期刊
NEUROETHICS
卷 16, 期 3, 页码 -出版社
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s12152-023-09530-5
关键词
Addiction; Substance use disorder; Ethics; Free will; Volition; Qualitative research
This research explores the implicit views and understandings of addiction and volition among three stakeholder groups through semi-structured qualitative interviews. The use of three paradigms (realism, relativism, pragmatism) helps characterize different stances on addiction and volition. The findings reveal that participants rarely rely on a single epistemic paradigm and there are notable differences in understandings of volition between clinicians and people with lived experience of addiction.
Addiction is a common condition affecting millions of people worldwide of which only a small proportion receives treatment. The development and use of healthcare services is influenced by how addiction is understood (e.g., a condition to treat, a shameful condition to stigmatize), notably with respect to how volition is impacted (e.g., addiction as a choice or a disease beyond one's control). Through semi-structured qualitative interviews, we explore the implicit views and understandings of addiction and volition across three stakeholder groups: people with lived experience of addiction, clinicians with experience treating addiction, and members of the public without lived experience of addiction. We notably examine whether three paradigms, i.e., three philosophical sets of understandings about the nature of reality and knowledge (realism, relativism, pragmatism) reflect how stakeholders envision addiction and volition in the context of addiction. The use of these paradigms allows for the characterization of different stances on addiction and volition and an assessment of the coherence of beliefs about these matters. Our findings demonstrate that few participants relied on a single epistemic paradigm when describing their views. Furthermore, there were notable differences in understandings of volition between the clinician group, who were more oriented toward pragmatism, and people with lived experience of addiction, who were less oriented toward realism. Despite its limitations, our study suggests that a greater appreciation for the complexity of views held by different stakeholders about addiction and volition could help critically assess the search for coherence expressed in academic and policy debates.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据