Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs

To analyze how “pleasure” and similar recreational motives for drug use permeate and are handled in contemporary drug preventive massmedia campaigns in Sweden.

Three campaigns were included in the analysis. Two campaigns were developed by the Alcohol Committee (entitled “Basic course for you who like to be drunk” and “The Party Method”) and one campaign by Mobilization against Narcotics (entitled “There are many reasons not to try narcotics”).

Recreational motives for drug use are recognized in all three campaigns. The reason for this, it seems, is to facilitate the overall trustworthiness of the campaigns. No campaign attempts to counteract the validity of the positive sides of drug use. Instead, they try to make people aware that the negative sides of drug use far outweigh positive sides.

The campaigns partly employ a novel approach to dealing with drug problems but their “core” content resembles traditional elements in drug preventive interventions.

The aim of the paper is to study how the Addiction Severity Interview (ASI) is integrated in the ordinary work of social services in two Swedish towns that use ASI regularly. According to an ideal model for using ASI, it should fulfil three functions: to be a structured tool for assessing client problems, to facilitate the follow-up of treatment measures for each client, and to form a basis for the systematic follow-up of treatment units. This paper asks specifically how ASI is used compared to this ideal ASI model, how ASI is viewed by the different hierarchical levels within the social service organisation, how the social worker's tasks are perceived, and how the use of ASI is followed up.

Qualitative interviews were undertaken with staff at different levels within the social service organization in the two towns, which were chosen from a county known for its extensive use of ASI.

Although rhetorically the social workers have adopted the use of ASI, in practice, however, the use of ASI seemed rather far from ideal. The foremost advantage the social workers perceived with ASI was that it supplied basic information in an initial investigation of client needs. The problems connected to the use of ASI were that it is not suitable for all clients and that some clients are subjected to too many ASIs. Other problems were that it was hard to maintain sufficient quality in the use of ASI due to too high staff turnover and too few opportunities to conduct interviews. In spite of the well-known obstacles for efficient use of ASI, little control was undertaken to monitor use or how information from the interviews is used.

The demand on social work to meet politician's expectations for service development can be in direct conflict with the practical considerations of the social service work, which may explain the shortfall between rhetoric and practice. From a political legitimacy point of view, it is more important that the social service organization is supported by the political funding sources than to meet demands for treatment efficiency. A loose coupling between rhetoric and practice allows for ASI to be adopted only rhetorically, while the regular work can continue to meet the practical considerations. The use of ASI cannot therefore be seen as a simple solution to the problems that the Swedish treatment system is struggling with.