Introduction
Alcohol and drug abuse are one of the most common and prevailing problems amongst young adults because of several internal and external socioeconomic factors. In developed countries like the United States, observations have shown that the ratio of drug and alcohol abuse is almost similar in the lower and upper classes (Kendall 81). However, the causes and motivations behind drug and alcohol abuse are different in either of these classes. The elite class tends to abuse alcohol and drugs for recreational purposes and tends to use high-quality, overpriced drugs. However, the lower class tends to abuse alcohol and drugs for recreational purposes as well as due to stress, anxiety, fatigue, depression, etc. (Kendall 81) due to socio-economic conditions such as workload, tuition fees, financial issues, etc. The respective paper will precisely overview the incidence of drug abuse amongst young adults, precisely, as their ratio is similar in upper and lower class segments (Kendall 81).
While the incidence of drug abuse and alcoholism is similar in elite and lower-class social segments, lower-class young adults are more likely to face adverse consequences as compared to upper-class young adults. This is because of the wealth disparity between the upper and lower class, the consequences of drug and alcohol abuse are very different between the two.
The young adults in the upper class who abuse drugs and alcohol can avoid the consequences because of their wealth. Young adults in the lower class who abuse drugs and alcohol will be punished without being given a chance to the upper class. How much and how fast the upper and lower classes receive treatment to help with their addiction depends on their social status.
Rule-Breaking, Consequences, and Deviant Behavior
Drug and alcohol abuse is the most common cause of deviant behavior in young adults of either class segment. The expansion of drug utilization among adolescents flags a bigger societal issue that may incorporate, a dismissal of societal norms, which is the result of social conditions and connections that bring about anguish, disappointment, misery, and general sentiments of seclusion or estrangement. The greatest threat concerning the fame of drugs is the emotional increase of their recreational use within the mainstream, the “normalization” of such drugs speaks to approximately a genuine arrangement of danger variables that should be addressed (Kaplan 2013).
However, upper-class young adults differ from the lower class in rule-breaking because their parents will bail them out. This makes the young upper-class adults who are being coddled not take action for their mistakes. No matter what they do, they do not face any consequences when it comes to drug and alcohol abuse. Not only do they not face any consequences but the parents will help cover up whatever the wrongdoing of drugs and alcohol.
When an upper-class young adult commits a crime, their parents help them in numerous ways. The parents provide high-power attorneys to make sure that the young upper-class adult receives minimal repercussions if any at all. The young upper-class adult will be put in a private facility with no wait time due to the wealth of their parents. The young upper class will receive multiple chances if they fail or relapse because of their parent’s social status.
The lower young-class adults who use drugs and alcohol will be faced with harder consequences than that of a young upper-class adult. When a lower-class young adult commits a crime, they face jail time or harsh punishment. The lower-class young adult will receive a public defender to help them with the crime that has been committed. When the lower class young adult receives care for their drug and alcohol abuse, they will be put on a waitlist that a government facility runs.
When a lower-class young adult receives help from the public defender, the defender gets them what’s easiest for them because of their workload. The percentage of a young lower-class adult goes to jail three times more than that of an upper-class young adult. A young lower-class adult does not have the stability or support of the upper young adult. The impact of drug and alcohol use on young young adults affects them for the rest of their lives.
Underlying Causes and Long-term Consequences on Young Adults of Upper and Lower Class
Drug-utilizing behaviors can be broken down on the premise of the social procedure theory which consists of three categories i.e. social learning theory, social control theory, and social reaction theory (Kaplan, 2013). The different social procedure theories of misconduct examine the cooperation in the middle of people and their surroundings for pieces of information on the underlying causes and reasons for deviant behaviors for this situation drug utilization and conceivable addictions (Kaplan, 2013). Most youths are impacted by the family, the experience, and their peers; it is the procedure of socialization happening within these social establishments that, alongside social structure, gives the strengths that either Shields adolescents and young people from or impacts them to confer deviant acts (Kaplan, 2013).
It is no secret that adolescent drug utilization is on the ascent; a standout among the most prevalent drugs is marijuana as a consequence of its availability and reasonableness (Apospori & Vega 211). Marijuana’s fixings can be blended with nourishment or tea. Every year in America, several thousand deaths are from the utilization of unlawful drugs (Apospori & Vega 211). Distinctive drugs affect individuals. Researchers have contemplated and learned about THC and how it influences the brain. At the point when marijuana is smoked, THC goes from the lungs to the bloodstream and conveys the synthetic to the brain and every single other organ in the body (Apospori & Vega 211). The compound creates various cell reactions that prompt clients to encounter a “high” when smoking marijuana. Unlawful drug use causes deadly contaminations and sicknesses in the body and brain harm; the cognitive thinking procedure is obliterated from the chemicals utilized as a part of drugs (Apospori & Vega 211).
The adolescent growing years are frequently associated with a turmoil of feelings, and sentiments and all things considered, being a confusing, testing time; high school students need and need to feel acknowledgment in their particular family and peers, which can make them powerless against falling into a dangerous example of deviance or drug use. A few adolescents have depended on drug use for an assortment of reasons, which may incorporate peer weight, family connections, or now and need to soothe themselves of anxiety (Apospori & Vega 211). While most youngsters presumably see their drug use as an easygoing approach to having a fabulous time or “escape,” there are negative impacts that happen thus.
Regardless of the possibility that adolescent drug use does not appear as a matter, of course, prompt adult drug misuse, there are still dangers and consequences. These negative impacts often exclude a drop in scholarly execution, intrigue, and strained associations with family or friends (Apospori & Vega 211). Adolescent drug use can greatly adjust behavior, and another distraction with drugs can swarm out exercises that were once already vital. Drug use can likewise change friendships as students associate more with kindred drug clients, who energize and bolster each other’s drug use (Apospori & Vega 211).
Information was likewise gathered from a gathering of youthful adults aged 28-29 who have been taken after since they were 15-16 years of age (Heiner 2014). Respondents answered self-administered, organized questionnaires in their mid-ages, and at other gatherings met individuals who were in their teenagers. As indicated by this study, the most grounded connections were between parental discipline and child hostility, and between parental closeness and child connection to the Guardian (Heiner 2014). Folks who report utilizing cruel techniques for disciplining their children or disagreeing with their mates about how to discipline the child will probably report that their children are forceful, have control issues, and are disobedient (Heiner 2014).
Individuals who report that they have close cooperation and participate in much talk and discussion with them are more likely to report that their children are balanced, set up positive relations with their guardians, are not withdrawn from them, don’t have control issues, and are free (Heiner 2014). There is a relationship between poorer child rearing and drug use (Kendall 85). Discoveries additionally incorporated a relationship between parental drug utilization and control issues in their children. Behavioral issues in childhood and early adolescence are the most punctual indications of adolescent drug association and wrongdoing; conduct issues and drug use seem to develop in families described by comparable childrearing styles as set forth (Heiner 2014).
Additionally, male children who take part in both battling and drug use seem to fit in with families with the most disrupted child-rearing. This demonstrates that certain child-rearing styles invigorate deviant behaviors in children, who, when they grow up, recreate these exceptionally similar examples in the winding of self-propagating deviance (Heiner 2014).
The presumption that the home environment impacts the behavior of young people is broadly acknowledged. In any case, while numerous might concur that family life is an imperative variable in blocking or advancing drug misuse, they disagree in transit in which it impacts behavior (Heiner 2014). Some have contended that poor guardian-child attachments prompt the absence of response to conventional exercises, and this is adequate to deliver conditions encouraging use as already discussed. There is a developing body of confirmation that recommends that drug use is likewise socially actuated and socially controlled by kindred peers (Kendall 85). The school is a child’s first demonstrating ground outside of the home. It allows the child to demonstrate his/her versatility and ability to conform to rules authorized by non-parental power (Heiner 2014).
Peer impacts have been observed to be among the most grounded indicators of drug use during adolescence. It has been contended that peers start youth into drugs, give drugs, model drug-utilizing behaviors, and shape attitudes about drugs (Kandel 290). There was a study done to determine how much peer weight influenced adolescent drug use. The most striking finding is the urgent part that peers play in the utilization of drugs by other adolescents. Contribution with other drug-utilizing adolescents is the most vital correspondence of adolescent marijuana use (Kandel 290). Denise Kandel (Kandel 290) examines how powerful folks are compared to the peer bunch (Kandel 290).
She acquired information from adolescents, their guardians, and their best school friends in a specimen of secondary school understudies in New York City. As indicated by her discoveries, drug use by peers has a greater impact than drug use by folks (Kandel 290). Friends are more comparative in their utilization of marijuana than in some other action or attitude. As indicated by this article, the most noteworthy rates of marijuana use are seen among adolescents whose folks and friends are drug clients (Kandel 290).
The gathered learning and research about drug use creates a system for prevention. It gives the idea that manhandles is brought about by early and premature drug abuse and exploitation by family and peer-related social conditions that block or advance drug use (Kandel 290). Mediation ought to create open doors for adolescents to experience accomplishment in family connections, school, and peer connections (Kandel 290). They ought to address the convictions of folks and peers that may advance the utilization of illegal substances. Also, adolescent drug use systems ought to concentrate on strengthening those aptitudes of folks, educators, and young people that may prompt solid guardian-child attachments, consistency in discipline, clear anti-drug qualities, and attachment to young people or adults who are focused on major norms of society (Kandel 290).
To strengthen youth’s social and behavioral abilities, decision-making ought to be embraced; preparing ought to prepare young people to successfully oppose peer weights by showing that colloquialism refuses to offer socially worthy drugs (Kandel 290). From a group viewpoint, the whole social bolster system must be addressed such that an atmosphere of non-drug use is created. Family methodologies or school programs alone are unrealistic to adjust the web of impacts that socialize young people to the utilization of drugs (Kandel 290). Some proposed preventions for misconduct and drug use from Delinquency and Drug Abuse: Implications for Social Services incorporate, early childhood training with Guardian inclusion, guardian preparing prevention methodologies, and life abilities preparation in schools including cognitive aptitudes preparing, proactive classroom administration, law-related instruction, critical thinking and behavioral aptitudes preparing, improvement of direction to expand scholastic achievement, social impact systems, and school-based health facilities (Kandel 290).
About 40% of car accident fatalities occur because of a drunken driver. About 30% of car accident fatalities can be attributed to driving above the speed limit and 33% and above because of reckless driving that causes the car to go off the road and result in an accident. Most car accident victims are the drivers, then the passengers of the car, followed by pedestrians, and cyclists. Every 12 minutes, one person dies because of a car accident. Every 14 seconds, a car accident results in an injured victim.” (Car Accident Statistics, 2010, 1-7).
Regulations for Lower the Drinking Age
The drinking age in America is twenty-one years old. This means that anyone under the age of twenty-one who drinks alcohol is doing something illegal. This is a very interesting thing to think about when the legal age to join the military is eighteen. If someone is old enough to fight in war and face death, then they should be allowed to drink. The drinking age has always been something people talk and think about. This is unfair, and America’s government should rethink the rules and regulations on drinking. Illegal drinking happens at almost every college and university. Most college people are 18 or older. If the age were lowered, fewer students would get in trouble or be kicked out of school. The smartest thing would be to lower the age so that younger people do not have to take illegal measures. Other countries all over the world have different drinking ages. Germany has a drinking age of 16. This means anyone at the age of 16 can legally drink alcohol anytime they want to. But in America, it is 21. This is too far of a difference. Lowering the drinking age from 21 to 18 would be the most logical choice when they are considered to be adults. Why should “adults” have rules?
As in 1984, the National Minimum Drinking Age Act [23 U.S.C 158] which obliged States to deny persons under 21 years old from obtaining alcohol, as a state of getting State highway funds, is being revised.
Conclusion
Several other components have not been thought about in this exploration that may influence connections and drug use among adolescents. For instance, the accessibility of more distant family individuals and peers who live close by or with whom the adolescent comes in continuous contact may influence the danger of adolescent drug use (Kandel 295). Thus, the accessibility of assets, for example, solid schools may offer youth from single, or stepparent families option exercises that discourage drug use or urge solid attachment to families and groups (Kandel 295). Adolescent drug use is unequivocally connected to patterns of dangerous taking or unsafe behavior (Kandel 295). In today’s mainstream, drugs, for example, marijuana is recognized as being a standout amongst the most prevalent in today’s era of adolescence, and that is most alarming (Kandel 295).
Works Cited
“The New York Times.” “Alcohol Abuse in College.” 2011.
Apospori, E. A., & Vega, W. A. Use among Three Racial/Ethnic Groups of Adolescents. Drugs,
Crime, and Other Deviant Adaptations: Longitudinal Studies, 211. 2013
Car Accident Statistics. Lawcore.com. 2010. http://www.theplanningcommission.org/
Faden, Vivian & Baskin, Marcy. “Evaluation of College Alcohol Policies.” 2007
http://www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov/CollegePresidents/evalCollegeAlcoholPolicies.aspx
Heiner, Robert. Deviance Across Cultures: Constructions of Difference. Oxford University
Press, 2014.
Hingson, Ralph W., et al. “Magnitude of alcohol-related mortality and morbidity among US
college students ages 18-24.” Journal of studies on alcohol 63.2 (2002): 136-144.
Kandel, Denise B. “The parental and peer contexts of adolescent deviance: An algebra of
interpersonal influences.” Journal of Drug Issues 26.2 (1996): 289-315.
Kaplan, H. B. (Ed.). Drugs, crime, and other deviant adaptations: Longitudinal studies. Springer
Science & Business Media. 2013.
Kendall, Diana Elizabeth. Framing class: Media representations of wealth and poverty in
America. Rowman & Littlefield, 2011.
Lewis, John Allen. A Zero-tolerance Juvenile Alcohol Law: Why Legislation Won’t Work. LFB
Scholarly Pub., 2009.
Meyers, Robert J., Jane Ellen Smith, and Denise N. Lash. “A program for engaging treatment-
refusing substance abusers into treatment: CRAFT.” International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy 1.2 (2005): 90.
