely to abuse drugs. A teenage drug abuser might not have to look any further than his or her parent’s medicine chest to ‘score.’ Prescription drug abuse by teens is on the rise. Also, teens are looking to prescription drugs to fulfill different needs other than to feel good or escape the pressures of adulthood. Teens may be just as likely to resort to drugs with ‘speedy’ side effects, like Ritalin to help them study longer, as they are to use prescription
Throughout this essay the sociological imagination is used to analyse the historical, cultural and structural reasons for drug use and abuse. Within this parameter the sociological imagination is applied, using studies research conducted in the United Kingdom, Australia, Russia and the United States. The sociological imagination was defined by Charles Write Mills as a ‘quality of mind’. (Mills quoted by Germov, Poole 2007: 4 ) It is stimulated by an awareness to view the social world by looking at how one’s own personal problems and experiences form a relationship to the wider society. In Victorian society the majority of people believed there was no ‘drug problem.' (Berridge, 1999) The substances used in Britain at the time like opium
Proponents on the legalization of drugs believe if drugs were to become legal; the black market worth billions of dollars would become extinct, drug gangsters would disappear, addicts would stop committing crimes to support their habit and the prison system would not be overwhelmed with a problem they cannot defeat. The decriminalization of drugs will only make illegal drugs cheaper, easier to get and more acceptable to use. “The U.S. has 20 million alcoholics and alcohol misusers, but only around 6 million illegal drug addicts. If illegal drugs were easier to obtain, this figure would rise”(Should Drugs be decriminalized? No.November 09, 2007 Califano Joseph A, Jr).”
For many years, a real push has been looming on the idea of legalizing now illegal drugs. This has become a hot debate throughout nations all over the world, from all walks of life. The dispute over the idea of decriminalizing illegal drugs is and will continue on as an ongoing conflict. In 2001, Drug decriminalization in all drugs, including cocaine and heroin, became a nationwide law in Portugal (Greenwald). Ethan Nadelman, essayist of “Think again: Drugs,” states his side of the story on the continuing criminalization of hard drugs, in which he stand to oppose. Whether it is for the good of human rights or not, decriminalizing drugs may be a good head start for a new beginning.
Substance abuse isn’t a new thing. Long ago since the start of human history, people have looked for ways to alter our consciousness with the use of herbs, alcohol and drugs.
“Drug policy regarding the control of the traditional illicit substances (opiates, cocaine, cannabis) is currently moving through upbeat times in almost all Western countries. Prohibition on the basis of repressive law enforcement not only seems to fail on a large scale, but also to create vast additional costs, problems, and harm for drug consumers, who often find themselves in extreme social, economic, and health conditions” (Fischer 1995: 389).
At first Chapman does not limit his perspective to one side of criticizing the use of illegal drugs in society. Instead, he deals with this subject in a broad way. He argues over the fact that the use of these prohibited drugs costs the government a lot of money, police time and prison space and how in spite of taking several administrative steps, the government has suffered from a colossal failure in stopping the drug abuse. He provides the data in support of his argument which is direct and precise. Through the example of Bennett, he tries to convey the message that people are not willing to have the spread of drug abuse in citizenry. A survey was conducted asking people to respond to the following question: if illegal
There was a great push for a non-judgmental approach that would ‘reduce physical, social and psychological risks to individuals who use drugs and to society as a whole’ (McCann & Temenos, 2015, p. 217). Never the less, this was a highly contested set of policy formulation across all levels of governance.
In addition, he gives cites from numerous legitimate pioneers he knew while he was executive of the Office of National Drug Control Policy. This gives him power appeal which offers the peruser some assistance with believing that Bennett is a solid hotspot for what he is discussing. Bennett likewise utilizes pathos to make an enthusiastic speak to the reader. He utilizes a decent example when he is contending the legalizers' case that heavy drug users just damage themselves. He says that legalizers' ought to see the 36 shot injuries endured by a kid who impeded her mother's medication crazed partner.
Drug legalization is an enduring question that presently faces our scholars. This issue embraces two positions: drugs should not be legalized and drugs should be legalized. These two positions contain an array of angles that supports each issue. This brief of the issues enables one to consider the strengths and weakness of each argument, become aware of the grounds of disagreement and agreement and ultimately form an opinion based upon the positions stated within the articles. In the article “Against the Legalization of Drugs”, by James Q. Wilson, the current status of drugs is supported. Wilson believes if a drug such as heroin were legalized there would be no financial or medical reason to avoid heroin usage;
This leads to an increase in criminal activity such as neglect of familial duties, robberies to fund their dependency, and violence to defend their habits. The ‘drugee’ becomes a nuisance to society. Some become homeless and exhibit poor health habits such as malnutrition and tooth decay. Other negative effects include the transference of diseases because of needle sharing. Though drug use is a personal choice, the effects on the rest of society are undeniable. The best intentions are formulated on a personal level, but this is overcastted by its negative effects. This argument, however, is a bit one-sided because the reason for using and dependency varies between users.
In order to update and expand what is known about drug use patterns among youth in Bishkek the paper examines ‘recreational’ consumption of cannabis among young people in the age of 18 to 25 through the frameworks of drug normalization theory. The research provide descriptive epidemiological data on illegal drug use among a sample of young people (n=134) who filled out online questionnaire. Cannabis use was contextualized among the chosen sample, with a specific focus on how the normalization thesis fits with the sample's patterns of use and attitudes towards cannabis. Results were analyzed within six dimensions that indicate drug use normalization process, as they include: access and availability, trying rates, frequency of use, intentions
normality of regular illicit drug use is reversing or, to some extent, has slowed down (Manning, 2013: 53). Shiner and Newburn (1997: 516) argue that both the frequency of illicit drug use “are easily exaggerated” by research which advocates increasing normalisation. Shiner and Newburn (1997) maintain that a majority of youths have never used an illicit drug, with the number of regular illicit drug users remaining less than is portrayed. Moreover, the concept of normalisation, agues Shiner and Newburn (1997: 525), gives “inadequate attention to the normative context of behaviour”, noting that normalisation, instead, is underpinned by a “confusion between normalcy and frequency" (1997: 514). Because many young people and adults have never taken an illicit drug, with a limited amount of regular
I have written this essay in response to the essay prompt Recreational use of soft drugs such as marijuana or ecstasy is less harmful than alcohol consumption and therefore should be decriminalised. In this essay I will talk about the effects that soft drugs have on society, and on adolescent youth. I will also talk about my position on this matter, and what I believe is the right course of action to take in regards to the essay prompt.