Recovery capital and collaborative theatre making: how actors in recovery from substance addiction value their participation in addiction prevention plays

Author(s):  
Dani Snyder-Young ◽  
Ashley Houston ◽  
Ana Bess Moyer Bell ◽  
Andy Short ◽  
Alisa Lincoln
2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 209-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Belle Gavriel-Fried ◽  
Tania Moretta ◽  
Marc N. Potenza

Human Ecology ◽  
2017 ◽  
pp. 19-24
Author(s):  
A. A. Eremeeva ◽  
A. G. Soloviev ◽  
I. A. Novikova ◽  
V. V. Nikulichev

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 293-314
Author(s):  
Dongil Kim ◽  
Changmin Keum ◽  
Al Tteu Ri Park ◽  
Seungho Lee

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Barnes-Ceeney ◽  
Lior Gideon ◽  
Laurie Leitch ◽  
Kento Yasuhara
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Markus Heilig ◽  
James MacKillop ◽  
Diana Martinez ◽  
Jürgen Rehm ◽  
Lorenzo Leggio ◽  
...  

AbstractThe view that substance addiction is a brain disease, although widely accepted in the neuroscience community, has become subject to acerbic criticism in recent years. These criticisms state that the brain disease view is deterministic, fails to account for heterogeneity in remission and recovery, places too much emphasis on a compulsive dimension of addiction, and that a specific neural signature of addiction has not been identified. We acknowledge that some of these criticisms have merit, but assert that the foundational premise that addiction has a neurobiological basis is fundamentally sound. We also emphasize that denying that addiction is a brain disease is a harmful standpoint since it contributes to reducing access to healthcare and treatment, the consequences of which are catastrophic. Here, we therefore address these criticisms, and in doing so provide a contemporary update of the brain disease view of addiction. We provide arguments to support this view, discuss why apparently spontaneous remission does not negate it, and how seemingly compulsive behaviors can co-exist with the sensitivity to alternative reinforcement in addiction. Most importantly, we argue that the brain is the biological substrate from which both addiction and the capacity for behavior change arise, arguing for an intensified neuroscientific study of recovery. More broadly, we propose that these disagreements reveal the need for multidisciplinary research that integrates neuroscientific, behavioral, clinical, and sociocultural perspectives.


2012 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laith N AL-Eitan ◽  
Saied A Jaradat ◽  
Gary K Hulse ◽  
Guan K Tay

2010 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-44 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Lyons

By some estimates, more than half of prison inmates in America have a drug or alcohol problem (Mumola and Karberg 2006). Existing models of treatment for these individuals, both inside and outside prison, have typically focused on the individual addict. These interventions often neglect the users' families and communities, and view poverty and marginalization as tangential to recovery—which is seen instead purely as an individual, internal process. This perspective defines addiction as a brain disease, and emphasizes the need of recovering addicts to learn new skills and to take personal responsibility for their actions and lives (Committee on Addictions of the Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry, 2002). These models, though a marked improvement over the idea of drug addiction as a moral failing, place an over-riding emphasis on the individual at the expense of the economic and social context.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document