Introduction
Numerous public awareness campaigns, including “addiction does not discriminate,” have been developed in response to the scourge of drug addiction and the fatalities that result from it. These messages are frequently viewed as a strategy for mobilizing the public and winning support for the families affected by addiction. Even though the statement is strictly correct, data from different types of research says otherwise.
Discussion
Whereas addiction does not discriminate as it can affect anyone, several statistics demonstrate that the rates of drug addiction and overdose are comparatively greater in some locations or among particular categories of individuals when compared to others (Scholl et al., 2018). As a result, addressing the addiction problem should be a holistic approach that targets certain components of the community. Despite the high rate of Opioid use being linked to poverty, social inequalities, and economic situations in the country, evidence-informed strategies, for instance, legislation, ought to be put in place to mitigate this epidemic.
The abuse and addiction to opioids, such as pain medicines and heroin, is often a national epidemic that impacts public health as well as the community’s economic and social well-being. Since the 1990s, attempts have been made to reduce opioid-related fatalities and addiction. However, despite the decrease in opioid prescribing, fatality rates have not decreased completely. Between 2012 and 2015, the number of prescriptions for outpatient analgesics decreased by 13% across the country (Scholl et al., 2019). However, the number of deaths caused by the prescription of these medications did not decrease accordingly. This is because mortality rates stayed at an average of 38% over those years (Bahji et al., 2020). Although opioids are mostly blamed for the deaths of many individuals in the country, they also give vital information about some of the country’s bigger societal and economic challenges.
This is mostly because fundamental societal problems including poverty, subpar housing circumstances, unfavorable job conditions, and a lack of community opportunities, are linked to poor health. The Medicaid program gives those who live in low-income areas access to high-quality medical care (Bahji et al., 2020). The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services reports that Medicaid recipients are more likely to be prescribed opioids in larger dosages and for longer periods than non-Medicaid recipients (Scholl et al., 2018). By doing so, they put themselves at risk for addiction and other potential side effects. Due to the health insurance policies, these individuals are also typically less likely to have access to evidence-based addiction treatment.
Poverty and substance misuse are often interwoven, and insecure housing and psychological illnesses can exacerbate them. The most profitable work opportunities are mostly located in the manufacturing and service industries in the country’s poorer areas (Barros et al., 2018). These employment sites frequently have major harm and dangers that professionals working in these fields must deal with. When job-related injuries and discomfort are sustained over a long period of time, they can compound to create dangerous conditions and experiences. As a result, these people are always at risk of being crippled or falling into poverty (Barros et al., 2018). Although the use of opioid analgesics can give a glimmer of hope to these people by allowing them to keep their jobs, those who work in physical labor appear to be at a higher risk of maintaining their nonmedical use of these medicines.
The social and economic elements that play a significant role in affecting the opioid epidemic are the product of societal inequities. For example, the neoliberal policy approaches have led to the deterioration of financial stability for many groups in the country (Kavanaugh & Schally, 2022). These neoliberal practices have had a detrimental impact on the demographic segment that lacks proper tertiary education (Scholl et al., 2018). Surprisingly, the United States economy has undergone enormous transformations during the last three decades. Among these developments are the Great Recession of the late 2000s and several Global Economic Crunches.
The considerable contributions of economic reasons as one of the key causes of the opioid epidemic are further supported by the fact that the increase in drug-related deaths corresponds well with financial difficulties. Some of these economic issues include a rise in the number of working-age adults leaving the labor market, a decrease in the wages given to employees, and an increase in the concentration of poverty in various places across the country (Kavanaugh & Schally, 2022). According to Scholl et al. (2018), both urban and rural sociology research has shown that when people are exposed to sustained levels of economic deprivation, they might be mentally damaged. Such persons are more likely to experience despondency and dissatisfaction.
Conclusion
To summarize, years of dedicated, organized, and diligent work will be necessary to limit the current opioid crisis and mitigate its negative impacts on society. At least 2 million people have an opioid use disorder (OUD) caused by prescription opioids, and about 600,000 have an OUD caused by heroin (Scholl et al., 2018). These figures are anticipated to rise in the next years, regardless of the measures implemented. However, data on the success of solutions for tackling the opioid pandemic will require restricting supply, such as by controlling the sorts of medications permitted for use (e.g., abuse-deterrent opioids) and regulating/restricting the circumstances of lawful access to approved pharmaceuticals (Pyra et al., 2022). Furthermore, changing prescribing behaviors, such as through provider education and the publication of prescribing guidelines, and lowering demand, such as through educating patients about opioids and boosting access to OUD therapy (Pyra et al., 2022). Finally, damage can be reduced by providing naloxone to prevent opioid overdoses and needle exchange programs for persons who use injectable drugs.
References
Bahji, A., Cheng, B., Gray, S., & Stuart, H. (2020). Mortality among people with opioid use disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Addiction Medicine, 14(4), e118-e132. Web.
Barros, F. C., Matijasevich, A., Santos, I. S., Horta, B. L., da Silva, B. G. C., Munhoz, T. N.,… & Rohde, L. A. (2018). Social inequalities in mental disorders and substance misuse in young adults. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 53(7), 717-726. Web.
Kavanaugh, P. R., & Schally, J. L. (2022). The neoliberal governance of heroin and opioid users in Philadelphia city. Crime, Media, Culture, 18(1), 126-144. Web.
Pyra, M., Taylor, B., Flanagan, E., Hotton, A., Lamuda, P., Schneider, J., & Pollack, H. A. (2022). Support for evidence-informed opioid policies and interventions: The role of racial attitudes, political affiliation, and opioid stigma. Preventive Medicine, 158, 107034. Web.
Scholl, L., Seth, P., Kariisa, M., Wilson, N., & Baldwin, G. (2019). Drug and opioid-involved overdose deaths—United States, 2013–2017. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 67(51-52), 1419. Web.