Getting a Grip: From Prohibition to Harm Reduction
The following article was written by essay online store
Prohibition and harm reduction are two of the most popular strategies to solve alcohol and drugs problems. Even though the former is more radical, the latter can be more effective if used properly. In American history, alcohol prohibition had its results, but harm reduction became a more appropriate strategy for modern use. Nowadays, the problems of alcohol and drugs are still relevant so governments should decide the proper solution. Despite their differences and similarities, both approaches can be used, but the success of their application depends on people and their particular situations.
Prohibition in the USA
One of the most famous alcohol prohibition campaigns was introduced in the USA in the 20th century (1920-1933). Before becoming a law, for many years, prohibition was used in the USA (Gitlin, 2010). Purposeful anti-alcohol propaganda, which was performed by public figures, church, politicians, and doctors, gradually began to give required results. In 1914, 12 states, which introduced a ban on the production of alcoholic beverages, received the name of ‘dry’ states. All other administrative entities fell into the category of ‘wet’. In 1916, 26 states became ‘dry’ as well. They began to introduce various restrictions on the consumption and production of alcohol, but such a state of affairs was still far from prohibition. Finally, Woodrow Wilson, the 28th President of the United States, found the courage to oppose any restriction on alcohol. Instead of fighting alcohol consumption, it is better to instill a culture of drinking in people and to increase their material level.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Prohibition
Some advantages and disadvantages of this approach should be named. First, this strategy can give a short-time result that still depends on people. If one understands the affects and damage, caused by alcohol, they will want to stop drinking altogether. For example, during prohibition in the USA, distilleries and breweries were closed in the entire country for a while. At first, the alcohol-related mortality rate decreased as well as crime rates, but all these changes occurred at the beginning of the Prohibition. The number of fires sharply dropped as well. However, the practice under discussion has many serious disadvantages. For example, prohibition seems to be not quite effective if one wants to keep drinking. This strategy cannot be called successful if the result depends mostly on one’s reasoning. Thus, for example, for this reason, bootleggers’ income during the prohibition in the USA was rather high. Female alcoholism increased as well since at the time, women drank alcohol regularly (Slavicek, 2008). While light alcoholic beverages were popular in the past, bootleggers started smuggling mostly whiskey and other strong alcoholic beverages to the USA. Their price was higher than that of light white and red wines. Therefore, bootleggers received more income.
Harm Reduction
Harm reduction is a set of practices, programs, and strategies that aim at reducing the harm, associated with the use of psychoactive substances among people who consume them. In comparison with prohibition, harm reduction is a prolonged process, but potentially, it is more effective. Corresponding programs focus on the prevention of harm instead of forbidding people to drink alcohol, for example. These programs also provide access to various types of drug and alcohol treatment, if such a request comes from the client. Harm reduction is neither a trend nor a universal approach, designed to replace all other strategies. This method takes its rightful place among the main strategies for reducing the demand for drugs and their consumption. Thus, harm reduction includes a whole range of approaches, aimed at reducing the serious consequences of drug addiction for individuals and society as a whole, without requiring the mandatory cessation or reduction of drug use. However, the desire to abandon such an addiction completely is fully combined with the goals of harm reduction. This strategy recognizes that there does not exist some single method that can definitively solve the problem and that the spread of HIV is a more urgent and serious threat of a global scale than drug addiction and alcoholism themselves. Without the intervention of harm reduction programs, the potential spread of HIV throughout the world among drug users, and from them - to the general population, could become devastating.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Harm Reduction
Harm reduction seems to be a more effective strategy due to its variety of steps and methods, including live chats, individual and group trainings. This method gives an explanation and reasoning for alcoholics to abandon their addiction. In this case, the treatment is more gradual. At the same time, the disadvantages of harm reduction include its softness as a strategy and the fact that achieving results is a long-time process. While programs also depend on people, but such a dependence is not as high as in prohibition. If people do not think that alcohol is a problem, they will do nothing to solve it. Alcoholics can just not perceive the information they receive. In fact, harm reduction strategy does not solve the problem completely since it only makes people drink less. Therefore, there is no guarantee that all patients will follow the rules and control themselves in alcohol consumption.
Conclusion
Both discussed strategies are not ideal. Thus, prohibition lacks individual, structural approach, while harm reduction is a bit soft and extended in time. Moreover, the latter method does not solve the problem completely, but this approach is potentially more effective. The example from American history has showed possible results of implementing prohibition laws. However, there is one major similarity of prohibition and harm reduction as both strategies depend on people, and without their willingness, there will be no positive solution of alcohol problem as there are no ideal methods for everybody.
Prohibition and harm reduction are two of the most popular strategies to solve alcohol and drugs problems. Even though the former is more radical, the latter can be more effective if used properly. In American history, alcohol prohibition had its results, but harm reduction became a more appropriate strategy for modern use. Nowadays, the problems of alcohol and drugs are still relevant so governments should decide the proper solution. Despite their differences and similarities, both approaches can be used, but the success of their application depends on people and their particular situations.
Prohibition in the USA
One of the most famous alcohol prohibition campaigns was introduced in the USA in the 20th century (1920-1933). Before becoming a law, for many years, prohibition was used in the USA (Gitlin, 2010). Purposeful anti-alcohol propaganda, which was performed by public figures, church, politicians, and doctors, gradually began to give required results. In 1914, 12 states, which introduced a ban on the production of alcoholic beverages, received the name of ‘dry’ states. All other administrative entities fell into the category of ‘wet’. In 1916, 26 states became ‘dry’ as well. They began to introduce various restrictions on the consumption and production of alcohol, but such a state of affairs was still far from prohibition. Finally, Woodrow Wilson, the 28th President of the United States, found the courage to oppose any restriction on alcohol. Instead of fighting alcohol consumption, it is better to instill a culture of drinking in people and to increase their material level.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Prohibition
Some advantages and disadvantages of this approach should be named. First, this strategy can give a short-time result that still depends on people. If one understands the affects and damage, caused by alcohol, they will want to stop drinking altogether. For example, during prohibition in the USA, distilleries and breweries were closed in the entire country for a while. At first, the alcohol-related mortality rate decreased as well as crime rates, but all these changes occurred at the beginning of the Prohibition. The number of fires sharply dropped as well. However, the practice under discussion has many serious disadvantages. For example, prohibition seems to be not quite effective if one wants to keep drinking. This strategy cannot be called successful if the result depends mostly on one’s reasoning. Thus, for example, for this reason, bootleggers’ income during the prohibition in the USA was rather high. Female alcoholism increased as well since at the time, women drank alcohol regularly (Slavicek, 2008). While light alcoholic beverages were popular in the past, bootleggers started smuggling mostly whiskey and other strong alcoholic beverages to the USA. Their price was higher than that of light white and red wines. Therefore, bootleggers received more income.
Harm Reduction
Harm reduction is a set of practices, programs, and strategies that aim at reducing the harm, associated with the use of psychoactive substances among people who consume them. In comparison with prohibition, harm reduction is a prolonged process, but potentially, it is more effective. Corresponding programs focus on the prevention of harm instead of forbidding people to drink alcohol, for example. These programs also provide access to various types of drug and alcohol treatment, if such a request comes from the client. Harm reduction is neither a trend nor a universal approach, designed to replace all other strategies. This method takes its rightful place among the main strategies for reducing the demand for drugs and their consumption. Thus, harm reduction includes a whole range of approaches, aimed at reducing the serious consequences of drug addiction for individuals and society as a whole, without requiring the mandatory cessation or reduction of drug use. However, the desire to abandon such an addiction completely is fully combined with the goals of harm reduction. This strategy recognizes that there does not exist some single method that can definitively solve the problem and that the spread of HIV is a more urgent and serious threat of a global scale than drug addiction and alcoholism themselves. Without the intervention of harm reduction programs, the potential spread of HIV throughout the world among drug users, and from them - to the general population, could become devastating.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Harm Reduction
Harm reduction seems to be a more effective strategy due to its variety of steps and methods, including live chats, individual and group trainings. This method gives an explanation and reasoning for alcoholics to abandon their addiction. In this case, the treatment is more gradual. At the same time, the disadvantages of harm reduction include its softness as a strategy and the fact that achieving results is a long-time process. While programs also depend on people, but such a dependence is not as high as in prohibition. If people do not think that alcohol is a problem, they will do nothing to solve it. Alcoholics can just not perceive the information they receive. In fact, harm reduction strategy does not solve the problem completely since it only makes people drink less. Therefore, there is no guarantee that all patients will follow the rules and control themselves in alcohol consumption.
Conclusion
Both discussed strategies are not ideal. Thus, prohibition lacks individual, structural approach, while harm reduction is a bit soft and extended in time. Moreover, the latter method does not solve the problem completely, but this approach is potentially more effective. The example from American history has showed possible results of implementing prohibition laws. However, there is one major similarity of prohibition and harm reduction as both strategies depend on people, and without their willingness, there will be no positive solution of alcohol problem as there are no ideal methods for everybody.
Go to Profile
Mark as Read