Skip to content
PaperFren

Addiction & agency

Does rejecting disease remoralize addiction?

Frank LE, Nagel SK · Neuroethics · 2017

Open access · cc by · source: Europe PMC

Moralization and stigma persist despite the disease model; alternative models (Flanagan, Lewis, Levy) can treat responsibility without sliding back into blame.

Key findings

Stigma persists despite the disease model’s prevalence. Further moralization would likely worsen law and public health. Reasons-responsiveness shows responsibility conditions are complex; one can reject disease without treating addiction as simple vice.

Methodology

The authors define moralization, ask whether the disease model really disentangles addiction from morals, and compare Flanagan’s twin normative failure, Lewis’s learning model, and Levy’s defect-of-agency model, focusing on reasons-responsiveness and moral responsibility.

Limitations

This is conceptual, not a new stigma survey. Medicalization is flagged as future work. It does not prove any model uniquely destigmatises.

How this study connects

Role on claims

Each row is a claim on a concept or method page where this paper supports, challenges, or qualifies the statement. Roles are hand-checked — not a model guess.

  • SupportsAddiction & agencyconcept

    Several papers reject the slogan that only a chronic brain-disease story can fight stigma or explain compulsion.

    Evidence for the claim as stated.

Related papers in this topic

Same topic cluster — not a recommendation engine.