Policysolutions to address individual and social pathologies associatedwith
Technologicaladdiction is commonly referred to as internet addiction. According toGill(2014), technologicaladdiction is the inability to control the use of some particulartechnology especially the internet and other devices such assmartphones. Some of the addictive technical applications include theinternet, online gaming, social media and gambling and personaldevice addictions. Some researchers conducted in the United Statesand Europe indicate that a percentage of 1.5 to 8.2 persons sufferfrom internet addiction.
Today,the uses of the computer have grown to problematic levels andaffecting the society by causing psychological disturbances,neurological issues, and many human adversaries(Tepperman & Curtis, 2010).Several models are available that dealing with technologicaladdictions. These models take into account socio-cultural factors,psychological predispositions such as personal characteristics,biological vulnerabilities for instance abnormalities in theneurochemical processes and the specific features of the internet toexplain the excessive addiction to technology.
Accordingto Simmons(2008), thereis an agreement that total abstinence from technological uses cannotbe a suitable factor when assessing the various policy solutions.Instead, those policies that prevent harmful use by promoting acontrolled and balanced technical use should be adopted. Some of thepolicy options available include the non-psychological approaches.Different authors explore pharmacological interventions fortechnological addictions probably because clinicians usepsychopharmacology to solve technical dependency cases though nostudies are addressing the efficiency of the approach.
Theco-morbid psychiatric signs of technological addiction havenecessitated the use of selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors(SSRIs) which have proved to be efficient. For instance, in anexperiment conducted byDell’Osso,escitalopram (a SSRI) was applied in treating 14 people sufferingfrom internet addictions. There was a significant decrease in theirinternet usage from 38.6 hours per week to 16.5 hours per week. Moodstabilizers may also serve to reduce technological addictions(Simmons, 2008).There are possibilities of physical exercises compensating thedecrease of dopamine levels because of reduced use of technologicaldevices.
Anotherpolicy solution is the use of psychological programs. The programsincorporate motivational talks that are client-centered approachesaiming at strengthening inward motivation to change(Cunha, De Sousa, Fonseca & Relvas, 2016).This process is supplemented through exploring and resolving aclient’s doubts. Reality therapy improves individual’sdecision-making hence improving their lives through their commitmentto change in conduct. This treatment incorporates sessions that showclients that addiction is a choice and provide alternative solutionsto the problematic behaviors. The acceptance and commitment therapywas used in a study conducted byTwohig and Crosbyin an attempt to treat six adults from problematic pornographicviewing. The result was impressive with an 85% reduction in watching,after treatment and with a three-month follow-up it reduced with upto 83%. Interventions from relatives and the society could be crucialto enhancing the addict’s motivation to reduce their usage oftechnological devices(Gill, 2014)
Anotherpolicy intervention is the use of multimodal treatments. Thisapproach applies different types of treatments including those fromother fields such as psychotherapy, family counseling, andpharmacology together or in a defined pattern. Treatments fortechnological addictions should incorporate many disciplines due tothe compound nature of the patient’s problems (Cunha,De Sousa, Fonseca & Relvas, 2016).Another applicable remedial policy is the use of the restart programthat is a recovery program combining technological detoxification,medical treatment and other forms of interventions to develop acomprehensive individualized approach.
Cunha,D., De Sousa, B., Fonseca, G., & Relvas, A. (2016). GamblingBehavior Severity and Psychological, Family, and ContextualVariables: A Comparative Analysis. JournalOf Social Work Practice In The Addictions, 16(3),266-289. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1533256x.2016.1200985
Gill,R. (2014). AddictionsFrom an Attachment Perspective.London: Karnac Books.
Simmons,L. (2008). Theeverything health guide to addiction and recovery.Avon, Mass.: Adams Media.
Tepperman,L. & Curtis, J. (2010). Socialproblems.Don Mills, Ont.: OUP Canada.