Article Analysis Preventing and Reducing Alcohol and Other Drug Use among High Risk Youths

Analysis Paper of the Article "Preventing and Reducing Alcohol and Other Drug Use among High-Risk Youths by Increasing Family Resilience"

In the article "Preventing and Reducing Alcohol and Other Drug Use among High-Risk Youths by Increasing Family Resilience," Johnson et al. (1998) discuss the interventions contributing to reducing alcohol and drug usage among youths. The authors argue that the most fundamental approach is to enhance family resilience. The effects of the community-based intervention are evident among youths between 12 and 14 who form the high-risk cluster. The family resilience initiative is among the five pillars recognized by the Center for Substance Abuse Prevention (CSAP) as effective ways of countering alcohol and usage of other drugs. The article explains that community-based programs positively impact family resilience. Besides, such interventions resulted in desirable moderating outcomes for the onset of drug and alcohol usage among youths (p. 297).

Family factors have a significant contribution to defining theories used in clinical practice. Johnson et al. (1998, pp. 297-298) resilience factors are primary moderators and mediators of youths' exposure to alcohol and drug (AOD) and influence prevention programs. However, the program theory has not attracted enough attention to justify the effects. Thus, by testing their events, the article shares the expectations of such prevention programs. The first expectation is the ability of the program to enhance family understanding of AOD, enlightening families about management skills and mentorship. Besides, improving family bonds encourages the community to participate in countering AOD (p. 298). The article discusses the effects of the resilience factors on families, individuals, and the church community to test if training and early interventions strengthen family resilience among parents and test the sustainability of such effects. The program enhances resilience among youths and the sustainability of the positive effects. Besides, the program leads to a reduction in AOD after increasing family resilience. The interventions are attained through information sharing, social competencies, affective education, and alternatives (pp. 298-299). Educations programs focus on training the youths on defense tactics against compromised environmental conditions that expose them to risk factors of AOD. It also integrates training the youths and parents on communication skills to enhance support and collaborative engagement to counter AOD (p. 299). The researchers in this article tested these effects by collecting data from diverse geographical points and participants. Data collection examined in the article was through interviewing youths and parents. The church was a blocking variable, serving as a control attribute for community disparities (p. 301).

The result revealed some gains when parents communicated with the youths but not verifiable for youths communicating with parents, which resonated with the arguments about beliefs and knowledge. That is, there is an improvement in family management practices by parents to counter AOD. A similar effect was realized among the church community, but the effect was not significantly direct as that of the parents-youths interaction. However, the gains were more significant in responding to family and individual programs. Youths who engaged in help-seeking initiatives with friends and parents recorded reduced cases of AOD and associated behavior. However, the study revealed that prevention programs have little effect on family management interventions because of the established rules governing family meetings. Families rarely meet to discuss AOD problems. Besides, their research did not register any positive influences of family involvement in the activities due to limited engagement time. However, there was increasing bonding among youths, parents, and communities (pp. 303-304).

The effects of prevention programs of AOD for short periods, primarily less than one-year, lack influence. Instead, they moderate the levels of family resilience, reducing AOD frequency. Besides, the bonding between fathers and youths increased due to enhanced family communication, where the youths became central players in initiating non-AOD rules. It is essential to note that while increasing bonding gave increased positive outcomes, improved positive communication of parents with their children did not give a corresponding reduction in alcohol prevalence. Over-communication could have resulted in some inadequacy (p. 304).

In the church-based interventions, the research recorded an overall enhancement in family resilience and a reduction in AOD among the high-risk youths. Parents registered improved beliefs and knowledge hence a positive contribution to social work (p. 305). The prevention program resulted in reduced alcohol usage among parents, which directly enhanced the bond with the youths, hence moderation in AOD. Thus, the research found that churches as social systems are instrumental in initiating prevention efforts. Collaborative training of youths and parents, education, and enhancement of social skills result in more robust family resilience. Besides, early interventions through parent-youth training and follow-up contribute to improved resilience and suppress AOD onset and its frequency among high-risk youths. More reliable results can be derived by studying multiple communities in urban areas. Thus, church-based community programs have strong effects on preventing AOD among youths. It also delays AOD onset and frequency, reinforcing the program theory's validity (p. 306).

A closer analysis of the program theory and its association with advanced clinical practice theory depicts close interdependency. These effects go beyond AOD. High-risk youths, particularly adolescent girls, are lured into negative behaviors and commercialized sex through similar analogies. Ijadi-Maghsoodi et al. (2016, pp. 108-109) reveal that vulnerable youths are the central focus of human traffickers because they lack the appropriate interventions to minimize AOD. This resonates with the article's main theme in this analysis, where the community, church, and parents fail to embrace appropriate interventions to mitigate AOD. Hence, nursing practice exhibits its duality in addressing AOD through understanding the social platforms that integrate interventions geared toward correcting AOD among high-risk youths. According to Koutakis et al. (2008, pp. 1629-1632), youths struggling with AOD form a significant part of society. The authors add that interventions through parents and the community have proved to be practical approaches to countering the behavior. In the article under analysis, similar arguments are a primary way to reduce AOD.

In the arguments about the effectiveness of church and community-based programs in countering AOD, it is essential to recognize the players in the church environment. The community integrates parents, youths, and religious leaders, implying that the collaboration of the three parties is indispensable. The interventions initiated in the community-based programs should be reinforced in the families.

In summary, the research documented by Johnson et al. demonstrates the significance of community-based interventions in reversing the growing trend of AOD among high-risk youths between 12 and 14. While communication in the family environment plays a crucial role in instilling positive values to counter AOD, reinforcing family bonds is a more assertive approach to initiating positive interventions. More specifically, enhancing interventions with fathers whose contribution to the lives of the high-risk youths is demonstrated as minimal compared to the mothers. These bonds become central in realizing the fundamental goals of community-based programs where the church engages in education and training sessions for parents and their youths to develop beliefs and knowledge essential in correcting AOD. The benefits begin by witnessing moderation in alcohol usage in the first year. Long-term benefits become significant after consistent interventions through the collaboration of youths and their parents. Non-AOD rules developed through the involvement of the youths also contribute to the enhancement of prevention mechanisms hence justifying the role of program theory in clinical practice.