Sociological causes of drug use & abuse among college students: An Introduction
The college students, particularly those between the age-group of 18 and 24 are normally registered in colleges and universities. They are at increased risk for involving in risk drinking and other substance use than their non-college peers. These students have a tendency to involve in binge drinking and other drugs than other age-groups, whether or not they are registered in college. Normally, this predisposition arises because of:
- Developmental traits of puberty and maturity, consisting of ongoing brain maturity through in the early 20s and the progress towards greater freedom and independence
- Social and cultural standards of college life that encourage binge alcohol and substance use.
- Personality traits and family background also may play a role in the growth of critical alcohol and drug use.
The modern studies have seen much focus given to the several risks arising from heavy alcohol and drug consumption amongst college students. These well-recorded dangers consist of educational troubles, injuries, auto accidents and deaths, violence, high-risk sexual activities, and sexual persecution (O’Grady, Arria, Fitzelle, & Wish, 2008). In accordance with Yusko, Buckman, White, & Pandina (2008), the incidents of binge alcohol and tobacco consumption, and illegal drug climaxed between the age group of 18-25. Moreover, the alcohol and other drug consumption symbolize the leading cause of preventable mortality and injury amongst American college students from 18-24 years of age (McCabe, Hughes, Bostwick, & Boyd, 2005). Moreover, there has also been a special focus given to the non-medical consumption of prescribed drugs as a major public health concern.
So far, there have been only a few researches that have related to social control theory to American college students. A study was carried out by Zullig, Young, & Hussain (2010) who studied many university students to establish which factor explain better disparity in college students’ decisions to involve in potentially hazardous drinking. They noted that the social bonding factor was the more vital of the two analytical aspects for both males and females.
The Research Question
How would theorists understand the sociological causes of drug use and abuse among college students?
- Emile Durkheim,
- Karl Marx,
- George H. Mead, and
- Max Weber
The Context of College Student Drinking and Other Drug Use: A Literature Review
The college students’ traditional era inherits a practice of binge drinking. The western history, values, and even religious courses portray the images of college life as an environment in which the western world’s finest philosophers and intellectuals have performed self-destructively.
Alcohol Use
The people in the USA have usually used large amounts of alcohol (Abadinsky, 2004). About 33% Americans misuse or become addicted to alcohol at some point in their lifetimes and generally do not seek the treatment (Read, 2010).
In the USA, the rates of alcohol consumption amongst high school students have continued over 50% for many decades. In accordance with the Monitoring the Future Study, 40% of eighth grade students and 70% of high school seniors have used alcohol (Belendiuk, Molina, & Donovan, 2010). Besides, the yearly polls commonly show that nearly 30% of high school students report heavy drinking.
Youths are not the only ones that misuse alcohol. Its consumption has been a significant lifestyle of the American college students since the 18th century (Vander Ven, 2011). Women began enrolling college in the nineteenth century and quickly participated in the alcohol use that was a distinctive college culture (Vander Ven, 2011). In contrast to males, females faced more social checks by the school authorities (Vender Ven, 2011).
Modern environment concerns with alcohol and other drug consumption all over the society, particularly on college campuses, result somewhat from the supposed rise in the incidents of use by youths. At mid-century, one study showed that about 75% of college students had taken a drink (Straus & Bacon, 1953); soon thereafter, the alcohol consumption had increased to about 90% amongst high school graduates and 92% amongst the college students (Johnston, 1985). Besides, other studies show that those who see a remarkable rise in student use may be misguided. The data show variations in the consumption of any specific substance, whilst the number of students consuming any substance continued to be rather stable. What appears to be rising is not the number of consumers, however, the amount used by the binge drinkers.
The mainstream students consume alcohol in the high school, although there is a remarkable rise in the rate and amount of use when these students enroll in colleges (Wechsler, Kuh, & Davenport, 2009; White et al, 2006). This rise in alcohol use is related to with many troubles consisting of non-attendance of classes, poor grades, physical disputes, injuries, auto accidents and deaths, poor efficiency, sexual activities, and sexual victimization (O’Grady et al., 2008; Wechsler et al., 2009). Hence, the college officials rate alcohol misuse as the key problem in the campus.
Heavy drinking has usually been linked to college students. There is a good justification for this relationship. For instance, the percentage of heavy drinkers is highest in the age group of 18-20 years. As well, 90% of the alcohol consumption is done by underage drinkers (Naimi, Brewer, Mokdad, Denny, Serdula, & Marks, 2003). Heavy alcohol consumption amongst the drinkers is also is also a concern. In accordance with Newton (2010), people above the age of 25 are involved in 70% of all binge-drinking incidents.
In a research, Shinew and Parry (2005) noted that about 84% of their sample, of college students, found they were alcohol consumer. The usual days the students found drinking in a week was 2.5 and some students consumed alcohol on one occasion was 5.7 (Shinew & Parry, 2005). Bennett, Miller, and Woodall (1999) found that 80% of the students were current drinkers and more than 33% of students were heavy drinkers. Besides, the binge drinkers consumed 8 times the number of drinks each week, and had considerably more substance-related consequences, than students who did not indulge in binge drinking. The heavy consumption of alcohol also seems to be linked to the use of other unlawful drugs (O’Grady et al., 2008).
Drug Use
The most extensive form of antisocial behavior in the society is substance consumption. In accordance with a survey, daily substance consumption rose amongst 8th, 10th, and 12th grade students in the period 2009-2011 (Johnston, O’Malley, Bachman, & Schulenberg, 2011). Besides, the daily substance consumption by 12th grade students in 2011 was at its climax i.e. 6.6%, since the early 1980s (Johnston et al., 2011). The use of cocaine either continued the same level or reduced for all the other three graders (Johnston et al., 2011).
Youths were not the only ones to consume illegal drugs. Indeed, illicit substance consumption peaked between the age group of 18-25 (Yusko, et al., 2008). A survey of thousands of students in several universities in Canada found that 47% of the students found having consumed marijuana at some point in their lifetimes and about 10% noted to use an unlawful drug within the past 12 months (Shinew & Parry, 2005).
Theorists’ Views
How would theorist Emile Durkheim understand the sociological causes of drug use and abuse among college students?
Émile Durkheim, the noted social theorist stated that deviance is normal in the society. Moreover, it served many critical functions for the society. Durkheim stated that deviance explains social standards and improves conformity in the society. This takes place as the discovery and penalization of deviance notifies the people of the societal standards and strengthens the consequences of infringing them. For example, if the class was taking an examination and a student was apprehended for cheating, the rest of the class would be at once remind of the policies and penalties for cheating, hence there they would be less probable to cheat. A second aspect of deviance is that it reinforces the social ties amongst the people responding to the deviant activities.
A final purpose of deviance, according to Durkheim was that it can assist in bringing about a positive social change. Thought some of the greatest persons in the world history were considered the worst kind of deviants, though people honor them for their dedication and the sacrifice they made.
There is a limitation, nevertheless, to the soundness of Durkheim’s functionalist theory. Accordingly, if deviance is rife, it can endanger the social fabric of the society in at least two ways. First, it can shatter interpersonal relationships. Alcoholism wrecks many households. If somebody gets enraged and tries to kill everybody, then it will be hard to maintain a pleasant relationship. Second, deviance amongst the alcohol consumers can weaken trust. Thus, Durkheim’s theory of deviance is useful as it can bring about benefits if it takes place within certain limits.
Durkheim’s sociological theory fundamentally focused on ‘social facts’ with the major assumption of the domination of those essentials over individualistic consciousness and mindsets. Durkheim’s sociology dealt with strong social facts and the main focus of psychology is the variable, unbalanced personal mindset, the former field has better prospects to become an independent science (Durkheim, 1964: 30-31). Durkheim tried to validate that suicide and other social ills, which seemed a personal event is conditional on various shared facts. Hence, he tried to explain them regarding social base and state (Durkheim, 1956: 299).
For Durkheim, all the sociological events could attain various types in diverse cases, whilst still preserving their vital traits (Durkheim, 1964) the people can realize neutrality in their sociological inspection. In other words, though he applied the comparative approach for social examination (Durkheim, 1964), he argued that social incidents are not distinct however, extensive due to the neutrality of social details. Hence, the methods to recognize one social fact can be concerned with other facts.
Durkheim evaluated social data as entities, i.e. they are peripheral and limited to a person’s psychological mindset. As such, social entities, in fact do have independent qualities that are similar to those of objects of the natural environment (Westby, 1991). This implies that in Durkheimian theory, the social facts together with social principles explain the basis of the social issues at the ontological level. Hence, for Durkheim, the sociological studies are directly correlated to the society or social being itself. Durkheim’s approach, the externality of human attitudes is established by social controls which facilitates the sociologists to acquire knowledge of concrete things in the society.
Durkheim’s social theory establishes individualistic activities and approaches sociology as a naturalistic discipline on the ontological, as it differs from epistemological bases (Westby, 1991). According to Durkheim, the possibility of the constitution of social order out of chaotic individualistic desires like binge drinking and drug use is conditional on the dominance of society itself and social rules over the vague world of these individuals.
How would theorist Karl Marx understand the sociological causes of drug use and abuse among college students?
In accordance with contemporary Marxist theorists, the social ills in the society are caused by class difference intrinsic in a western capitalist system. A number of social evils, like substance and alcohol consumption, physical and mental illness, poor learning, achievements, and other crimes are associated with poverty.
Besides, creating a poor class of people, capitalism also supports "corporate violence", which may be explained as real harm meted out to the common people and the workforce because of decisions by business executives or managers. As well, the corporate violence may also be caused by corporate disregard, the quest for profits at any cost, and deliberate infringement of health, safety, and ecological laws. The profit-focused economy supports people who are otherwise good, humane, and honest intentionally contributes in the building and marketing of flawed brakes on jets, fuel tanks on auto, and contraceptive equipments. The profit motivation has also created people to sell faulty medical equipments, poisonous pesticides, and unhygienic foods to the developing countries.
Marxist theories also focus on the problems of alienation or incapability and worthlessness in people's lives. In the developed countries, the people normally have little authority or control over their social life, which promotes a sense of helplessness in their lives.
Alienation is generated not only in the society, but also in the educational institutions. The students have little power over their extra-curricular activities and often find their lives meaningless. They are beset with various harmful activities like binge drinking, smoking and substance abuse which impacts low educational achievement, violence, and suicide.
Marxist depictions of social problems mean that the solution lies in removing harmful activities as well as elimination of inequality amongst various classes of people as to form a classless society. The nature of work must also change to avoid alienation. Finally, stronger controls must be applied to corporations to ensure that corporate decisions and practices are based on safety rather than profit considerations.
How would theorist George H. Mead understand the sociological causes of drug use and abuse among college students?
George Herbert Mead teachings created the foundation for many modern theories in the fields of psychology and sociology. Mead applied the word “mind” to explain the human capability to systematize skill by means of explanation and projection. Both development and clinical psychologists have analyzed immature theorizing, showing that each person applies theories in daily life and that one’s theory system may be quite contrary to another’s.
George Mead's social theory is less related to the micro-level motivation on the deviant and more concerned with the macro-level procedure of discerning the condemned (Pfohl, 1994). In 1934, Mead explained the notion of self as created within the framework of social process. The self is the outcome of the mind's insight of social symbols and relationships. The self is present in certainty and is later internalized into the conscious. Moreover, the notion of moving the focus away from the deviant individual and seeking how social organization impacts the separation of those individuals deemed eccentric has a great impact.
How would theorist Max Weber understand the sociological causes of drug use and abuse among college students?
Max Weber's sociological studies generally focused on tension regarding individualistic freedom concerning ideas and needs about social regularity for instance alcohol and drug abuse amongst college students. It should be noted that the issue of how the social rule takes place from the disorder of indeterminacy of infinite personal needs and requirements is normally taken in hand at the personal level.
Weber tackled the issue of social regulation through the question of how the application of social regulation is feasible out of the chaos of personal uncertainty. Accordingly, Weber sought the fundamental rules and principles in this regard. In accordance with Weber, the social stability and the social rules are created at the individualistic awareness level as a result of the approaches in which social actors stress importance of their activities. Weber asserted that the real experimental sociological inquiry starts with the question: What rationales establish and cause the individual members and participants in this society to act in such a way that the community came into being initially and that it continued to exist? (Weber, 1968).
Weber suggested that the rationale behind regular activities is the implications which people give to their steps (Weber, 1968: 29). Moreover, Weber defined what he understood from step as the dynamic person linked a personal implication to his activity, whether it may be overt or covert, omission or compliance (Weber, 1968). In accordance to Weber, sociology is only related with the meaning-attributed-activity in the social order (Weber, 1968). For Weber, people offered significance not only for their own actions, however, also to deeds of other people in their mutual ties, since “the activity of each considered that of others (Weber, 1968). Weber considered the social regularity as the synchronization of the personal social activities and the implications they give to the deeds of other people. For Weber in a sociological framework for a country, a nation, a business, a household, or an army, or to analogous referred to a particular type of growth of real or potential social activities of individuals (Weber, 1968).
The individuals’ creation of implication of activities and social ties presents social life its regularity, or else, social actions would be unattainable. For Weber, these social regularities in social and personal levels combine in social activities. Thus, it can be seen that for Weber, ideas can assign a role in a social change.
In the contemporary world, Weber evaluated legal right as the decisive aspect in achieving human needs and desires, as this kind of right initiates the acknowledgement of universal values and the competent use of methods to attain the needed objectives and desires. As well, it helps the people to make decisions regarding the choice to realize desired goals through legitimate and legal authority (Weber, 1968: 212-20).
Max Weber tackled this issue at the individual awareness level, studying how people control their attitudes by offering meaning to their activities as well as of other people. Moreover, Weber believed that giving meaning to activities play a part in the legitimization the process of personal needs and desires like drinking and substance abuse.
Conclusions
This report delved into the social traits of the college students who are at increased risk for involving in risk drinking and other substance use. Normally, this tendency arises because of:
- Developmental traits of puberty and maturity, consisting of ongoing brain maturity through in the early 20s and the progress towards greater freedom and independence
- Social and cultural standards of college life that encourage binge alcohol and substance use.
- Personality traits and family background also may play a role in the growth of critical alcohol and drug use.
The modern studies have focused on the associated risks arising from heavy alcohol and drug consumption amongst college students. Various theorists like Emile Durkheim, Karl Marx, George H. Mead, and Max Weber have suggested the theories which might help in understanding the drinking and substance use amongst college students.
References
Abadinsky H. 2004. Drugs: An Introduction (5th Ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Belendiuk K. A., Molina, B. G., & Donovan, J. E. 2010. Concordance of Adolescent Reports of Friend Alcohol Use, Smoking, and Deviant Behavior as Predicted by Quality of Relationship and Demographic Variables. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 71, 253-257.
Durkheim E. 1956. Suicide, translated by J. A. Spaulding and G. Simpson, New York: the Free Press.
Durkheim E. 1964. The Rules of Sociological Method, translated from the French by S. S. Solovay and J. H. Mueller edited by George E. G. Catlin, New York, London, the Free Press.
Johnston L. D. 1985. The etiology and prevention of substance use: What can we learn from recent historical changes? In C. L. Jones and R.J. Battjes (Eds.), Etiology of Drug Abuse: Implications for Prevention (National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph 56). Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing Office.
Johnston L. D., O'Malley P. M., Bachman J. G., & Schulenberg J. E. 2011. Monitoring the Future national results on adolescent drug use: Overview of key findings, 2010. Ann Arbor: Institute for Social Research, The University of Michigan.
McCabe S. E., Hughes T. L., Bostwick W., & Boyd C. J. 2005. Assessment of Difference in Dimensions of Sexual Orientation: Implications for Substance Use Research in a College-Age Population. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 66, 620-629.
Mead G. H. 1934. Mind, self, and society from the standpoint of a social behaviorist. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Naimi T. S., Brewer R. D., Mokdad A., Denny C., Serdula M. K., & Marks J. S. 2003. Binge Drinking Among US Adults. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 289, 70-75.
O’Grady K. E., Arria A. M., Fitzelle D. M. B., & Wish E. D. 2008. Heavy Drinking and Polydrug Use Among College Students. The Journal of Drug Issues, 38, 445-465.
Pfohl S. 1994. Images of Deviance and Social Control: A Sociological History. 2nd Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Shinew K. J. & Parry D. C. 2005. Examining College Students’ Participation in the Leisure Pursuits of Drinking and Illegal Drug Use. The Journal of Leisure Research, 37, 364-386.
Straus R., & Bacon S. D. 1953. Drinking in college. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Vander Ven, T. 2011. Getting Wasted: Why College Students Drink Too Much and Party So Hard. New York, NY: New York University Press.
Weber M. 1968. Economy and Society: an Outline of Interpretative Sociology, edited by G. Roth and C. Wittick, translators: E. Fischoff (and others), New York: Bedminster Press.
Wechsler H., Kuh G., & Davenport A. E. 2009. Fraternities, Sororities and Binge Drinking: Results from a National Study of American Colleges. NASPA Journal, 46, 395-416.
Westby David L. 1991. The Growth of Sociological Theory: Human Nature, Knowledge, and Social Change, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
White H. R., McMorris B. J., Catalano R. F., Fleming C. B., Haggerty K. P., & Abbott R. D. 2006. Increases in Alcohol and Marijuana Use During the Transition Out of High School Into Emerging Adulthood: The Effects of Leaving Home, Going to College, and High School Protective Factors. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 67, 810-822.
Yusko D. A., Buckman J., White H. R., & Pandina R. J. 2008. Alcohol, Tobacco, Illicit Drugs, and Performance Enhancers: A Comparison of Use by College Student Athletes and Nonathletes. Journal of American College Health, 57, 281-289.
Zullig K. J., Young M., & Hussain M. 2010. Distinguishing between Positive and Negative Social Bonding in Problem Drinking among College Students. American Journal of Health Education, 41, 85-92.
