“We haven't Sliced Open anyone's Brain yet”: Neuroscience, Embodiment and the Governance of Addiction

Netherland, Julie

doi:10.1108/s1057-6290(2011)0000013011

Cited by 27 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In this previous work, we were interested in conceptualising the 'impact' of neuroscience information based on the public's unprompted accounts of addiction aetiology. Consistent with others' findings (Netherland, 2011;Pickersgill et al, 2011;Bröer and Heerings, 2013;O'Connor and Joffe, 2013), our interviewees saw the causes of addiction as multifactorial. We described participants' views as arising from various combinations of six causes that, in descending order of prevalence, were: 'character' (poor choices, lack of willpower and/or a weak or addictive personality); 'emotion-experience' (a drive for the 'thrill' or the 'buzz' and/or using drugs to escape or erase a traumatic past or obliterate the present); 'socialenvironment' (linked to certain forms of social dysfunction at various scales from the family to broader society and culture); 'rational-learning' (resulting from learned behaviour and knowledge); 'biologicalbody' (linked to genetic predispositions, the brain, an individual's biology and/or 'chemical imbalances'); and the addictive properties of the drugs themselves.…”

Section: Findings Neuroscience Information In Spontaneous Depictions supporting

confidence: 71%

What does ‘acceptance’ mean? Public reflections on the idea that addiction is a brain disease

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public responses to the dissemination of neuroscientific explanations of addiction and other mental disorders are an interesting sociocultural phenomenon. We investigated how 55 members of the Australian public deliberated on the idea that 'addiction is a brain disease'. Our findings point to the diverse ways in which the public understands and utilises this proposition. Interviewees readily accepted that drugs affect brain functioning but were ambivalent about whether to label addiction as a 'disease'. Contrary to the prediction of neuroscientific advocates and social science critics, acceptance of a neurobiological conception of addiction did not necessarily affect beliefs about addicted persons' responsibility for their addiction. We discuss the theoretical and applied implications of these findings. Theoretically, we examine the complexity surrounding how people adopt new knowledge and its role in reshaping ethical beliefs. We also discuss the implications of these findings for the ethics of communication of neuroscientific information to reduce stigma and enhance social support for the treatment of addicted individuals.

show abstract

Section: Findings Neuroscience Information In Spontaneous Depictions supporting

confidence: 71%

What does ‘acceptance’ mean? Public reflections on the idea that addiction is a brain disease

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As described in the methods, our approach was inductive in deriving thematic categories from our data. A recently published paper comparing neuroscience discourses with the beliefs of individuals in treatment for drug addiction in North America lends some support to the validity of our thematic categories [34]. Specifically, Netherland's article employed similar thematic categories of 'pleasure', 'rationality', 'environment' and 'volition' to structure her description of key positions in neuroscientific and addicted individuals' discourse about addiction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Public Understandings of Addiction: Where do Neurobiological Explanations Fit?

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developments in the field of neuroscience, according to its proponents, offer the prospect of an enhanced understanding and treatment of addicted persons. Consequently, its advocates consider that improving public understanding of addiction neuroscience is a desirable aim. Those critical of neuroscientific approaches, however, charge that it is a totalising, reductive perspective-one that ignores other known causes in favour of neurobiological explanations. Sociologist Nikolas Rose has argued that neuroscience, and its associated technologies, are coming to dominate cultural models to the extent that 'we' increasingly understand ourselves as 'neurochemical selves'. Drawing on 55 qualitative interviews conducted with members of the Australian public residing in the Greater Brisbane area, we challenge both the 'expectational discourses' of neuroscientists and the criticisms of its detractors. Members of the public accepted multiple perspectives on the causes of addiction, including some elements of neurobiological explanations. Their discussions of addiction drew upon a broad range of philosophical, sociological, anthropological, psychological and neurobiological vocabularies, suggesting that they synthesised newer technical understandings, such as that offered by neuroscience, with older ones. Holding conceptual models that acknowledge the complexity of addiction aetiology into which new information is incorporated suggests that the impact of neuroscientific discourse in directing the public's beliefs about addiction is likely to be more limited than proponents or opponents of neuroscience expect.

show abstract

“…Critics argue that the BDMA reduces drug dependent persons' feelings of control, undermines their selfefficacy, promotes fatalism and leads policy-makers to neglect the role of social factors in the development and treatment of addiction (Dingel, Karkazis, & Koenig, 2011;Kalant, 2009;Levy, 2013;Midanik, 2004). M a n u s c r i p t 3 A growing literature has begun to examine the extent to which neuroscientific explanations of addiction have influenced the views of addiction held by the general public, addiction clinicians and neuroscientists, and addicted persons Dingel, et al, 2011;Hammer, Dingel, Ostergren, Nowakowski, & Koenig, 2012;Hammer, et al, 2013;Meurk, Hall, Morphett, Carter, & Lucke, 2013;Meurk, Partridge, et al, 2014;Netherland, 2011). Although there are some who express concerns about the negative consequences of the BDMA (Hammer, et al, 2013), others suggest that the predicted positive and negative social impacts of the BDMA have been overstated (Courtwright, 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In one of the few studies that assessed drug dependent persons' views about neuroscientific understandings of addiction and technologies derived from them, Julie Netherland (Netherland, 2011) found that pharmacological therapies were seen as affording individuals some prospect of achieving 'normality', defined as 'new opportunities for personhood and freedom -a chance to avoid imprisonment, to reconnect with family, to care for their health, and to regain some measure of economic security and autonomy' (Netherland, 2011, p. 173). This finding is similar to the optimism expressed by individuals with mood disorders about the positive impacts of neuroimaging on their views about the treatment of depression (Buchman, Borgelt, Whiteley, & Illes, 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Scepticism and hope in a complex predicament: People with addictions deliberate about neuroscience

Morphett

Carter

Lucke

et al. 2016

International Journal of Drug Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Please cite this article as: Meurk, C., Morphett, K., Carter, A., Weier, M., Lucke, J., and Hall, W.,Scepticism and hope in a complex predicament: people with addictions deliberate about neuroscience, International Journal of Drug Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10. 1016/j.drugpo.2016.03.004 This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain. AbstractBackground According to the 'brain disease model of addiction', addiction is a chronic condition the symptoms of which reflect persistent changes in neural functioning produced by long-term drug use. Scholars have argued both for and against the validity and usefulness of this way of conceptualising addiction, which has been variously described as emancipatory and detrimental to addicted persons. In this paper we explore how people with addictions make sense of the brain disease concept and the extent to which they find it useful. Methods: We conducted 44 semi-structured interviews with persons in treatment for drug and alcohol addiction recruited through a variety of channels. Transcripts were analysed by combining a health identity approach with thematic analysis. Results: We describe participants' understandings of how they became addicted and what role, if any, neurobiological conceptions play in their explanations. Our findings highlight the hopeful and sceptical viewpoints of addicted individuals on the value of addiction neuroscience ideas and neurotechnologies. Conclusions: These viewpoints shed some light on the diverse and divergent ways that people with addictions make sense of neurobiological ideas and technologies. It also describes when, and how, neurobiological explanations and the 'brain disease' model can be helpful to addicted persons. Some of the limitations of the brain disease model become apparent in the complex ways in which neurobiological explanations and labels are incorporated into lay understandings. In order to be more useful to addicted persons, neurobiological explanations should be provided as part of a more complex explanation of addiction and the brain than the BDMA offers, and should not be given a 'disease' label.

show abstract

“We haven't Sliced Open anyone's Brain yet”: Neuroscience, Embodiment and the Governance of Addiction

Cited by 27 publications

References 43 publications

What does ‘acceptance’ mean? Public reflections on the idea that addiction is a brain disease

What does ‘acceptance’ mean? Public reflections on the idea that addiction is a brain disease

Public Understandings of Addiction: Where do Neurobiological Explanations Fit?

Scepticism and hope in a complex predicament: People with addictions deliberate about neuroscience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About