Social Disadvantage and Alcoholism, Essay Example

Introduction

It is typically held that those earning minimal incomes reflect a variety of social conditions, just as those conditions tend to promote economic and social stagnation.  The poor are widely viewed as more likely to abuse substances, and the population itself is often believed to be primarily a racial minority one.  The abuse then points to disadvantage more commonly experienced among blacks and Hispanics, as it is then more readily believed that minorities are more inclined to alcoholism.  There is validation for this general belief, but a more expansive approach, as in the article discussed in the following, reveals another commonality defying the broad assumption; namely, social disadvantage promotes stress and alcoholism in all races, the dominance of minorities notwithstanding.  The strongest element of the article, then, is its oblique affirmation of actual disadvantage, rather than any factors directly related to race, as encouraging problems with alcohol.

Discussion

In “Social Disadvantage, Stress, and Alcohol Use Among Black, Hispanic, and White Americans: Findings From the 2005 U.S. National Alcohol Survey,” the authors essentially and deliberately set aside a more expected approach.  The objective is not to study whether minorities are more prone to abuse alcohol due to disadvantage, but to more widely note how the three largest racial populations in the U.S. – whites, blacks, and Hispanics – function in this regard.  There is as well an emphasis in the study on the causal agent of stress, in that economic and social disadvantage create pressures leading to, or exacerbating, alcoholism.  That minorities are more vulnerable to such stress is acknowledged: “Although we expect that racial/ethnic minorities have greater exposure to social disadvantage, it is unclear whether the adverse effects of disadvantage are limited to minorities” (Mulia, Ye, Zemore, & Greenfield, 2008).  The important point remains, however, that race is targeted here only as a broad instrument, and that all populations studied are addressed uniformly.

In terms of the problems at the heart of the study, the authors do not expound on the social and personal damage created by alcoholism, but there is no real need for this.  It is generally understood, and with reason, that alcohol addiction is a widespread and extremely difficult problem to address, at least partially because alcohol, until relatively recently, was viewed as mainly recreational.  It was and is as well legal, and this combines with a lengthy history of promotion and social approval to amplify its harmful potentials.  That the authors employ a national survey conducted to ascertain drinking levels is evidence alone of how enormous alcoholism is as a social issue.  Moreover, the study complies with standards of alcohol abuse established, which further supports the society’s awareness of the problem.

To that end, the authors essentially correlate all the national data, setting the three measures of social disadvantage against the three ranges of consumption.  The former are poverty level, frequency of unfair treatment received, and awareness of race or class as relevant.  The alcohol measures are current drinking status, at-risk drinking, and problem drinking, which is defined when the consumption has direct and negative effects on the individual’s life.  These mechanism in place, the authors then present a complex statistical analysis in which each factor’s impact is measured in terms of race.  The results are both variable and unsurprising.  For example, and as expected, problem drinking is uniformly an issue among all races reporting unfair treatment and/or poverty conditions, the higher percentages of minorities asserting these conditions notwithstanding: “Across all three racial/ethnic groups, cumulative disadvantage was a significant predictor of problem drinking” (Ibid).  At the same time, interesting distinctions were noted; educated blacks, for example, reported the highest levels of experiencing stigma, but the lowest levels of psychological distress.  More to the point, it should be emphasized that the study affirms that varying aspects of social disadvantage are strongly linked to alcohol abuse, and irrespective of race.  The white person feeling unjustly treated, in plain terms, is as likely to abuse alcohol as the black person stigmatized due to race.

The article concludes with an assessment of the data, and the verdict is clear: minorities are at twice the risk to abuse alcohol than whites, even as social disadvantage generates the risk evenly when whites are disadvantaged.  Other conclusions are reached, one of the more striking being that the extremely poor are least likely to turn to alcohol, which the authors interpret as due to limited access.  Another refers to how education seems to offset alcoholism in minorities, even as highly educated blacks report excessive racial stigma.  Lacking in the conclusion in general is any recommendation, save that of further research being necessary.  The impression given is that the authors feels the study alone provides a rich field for deeper exploration into the causal relationship between disadvantage and alcoholism, as their findings reveal that relationship as crossing all racial boundaries.

More than one challenge is presented by the article, as each is significant to the society’s well-being.  To begin with, there remains that inescapable factor of race as reinforcing the connection, an emphasis all the stronger because whites are subject to the same, negative influences.  In plain terms, when blacks and Hispanics are at twice the risk of alcoholism than whites, social injustices and disparities are all the more keenly magnified.  It may be expressed that the culture promotes certain populations to be more vulnerable to a disease potentially affecting any, which stands as a further, if unnecessary, argument against racial bias.  Here is evidence of how inequality, and on levels of income, education, and stigma created by the society, encourage destructive behaviors.  It may be said that it is ironic how the white mainstream population, susceptible to the same forces driving alcoholism in minorities, continues to victimize in this manner.

Conclusion and Reflection

On a personal level, what I found lacking in the article was attention to the causal relationship mentioned above.  I understand that the authors have a specific purpose, and that such an approach requires far more extensive research.  At the same time, I feel it is crucial to identify, as nearly as possible, the actual nature of the relationship between disadvantage and problem drinking.  It seems logical, of course, that people undergoing the stresses of economic hardship and social disadvantage would turn to alcohol, but the question must be asked: why, when it is so well known that alcohol creates greater issues?  More exactly, it is worth investigating the actual meaning of alcohol in the society’s consciousness.  As noted, it has long been viewed as a pleasurable and recreational means of easing pressures, but it is certainly arguable that this view is so deeply ingrained in the culture, even modern awareness of its negative impacts is unable to weaken the association.  As this cultural idea or belief also crosses all racial boundaries, it seems to go to the heart of the issues explored by the article.  Ultimately, my concern is more regarding the “why” of the tendencies, rather than tracing the trajectories of how they occur, and to whom.

References

Mulia, N., Ye, Y., Zemore, S. E., & Greenfield, T. K. (2008). “Social Disadvantage, Stress, and Alcohol Use Among Black, Hispanic, and White Americans: Findings   From the 2005 U.S. National Alcohol Survey.”  Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 69(6), 824.  Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2583375/