(Classmate Venny)
The models I chose for my Benchmark analysis were the Moral Models, Psychological Models, Developmental Models, and Biological Models. Each of these models represents an aspect of human function which I find fascinating and have room for interpretation. I am always fascinated by the human mind and what makes one do the things they do. The models touch on aspects of the human makeup of mind, body, and soul which I believe influence all our tendencies and which also reflect, in totality, Imago Dei the image of God (Neff & McMinn, 2020).
Moral Models (MM):
This model’s core concept states that one has control over one being to stop drinking and needs to seek God to stop substance abuse (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020). This is a belief I have ascribed to for a very long time and currently struggle with softening. My worldview is one of zero tolerance when it comes to substance abuse, especially anyone who drives under the influence. However, my biblical perspective is the belief to love and meet people where they are, and I know that the peace they seek is found only in Christ. This model helped me to process my hardline against substance abuse. From a cultural perspective, I believe this model would be difficult to implement. Some cultures, like the American Indian demographic view alcohol as a huge part of their culture (Manson, 2020), and it would be deemed as judgmental to impose a moral model toward a client.
Psychological Models (PM)
The PM purports to seek to understand the addict’s traumatic past as a precursor to the individual’s initial use of addictive substances. The model’s fundamental belief is that the individuals who begin using addictive substances are trying to self-medicate (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020). My worldview aligns with this view because I strongly believe that unresolved traumatic events can alter a person’s psychological development progress. My biblical perspective also supports this model as I believe that flies in the oil create a stench (The Spirit-Filled Bible, Ecclesiastes 10:1). This causes me to believe that the “flies” in our lives cause us to stumble but our mind is renewed in Christ (The Spirit-Filled Bible, Romans 12:2). This model can also be applied from a cultural perspective as it can look at individual’s circumstances from a person-centered approach as well as from a cultural perspective.
Developmental Models (DM)
The Developmental Models focus on how addictions disrupt the development of the addict (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020). I appreciated the model as I also personally believe that substance use and/or abuse can stagnate an individual’s development of hitting certain milestones. My worldview is that stagnation can cause one to feel inferior and incapacitated causing them to further delve into an addiction to fill the void. From a biblical perspective, I believe this model reflects God’s declaration that he knows every hair on our head and that He created us to prosper us and give us a future (The Spirit-Filled Bible, Jeremiah 29:11). Everyone has a purpose regardless of the lie addiction might tell us and we are destined to develop fully in God’s identity. Culturally, this might be difficult to implement because development standards may vary, and a counselor would have to be culturally competent to ascertain true development based on cultural influences.
Biological Models (BM)
Biological Models refer to the makeup of the human genome and the environment which can cause one to develop an addiction. An individual who is not genetically predisposed to addiction could be susceptible to it based on their environment (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020). As well, an individual pre-disposed to addiction but is not exposed to the influence may not gravitate toward said addictions (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020). It can also be reflected in the fact two children can live in the same home where addiction is present but only one succumbs to the environment. I loved this model as it showed, without bias, how different we all are. One person’s struggle may not be another person’s struggle. And, from a biblical perspective we are to “judge not, lest we be judged” (The Spirit-Filled Bible, Matthew 7:13). From a cultural perspective, I also believe this will be easy to adopt this approach because it would be easy to assess and become familiar with the family or origin and community of the client.
References
Capuzzi, D. & Stauffer, M. D., (2020). Foundations of Addictions Counseling. 4th Edition. Pearson Education.
Manson S.M. (2020). Alcohol-Induced Deaths Among American Indian and Alaska Native Individuals. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.21391
McMinn, Mark, R., Neff, Megan, A., 2020. Embodying Integration: A Fresh Look at Christianity in the Therapy Room. InterVarsity Press
The Spirit-Filled Bible. (2002). Published by: Thomas Nelson, Inc. (Original work published 1993).
(Classmate Shelby)
“Historically, addiction has been understood in various ways—a sin, a disease, a bad habit—each a reflection of a variety of social, cultural, and scientific conceptions” (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020, p. 7; Hammer et al., 2012, p. 713). Being that a human is composed of mind, body, and spirit, I am not surprised that addiction theorists have been striving to understand the complex world of addiction from different possible contexts. To deny one contextual area of understanding the complex realm of addiction, would be to deny a part of ourselves. Hence, to only try to gain understanding in one area, would be to neglect others, leaving us less than caring for our whole selves. Addiction is so complex, that there have been many contextual areas researched. Capuzzi & Stauffer (2020) elaborate on eight different models of addiction: the biological, developmental, disease, family, moral, psychological, public health, and sociocultural models. For the purpose of this paper, I will be elaborating specifically on the cognitive-behavioral model, the disease model, the genetic model, and then the moral model.
Cognitive-behavioral Model
The cognitive-behavioral model is one of the Psychological models of addiction. The psychological models address the process and substance-related addictions (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020). More specifically, the cognitive-behavioral model approach explores the primary causes of addiction through the behavioral and cognitive motivations and reinforcements. Those afflicted with drug use or process addictions are seeking experiences such as escaping boredom, creativity or performance enhancements, mood alterations, religious insights, self-explorations, sensory stimulation, or pleasure-seeking endeavors (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020).
An example under the cognitive-behavioral addiction model would be an internet addiction. When an individual utilizes the internet excessively, one goes through a process of negative reinforcement, which is an uncomfortable feeling due to the problems they will be facing. However, an individual will also experience positive reinforcement because while in the midst of utilizing the internet, their negative emotions and loneliness (or boredom) subsides. For those exhibiting pathologic internet gaming behaviors, there is some level of gratification gained, which provides a positive reinforcement perpetuating continual and excessive usage of internet gaming (Kurniasanti et al., 2019).
There are two passages that I can relate to when contemplating the cognitive-behavioral model of addiction: Romans 7:19: “For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do” and Romans 12:2: “And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God” (King James Bible Version [KJV], 1998). This can be accomplished if one were to apply this scripture: 2 Timothy 2:15: “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (King James Bible Version [KJV], 1998).
Disease Model
According to Barnett et al. (2018), the modern disease model of addiction (DMA) was proposed back in the early 17th century when Stuart clergymen in England endeavored to advance the notion that habitual drunkenness constituted a disease. Addiction is not like many other diseases or clinical issues in that it is considered to be both symptom and disease (Hawkins & Clinton, 2015). The disease model of addiction (DMA) aligns with the medical model which proposes that addiction is an inherited disease which chemically alters the biological body whereas the individual is permanently altered at a genetic level (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020). Proposers of the disease model will often compare addiction to type 2 diabetes mellitus. With one afflicted with diabetes, the behavioral component would be the ingestion of a high in sugar diet. With those afflicted with addiction, it is one’s drug of choice (Lembke, 2018). In this disease model, addiction is considered a primary disease and not secondary to another condition (Barnett et al., 2018).
The disease model stands in contrast to moral failings or psychological reinforcements (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020). In the DMA, an individual is neither responsible for problems nor solutions stemming from their disease and require ongoing treatment by a medical professional. Potential positive impacts of the DMA with regards to client compliance could be: reduced stigma and guilt for those afflicted with addiction; increased insight into one’s condition from the perspective of the client; and possibly an increase in those seeking treatment (Barnett et al., 2018). When I contemplate about diseases and think about scripture, I am reminded of Psalms 103:2-3: “Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits: Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases” (King James Bible Version [KJV], 1998)
Genetic Model
With the genetic model, it is proposed that those suffering from addictions are inherently predisposed in developing an addiction (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020). Akin to the DMA, disease terminology is utilized when addressing addictions and treatment is often delegated to the oversight of physicians, nurses, or other medical personnel. With regards to alcohol use disorder, its statistical affiliation to genetics is very strong. Research has demonstrated that children of alcoholics can be seven times more likely to be addicted to alcohol than the children whose parents are not alcoholic. There is some research indicative of an impaired production of enzymes produced within the body. There is other evidence that alludes to an inheritance of genetic traits resulting in a vitamin deficiency of vitamin B complex. Supposedly, this deficiency leads to alcohol cravings along with other cellular and metabolic changes (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020).
When trying to understand genetics, one needs to remember that genetic risks is calculated as probabilistic and it is not considered deterministic (Heilig et al., 2021). In the specific area of addiction genetics, the genetic risks do contribute to a vast consistent probability that shifts towards one’s maladaptive behaviors. Through previous research, there have been a large number of alleles found responsible for being involved in a genetic predisposition to the disease of addiction. These alleles could possibly predict one’s risk to addiction (Heilig et al., 2021). Hence, genetic research in addictions has great potential, but it is very complex in nature (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020).
Moral Model
The moral model of addiction was dominant prior to when the DMA model was popular (Barnett et al., 2018). It is premised on the beliefs of what is right or wrong and what is acceptable or unacceptable (Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2020). Promoters of this model propose that those suffering with addiction are individuals who are irresponsible and impulsive engaging in reckless or risky behaviors because of their weak morality. The sinfulness of human nature is the central culprit for this model of addiction. Within this model, the addicted individual is perceived as choosing to inflict suffering on oneself and family members. Hence, they are justifiably held accountable for their own behaviors or actions. Since the addictive behavior is a choice, the individual should justifiably be punished. Punishment is the preferred antidote instead of offering help or medical care/treatment (Lassiter & Culbreth, 2018). A strength of this model is that it is straightforward and clear with a simple and clear remedy. Addiction is not viewed as a complex issue, rather it is simply a sinful or immoral issue.
An example of the moral model could be the addiction of pornography or gambling. In this case, the individual is merely choosing to view pornography or engage in gambling. It is considered a morally wrong choice, or a sinful behavior and the individual merely needs to address them if he/she is willing to address them. Scripturally, when contemplating the moral model of addiction, I think of Romans 8:23: “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; James 1:14: “But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed”; and 1 Corinthians 10:13: “There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it” (King James Bible Version [KJV], 1998).
References
Barnett, A., Hall, W., Fry, C., Dilkes-Frayne, E., & Carter, A. (2018). Drug and alcohol treatment providers’ views about the disease
model of addiction and its impact on clinical practice: A systematic review. Drug and Alcohol Review., 37(6), 697–720.
https://doi.org/10.1111/dar.12632 Links to an external site..
Bisen, S. & Deshpande, Y. (2018). Understanding internet addiction: a comprehensive review. [Overview of internet addiction] The
Mental Health Review, 23(3), 165-184. https://doi.org/10.1108/MHRJ-07-2017-0023 Links to an external site..
Capuzzi, D. & Stauffer, M. (2020). Foundations of Addictions Counseling (4th ed.). Pearson. da Silveira, P., Casela, A., Monteiro, E.,
Ferreira, G., de Freitas, J., Machado, N., Noto, A., & Ronzani, T. (2018). Psychosocial understanding of self-stigma among
people who seek treatment for drug addiction. Stigma and Health., 3(1), 42–52. https://doi.org/10.1037/sah0000069 Links to an external site..
Hammer, R., Dingel, M., Ostergren, J., Nowakowski, K., & Koenig, B. (2012). The experience of addiction as told by the addicted:
Incorporating biological understandings into self-story. Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, 36(4), 712–734.
Hawkins, R. and Clinton, T. (2015) The New Christian Counselor. Harvest House Publishers.
Heilig, M., MacKillop, J., Martinez, D., Jürgen, R., Lorenzo, L., & Vanderschuren Louk, J. (2021). Addiction as a brain disease revised:
why it still matters, and the need for consilience. Neuropsychopharmacology, 46(10), 1715-1723. https://doi-org.ezproxy.
liberty.edu/10.1038/s41386-020-00950-y.
Kurniasanti, K., Assandi, P., Ismail, R., Nasrun, M., & Wiguna, T. (2019). Internet addiction: a new addiction? Medical Journal of
Indonesia., 28(1), 82–91. https://doi.org/10.13181/mji.v28i1.2752 Links to an external site..
Lassiter, P. & Culbreth, J. (2018). Theory and practice of addiction counseling. SAGE.
https://uk.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-assets/81662_book_item_81662.pdf Links to an external site..
Lembke, A. (2018). Why addiction should be considered a disease. The Judges’ Journal, 57, 4.
Maier, J. (2021). Addiction is a disability, and it matters. Neuroethics., 14(3), 467–477.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12152-021-09466- Links to an external site.8 Links to an external site..
National Institute on Drug Abuse. (2019). Genetics and epigenetics of addiction: Drug facts. NIDA. Links to an external site.
https://nida.nih.gov/publications/drugfacts/genetics-epigenetics-addiction.
The Bible. Authorized King James Version, Oxford UP, 1998.