In this article the results of a qualitative study carried out in Italy regarding the phenomenon of drug addiction remission are presented. The research explores the process of remission experienced by two groups of former drug addicts: One group of subjects who faced their addiction by turning to drug services and a group of subjects who overcame their addiction without treatment. Considering remission as a process regulated by specific social mechanisms, the careers of the interviewees are analyzed in order to evaluate: 1) If significant differences exist between the two groups as regard self-definition, lifestyle, etc. 2) If such differences may be attributed to interaction with treatment. The findings suggest that the differences noticed between the two groups as regards self-definition are determined by the remission process experienced; spontaneous remission is possible on certain conditions; the jeopardizing of a subject's social functionality and his capability of functioning are not the “natural” (inevitable) outcome of his drug addiction.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaileyK. (1982) Methods of social research, New York, NY: The Free Press.
2.
BeckerH. (1963) Outsiders. Studies in the sociology of deviance, New York, NY: The Free Press.
3.
BiernackiP. (1986) Pathways from heroin addiction: Recovery without treatment. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
ColemanJ.S. (1988) Social capital in the creation of human capital, American Journal of Sociology94:95–120.
6.
ColemanJ.S. (1990) Foundations of social theory, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
7.
CoombsR.H. (1996) Drug abuse as career, in GreenbergD.F. (ed.), Criminal careers, vol. II, pp. 71–89. Aldershot, UK: Dartmouth.
8.
DavisN.J. (1972) Labelling theory in deviance research: A critique and reconsideration, The Sociological Quarterly13:459–472.
9.
De LeonardisO. (1990) Il terzo escluso, Milano, Italy: Feltrinelli.
10.
De LeonardisO. (2001) Le istituzioni, Roma, Italy: Carocci.
11.
EbaughH.R. Fuchs (1988) Becoming an ex: The process of role exit, London & Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12.
GlaserB.StraussA. (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research, Chicago, IL: Aldine.
13.
GoffmanE. (1961) Asylums, New York, NY: Doubleday.
14.
GoffmanE. (1963) Stigma: Notes on the management of spoiled identity, Emglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
15.
GranfieldR.CloudW. (1999) Coming clean, New York & London: New York University Press.
16.
GranfieldR.CloudW. (1996) The elephant that no one sees: Natural recovery among middle-class addicts, Journal of Drug Issues26:45–61.
17.
GranfieldR.CloudW. (2001) Natural recovery from substance dependency: Lessons for treatment providers, Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions1(1):83–104.
18.
HänninenV.Koski-JännesA. (1999) Narratives of recovery from addictive behaviors, Addiction94(12):1837–1848.
19.
HirschiT. (1969) Cause of delinquency, Berkeley. CA: University of California Press.
20.
HughesE.C. (1945) Dilemmas and Contradictions of Status, American Journal of Sociology50:353–359.
21.
KlingemannH. (1992) Coping and maintenance strategies of spontaneous remitters from problem use of alcohol and heroin in Switzerland, International Journal of Addictions27:1359–1388.
22.
KlingemannH.K.SobellL.BarkerJ.BlomqvistJ.CloudW.EllinstadT.FinfgeldD.GranfieldR.HodgingsD.HuntG.JunkerC.MoggiF.PeeleS.SmartR.SobellM.TuckerJ. (2001) Promoting self-change from problem substance use, Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
23.
KorfD.J. (1997) The tip of the iceberg: Snowball sampling and nomination techniques. The experience of Dutch studies, in: EMCDDA, Estimating the prevalence of problem drug use in Europe, Lisbon, Portugal: EMCDDA.
24.
LemertE.M. (1951) Social pathology: A systematic approach to the theory of sociopathic behavior, New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
25.
MaffiodoB.TorreC. (1994) Una proposta di rinnovamento della comunicazione: L'autoaiuto, Animazione Sociale5:55–61.
26.
McIntoshJ.McKeganeyN. (2000) Addicts' narratives of recovery from drug use: Constructing a nonaddict identity, Social Science & Medicine50:1501–1510.
27.
MeoA. (2000) Vite in bilico, Napoli, Italy: Liguori Editore.
28.
MertonR.K. (1968) Social theory and social structure, New York, NY: The Free Press.
29.
MillsC.W. (1940) Situated actions and vocabularies of motive, American Sociological Review5:904–913.
30.
OrbuchT.L. (1997) People's accounts count: The sociology of accounts, Annual Review of Sociology23:455–478.
31.
ParsonsT. (1951) The social system, London, UK: Routledge & Paul.
32.
PeeleS. (1998) The results for drug reform goals of shifting from interdiction/punishment to treatment, International Journal of Drug Policy9:43–56.
33.
SchwartzH.JacobsJ. (1979) Qualitative sociology. A method to the madness, New York, NY: The Free Press.
34.
RubingtonE.WeinbergM.S. (1999) Deviance: The interactionist perspective, Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
35.
ScottM.B.LymanS.M. (1968) Accounts, American Sociological Review33:46–62.
36.
SenA. (1982) Choice, Welfare and Measurement, Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
37.
SenA. (1992) Inequality re-examined, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
38.
SenA. (1993) Capability and well-being, in NussbaumM.SenA. (eds.), The quality of life, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
39.
StallR.BiernackiP. (1986) Spontaneous remission from the problematic use of substances: An inductive model derived from comparative analysis of alcohol, opiates, tobacco and food/obesity literatures, International Journal of the Addictions21:1–23.
40.
SykesG.M.MatzaD. (1957) Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency, American Sociological Review22:664–670.
41.
ThomasW.I. (1923) The Unadjusted Girl, Boston, MA: Little, Brown, and Co.
42.
WaldorfD.ReinarmanC.MurphyS. (1991) Cocaine changes. The experience of using and quitting, Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
