Adolescent Risk-Taking and Drinking

A truism in the field of alcohol, other drug, and violence prevention, at
least historically, has been that adolescent risk taking is the result of
impulsive choices driven by an under developed capacity to think rationally.
This belief has driven the work of AODV prevention professionals for
years...up to and including the present. But new research coming out of
Temple and Cornell Universities is suggesting that this staple of
conceptualizing prevention programming for high school and college
adolescents may need to be revisited...if not rethought.

" Decision research shows that adolescents make the risky judgments they do
because they are actually, in some ways, *more rational* than adults.
Grownups tend to quickly and intuitively grasp that certain risks (e.g.,
drunk driving, unprotected sex, and most anything involving sharks) are just
too great to be worth thinking about, so they don't proceed down the
"slippery slope" of actually calculating the odds. Adolescents, on the other
hand, actually take the time to weigh risks and benefits — possibly deciding
that the latter outweigh the former. (It is during adolescence, in fact,
that the parts of the frontal lobe that govern risk/reward calculations
undergo significant maturation.)" This is a quote from a piece published in
the Association of Psychological Science's Observer - see
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/getArticle.cfm?id=2098 for the
full piece.

This is a very intriguing piece of information. If this is true--and the
science appears to exist to suggest that it is--this may mean that we
involved in the prevention of "high-risk" drinking and other drug use by
high school and college students may need to rethink our approach to
prevention, not to mention the term used to refer to the type of drinking
these students do. Most of us involved in the prevention of "high-risk"
collegiate drinking are aware of the controversy that has existed in the
field regarding how to refer to collegiate drinking since the Harvard School
of Public Health coined the term "binge drinking" in 1994 to refer to the
consumption of 4+ drinks for women and 5+ drinks for men during an outing.
The field has been divided as to the utility of this term when discussing
the phenomenon of collegiate drinking ever since - see my essay on the
subject --  http://www.robertchapman.net/essays/about.htm

In that 2003 essay I suggested referring to this type of collegiate drinking
as being "high-risk," but it would appear that this too may be no better a
moniker  for this type of collegiate imbibing than is "binge drinking." If,
as I suspect, Drs. Reyna at Cornell and Farley at Temple are correct, we in
the prevention field need to not only rethink how we approach adolescents
with our prevention messages, but revisit the language we use when doing so
as well. If there is a "Type-T" personality (Thrill-seeking) as these
researches proffer, this type of student may actually be titillated by our
messages designed to reduce "high-risk" consumption. Perhaps Linda
Lederman's suggestion to refer to this type of collegiate drinking as
dangerous is the more appropriate way to proceed.

What do you think?


Best regards,
Robert

Read my three-monograph series, "When They Drink," at http://www.robertchapman.net and clicking "online resources"

Understanding Co-Dependency Using Online Video

I respect the fact that the term “co-dependent” is at least troublesome for some who see it as just so much jargon and difficult to operationally define, but it is term to which we must nonetheless introduce our students—and a construct we best prepare them to address—if they are to work effectively in the addictions field. We cannot prepare our students to work with addictions without providing them with at least some understanding of and preparation for working with the families of addicted individuals and in particular, those “chief enablers” who are so often referred to as being “co-dependent.”

To pursue addressing these issues with my students, I have always been hard pressed to explain “co-dependence” and “primary/chief enabler” in a clinical manner. Historically, I have found the work of Virginia Satir (“roles” in dysfunctional, or as I like to call them, chaotic families) and Salvitore Minuchin (regarding “boundaries”) to be most useful, I have always thought, however, as though I did not quite clear the bar when trying to “inform” my students about the dynamics of the relationship that exists between the addicted member of a significant relationship and his/her oft perceived manipulated if not “used” significant other. I have tried using classic Disney characters to both demonstrate the dynamic between aggressive males and “their women”—re-watch “Beauty and the Beast” (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byaMd_PNyIY for YouTube clip on Disney’s impact on gender values/roles...in particular, from the 3-min point to end) and see what conclusion you draw as to what Disney is telling young woman...ney, “little girls”...about the role they should play when encountering controlling, demanding, and brutish men. Likewise I have used “The Simpsons” as the virtual personification of the addicted family with Marge as the stereotypical chief enabler. These have worked well and the clips serve to entertain students and hold their interest as well a proffer a somewhat better understanding of the family dynamics to which I am attempting to sensitize them. Again...progress is made, but I nonetheless do not believe that I clear the intended bar.

At the graduate level, practica and internships can provide the opportunity to observe these family dynamic “in vivo” and process them under supervision. For undergrads this experience is a bit more elusive, that is until I discovered a brace of videos on YouTube that present the opportunity to demonstrate this dynamic in such a way that students can experience a visceral reaction to what they are watching yet because the film does NOT involve addiction-affected relationships, this seems to free up discussion as I suspect that 20 to 25% of my students come from chaotic families and therefore have a difficult time openly discussing this topic because of their own unaddressed issues.

The videos are actual 2 parts of a short film, each part being approximately 10-min, entitled, “The Man on the Back.” Part I can be found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0m9iu6O3dg&feature=related and Part II at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yDONtxVLLc&feature=related This film takes place in Iceland and the actors speak Icelandic with English subtitles, but surprisingly, this does not detract from the impact it has on students, at least my students seemed to enthusiastically respond to the film. The discussion of each part (paused the film periodically to discuss the changing dynamic) and the issues they bring to the surface regarding “how” dysfunctional/toxic relationships start and, more to the point, how they are/can be continued, often over extended periods in spite of escalating abuse, are most encouraging and I will continue to use these “visual aids” regarding this topic in the future.

Not knowing how long the videos will remain at these URLs, I downloaded both and saved to my hard drive so that I could ensure future use. In invite you to consider this film and correspond with me (rchapman@drexel.edu) as I am interested in your thoughts and more to the point, your ideas on how you might use the film in your classes.

Best regards,
Robert