Moral Model Of Addiction

The Moral Model of addiction suggests that the choice to use substances can be considered immoral conduct and that the addict is to blame for their poor choices. In this model, substance use is seen as bad and the user is ostracised or shunned (Hitzeroth & Kramer, 2010). Religious sectors of society often hold this view of addiction and they see it as a sin. The negative implications of this is that addicts are stigmatised, and no formal treatment is recommended. It treatment is offered, it is often in the form of punishment and manipulation to correct their immoral behaviour. The positive aspect of this model is that it does call for a return to family values which is acknowledged to be a protective factor against addiction and a strong

This implies that the user or addict is a criminal and using is a crime. There is no space for debate with the legal model, it is all or nothing approach. As using is a crime, the user or addict should be punished by the law and sent to prison. Relapse is seen as a criminal offence and no treatment is offered as the addict needs to be punished and then learn to abide by the law (Hitzeroth & Kramer, 2010). While the legal model might deter the initial use of substances, it does nothing to help the addict or the problems which they might be facing that have led them to the initial use of illegal substances.

Not all proponents of the choice theory are as dogmatic as the moral and legal models. In a slightly more moderate opinion, Satsel & Lilienfeild (2014) point out a need to acknowledge the limits that the Medical Model has with regards to recovery. They point out that, in order to fully understand addiction, we need to have a broad perspective of the problems the addicted person has. Their conclusion is, “Thankfully, addicts can choose to recover and are not helpless victims of their own hijacked brains.” (Satsel & Lilienfield,

Ross (2012) cites an example of this effect where he explains how, at any point in time, we can choose immediate relaxation or the effort of working towards long-term welfare. In other words, it takes more effort to work towards future goals with no instance reward, and the immediate gratification of relaxing, often induced by substance use, is a more attractive choice. He explains further that the anxiety, caused by this behavioural choice, increases the more the person procrastinates. As such they fall into what he calls “behaviour traps” of compulsive substance