Drugs and Society

Drugs and Society

Why do people use drugs: A historical and philosophical overview

The word 'drug' can have either a positive or a negative connotation. On one hand, legally-prescribed drugs have saved the lives of many people: antibiotics can cure infections; drugs can alleviate pain and the symptoms of many common illnesses spanning from allergies to the common cold; drugs can curtail the advancement of serious illnesses, and make living with chronic diseases such as diabetes feasible. But there is a clear dark side to drug use: drug addiction. Several models have been suggested to explain why people use illegal drugs and abuse legal drugs, none of which are entirely persuasive.

The oldest model, which still has a great deal of traction today, is that of the moral model: It is assumed that people who use drugs are morally 'weak' and use drugs to escape reality. Another model, occasionally used by artists, is the idea that drugs can free the human consciousness from the boundaries of conventional reality. Opium smoking was not uncommon during the 19th century amongst the Romantic poets, just like LSD was popular amongst a wide subculture of musicians and other artists. And there is a longstanding tradition amongst writers and other artists to use alcohol as a method of release (Berridge 1988: 51). One of the most famous accounts of drug abuse was The doors of perception and heaven and hell by Aldous Huxley, which chronicles the author's experiences taking mescaline. Similar to that of earlier recreational drug users, Huxley conducted his self-experiments when the drug was not illegal, and the negative side effects of long-term use were not known.

From an artist's perspective, one could argue that any supposed benefits that might be derived from drug use are miniscule for 'the art' and instead their use is really is a product of the culture that surrounds artists. In other words, rather than the benefits actually derived from experimenting with drugs, the main reasons that artists often dabble in drug use are because it is so accepted within the culture that surrounds the production of art. It is true that a culture of acceptance is yet another reason that people use drugs -- whether the subculture of teens or impoverished persons who abuse street drugs and alcohol; of bodybuilders and other athletes who illegally use steroids, or even cultures where drugs are used as part of religious rituals, such as the use of peyote in Native American rituals. In these instances, it is fairly easy to understand the 'why' of drug use -- it is normalized, and not using drugs is considered unusual.

Another reason that people abuse drugs that is little-publicized by the pharmaceutical industry is the ways in which the use of legal, prescribed drugs can morph into abuse. Someone may be given a prescription for an opiate-based painkiller and begin to use the numbing effects of these painkillers, not for pain but for psychological reasons -- to shut out reality. Stimulants like Ritalin can treat ADHD or can be abused to enable students to stay awake for a test or for adults to work 24-hour shifts. There are instances of individuals 'faking' pain to obtain drugs or buying drugs with legitimate uses off of the streets. These examples highlight the tenuous relationship between legitimate and illegitimate drug use. Clearly, some drugs seem to have few medical applications and can be classified as almost entirely negative in their effects, such as cocaine and heroin. However, many other drugs have both palliative and abusive potential, including opiate-based painkillers and marijuana. This suggests that the way drugs are used must be considered when evaluating whether drug use is 'wrong.'

Such examples also highlight the question of what constitutes an 'addictive' personality. Some drugs because of their chemical makeup pose a higher risk for physical addiction -- oxycontin is a much more addictive painkiller than aspirin, for example. But not every person who gets prescribed Percocet when recovering from wisdom tooth surgery become addicted to the drug, just like not every person becomes an alcoholic who drinks the socially acceptable drug of alcohol. There is a biological and psychological predisposition to addiction in many individuals.

A final question to ask when evaluating drug use and abuse is its impact upon society. Abusing illegal drugs can give rise to crime and violence, even if they are used in an allegedly positive way to 'open up' and 'free' the mind. Even overusing antibiotics, and insisting upon taking them even though one's disease is likely caused by a virus can cause a rise of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and can impact general human health. However, refusing to take certain medical treatments, such as refusing to vaccinate one's child, can have negative social fallout, as can be seen in the increase of diseases that were once thought to be eradicated, such as mumps and measles. An untreated mental illness can have a profoundly deleterious effect for the sufferer and his or her family.

When antidepressants became popular during the 1990s, some questions were raised regarding the morality of taking them, as it was said that this could fundamentally change the personality, and even ran the risk of eradicating art and higher-level thinking, given how much despair had influenced great artists and philosophy. The imperfect effects of antidepressants, which some studies indicate are not nearly as effective as once thought, have silenced such criticisms. But according to David Karp, who took such medications and believes he must take them for the rest of his life to remain 'normal': "In contrast to other medications ... psychotropic drugs ... act on -- and perhaps even create-people's consciousness and, therefore, have profound effects on the nature of their identities" (Karp 2006: 12). Karp argues that the false sense that body is different than mind causes people to stigmatize the use of antidepressants more than other medications.

While this may be true, profound questions have arisen regarding the efficacy of treating mild depression with medication. According to Antonuccio (et al. 1999), the fact that so many of the studies proving the value of antidepressants were industry-funded research, combined with conclusive evidence of side effects and withdrawal symptoms, and inconclusive evidence about the actual impact of the drugs on the individual's state of health argues for caution when prescribing antidepressants even adult patients (Antonuccio 1999: 68).

While drugs may be necessary to treat some psychological illnesses, such as bipolarity and schizophrenia, given the severity of these illnesses (in contrast to mild depression) it is important to remember that these drugs have even more serious side effects than those chronicled by Karp in his book on depression. Despite side effects and the potential for addiction, it is difficult to wish for a world without any drug use at all. The argument that drugs such as lithium (used to treat bipolar illness) do not provide a cure could also be posed for drugs such as insulin, which many diabetics require to live a normal life.