For Essays Guru

Description

Substance use is one of the major causes of violent criminal behaviors in United States. In as much as cases of violence stemming from drugs use are overlooked, violent behavior is linked to drugs and alcohol use in almost three-fourths of the incidences of violence. In as much as violence and substance abuse form components of a lifestyle that entails antisocial and delinquent traits, in many situations the violent behavior actually arises prior to the substance use. The drug use is just part of a risky and dangerous lifestyle. While the abuse of drugs does not broadly lead youths and adults to become engaged in violence, those violent individuals who utilize illegal drugs tend to take part in violent behavior more frequently and to go on with violence much longer than those violent people who do not utilize drugs. This suggests the existence of a strong correlation between substance and alcohol abuse and violent criminal behaviors (Mire & Roberson, 2011).

The alcohol-drug-abuse nexus packages itself in various distinctly different facets. This suggests that alcohol and other substances of abuse may act on the brain mechanisms that lead to a high-risk individual to participate in aggressive and violent behavior (Soyka, 2000). People with costly heroin or cocaine habits may commit violent criminal activities with the purpose of securing the resources for further drug purchases. Narcotic drug dealers, except the alcohol vendors, practice their trades within a violent manner. Alcohol, narcotics, hallucinogens, and psychomotor stimulants differ significantly from each other and in the manner that they are related to dissimilar kinds of violent and aggressive behavior. Generalizations concerning the relationships between drugs and alcohol use, and violence can be made to look complex by the many direct and indirect-levels of interactions. They range from drugs activating aggressions-specific brain mechanisms, to drugs acting as licensure for violent and aggressive behavior. In addition, they may take the form of drugs as the commodities within an illegal distribution system that depends upon violent enforcement strategies, as well as violent behaviors that represent one of the means through which a drug habit is maintained (Reiss, 1994).

The consistently overburdening alcohol-violence linkage, coupled with the rising outbreaks of ‘crack’ cocaine and ice methamphetamine epidemics in the country, offers dramatic cases of serious and complicated public health and legal problems that require redress within a careful and comprehensive way (Soyka, 2000). The systematic proofs for alcohol and other drugs of abuse that act on aggression-specific brain mechanisms, stem majorly from researches in animals, though a few neuroendocrine and other neurochemicsl and neurophysiologic measures have been obtained in human beings. Information from surveys in animals reflect the primary methods of investigating empirically the proximal and distal causes of aggressive traits, while research in humans most frequently seek to deduce causative link mainly by correlating the incidences of violent and aggressive traits with previous alcohol intake or abuse of other drugs (Reiss, 1994).

Etiology theories related to drug use as a violent criminal behavior

Criminal Personality Theory of Yochelson and Samenow

One of the earliest explanations of alcohol and substance abuse as a violent criminal behavior was previously heralded as a groundbreaking but later fell out of support is Samuel Yochelson and Stanton Samenow’s theory of criminal personality (Walters, 2006). To them, all criminal behaviors, including rape and other forms of violence stemmed from a combination of thinking errors and underlying fears. The two theorists postulated a large number of distortions in reasoning, such as the idea that the criminal is afraid of being lowered to nothing. In order to protect themselves from sinking into an unbearable sense of worthlessness, the criminal applies most of such thinking distortions of self-protection (Guarino-Ghezzi & Treviño, 2010). For instance, criminal pride represents the unrealistic thoughts that an individual is superior to others. This thought is so strong that it is not responsive to input from others. One case of criminal pride is the heightened feeling of masculinity, desirability, and sexual prowess. This means that the challenges to the person’s manhood may lead to defensive actions of taking alcohol and engaging in physical aggression.

Yochelson and Samenow’s concepts are related to those championed by Bumester, Smart and Boden, expressed in their theory of threatened egotism (Walters, 2006). In this theory, they argue that people whose high self-esteem is founded on real accomplishments, like academic achievements and legitimate success, are less likely to react violently when their sense of self-esteem is challenged or questioned by others. In this regard, when an educated, successful, rich, or good-looking individual approaches seeks friends, but the friends challenge him or his self-worth, the person is less likely to react negatively by forcing themselves to take alcohol, since he knows that the allegations are not real (Guarino-Ghezzi & Treviño, 2010). The reverse is true of an individual who feels as though his self-esteem is minimal and is unachieved in life. When his self-esteem is not based on real accomplishments, he tends to react aggressively to provocations. Thus, Yochelson and Samenow maintain that low self-esteem is related to violent behaviors such as drug abuse and physical assaults.

Eysenck’s Theory of Personality and Crime

One of the earliest considerably detailed psychological theories of crime was developed by Hans Eysenck, who held that understanding criminal behavior need understanding the interactions between environmental factors, the socialization of individual, and the makeup and qualities of the brain and nervous system (Corr, 2004). According to him, in as much as the genetic factors and general intelligence have an important role to play in defining an individual’s criminal conduct, three temperament variables should be noted. He asserts that such temperamental factors, namely extroversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism, are dictated by the excitability, sensitivity, and reactivity of the nervous system (Ireland & Ireland, 2011).

Eysenck maintains that criminal behaviors of all forms, including drug abuse, are highly related to extroversion and neuroticism, with each constituting a continuum. For instance, extroversion ranges from the extreme degrees of temperament that characterizes the person as outgoing, highly active, sensation-seeking, as well as socially engaged to the other extreme temperament that characterizes the person as reserved, socially tentative, quiet, and hesitant to keep feelings under check. To him, the neuroticism continuum arouses feelings that are intense and show a tendency to respond dramatically to stressful circumstances, to more stable feelings that are exhibited by the person who is poised, calm, and less reactive. Many people fall within the continuums. It was Eysenck’s argument that extremely neurotic, highly extroverted persons are most likely to engage in violent criminal behaviors like drug abuse. In as much as subsequent studies have backed Eysenck’s theory as it relates to personality in general, his ideas on crime have not been backed by research. Parts of his theory, however, have been embedded into other explanations of criminal traits (Ireland & Ireland, 2011).

Prevention and Treatment of Violent Drug Abuse behavior

Treatments of violent drug offenders mostly focus on behavioral interventions. In this regard, a broad range of factors are taken into account in assessing the risk of recidivism, even among individuals who lack the characteristics of violent sexual offenders. Usually, cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) has long proven to be one of the most effective methods of preventing and treating violent drug behaviors (Sakdalan & Gupta, 2014). The standardized CBT group treatment programs for violent drug offenders emphasize on correcting cognitive distortions, attitude change towards sexual offending and relapse prevention training (Hoffman et al. 2012). Usually, the dialectic behavior therapy (DBT), which is a form of CBT, is composed of principles from eastern philosophies developed by Marsha Linehan. The standard DBT program entails four components: group treatment, individual therapy, telephone coaching and the consultation group. Each part of the treatment process is meant to support client to develop and practice skills in a systematic way within the domains of mindfulness, distress, tolerance, emotional regulation and interpersonal effectiveness (Sakdalan & Gupta, 2014).

Patients who are highly reliant on cannabis can undergo cognitive behavior therapy and active escitalopram would show a greater immediate abstinence success rate in reaction to a three-month treatment program in comparison to the cognitive behavior therapy and placebo group (Weinstein et al. 2014). Therapeutic communities can also be applied as a form of cognitive behavior therapy. This strategy emphasizes on the reconciliation of the person and broad-based community programs as active components of treatment (Gaines & Kremling, 2013). Therapeutic Communities are especially well suited to address criminal justice inmates incarcerated for violence related to drugs. Apart from this method, assertive Community Treatment (ACT) programs can be employed. These programs integrate the behavioral treatment of other serious mental disorders like substance use disorder. Usually, ACT is differentiated from other management, outreach emphasis, a heavily individualized method, as well as an assertive strategy of maintaining contact with patients. Another strategy, DBT is meant particularly for lowering self-harm behaviors like self-mutilation and suicidal attempts, thoughts, and urges among violent drug users. It is one of the few treatment procedures that are considered to be effective for people who meet the criteria for substance use disorder (Gaines & Kremling, 2013).

References

Corr, P. J. (2004). Reinforcement sensitivity theory and personality. Neuroscience &

Bio behavioral Reviews, 28(3), 317-332.

Gaines, L. K., & Kremling, J. (2013). Drugs, crime, and justice: Contemporary perspectives.

Waveland Press.

Guarino-Ghezzi, S., & Treviño, A. J. (2010). Understanding Crime: A Multidisciplinary

Approach. London: Routledge.

Hofmann, S. G., Asnaani, A., Vonk, I. J., Sawyer, A. T., & Fang, A. (2012). The efficacy of

cognitive behavioral therapy: a review of meta-analyses. Cognitive therapy and research,

36(5), 427-440.

Ireland, J. L., & Ireland, C. A. (2011). Personality structure among prisoners: How valid is the

five-factor model, and can it offer support for Eysenck's theory of criminality?. Criminal

Behavior & Mental Health, 21(1), 35-50. doi:10.1002/cbm.770

Mire, S., & Roberson, C. (2011). The Study of Violent Crime: Its Correlates and Concerns. CRC

Press.

Sakdalan, J. A., & Gupta, R. (2014). Wise mind—risky mind: A reconceptualization of

dialectical behavior therapy concepts and its application to sexual offender treatment.

Journal of Sexual Aggression, 20(1), 110-120. doi:10.1080/13552600.2012.724457

Soyka, M. (2000). Substance misuse, psychiatric disorder and violent and disturbed behavior.

The British Journal of Psychiatry, 176(4), 345-350.

Walters, G. D. (2006). Appraising, researching and conceptualizing criminal thinking: A

personal view. Criminal Behavior and Mental Health, 16(2), 87-99.

Weinstein, A. M., Miller, H., Bluvstein, I., Rapoport, E., Schreiber, S., Bar-Hamburger, R., &

Bloch, M. (2014). Treatment of cannabis dependence using escitalopram in combination

with cognitive-behavior therapy: a double-blind placebo-controlled study. American

Journal of Drug & Alcohol Abuse, 40(1), 16-22. doi:10.3109/00952990.2013.819362