ACTIVELY LEARN ASSIGNMENT #1: In this exercise, you'll practice
annotating the text (taking notes in the margins) as well as answering the
questions).
STEPS for PART ONE:
1. Read/listen the article through once, highlighting and looking up words
you don't understand.
STEPS for PART TWO:
1. Begin annotating the text. Make notes on the following:
- Who is the author and what are their credentials? You might need to
Google her.
- Make notes on questions you have about the text, highlight areas you
don't understand.
- Highlight and summarize the main idea of the text.
- Highlight and identify the stories, or examples, or proof the autho
provides to convince you of her message.
- Highlight and make notes on connections you might have to the text (does
it make you think of something?)
- Answer 13 questions.
ASSIGNMENT DIRECTIONS
ACTIVATING PRIOR KNOWLEDGE: What do you think this article is going to be about?
Before answering, click on the title above to see the whole title, then try to infer what
you think it will be about based on the title.
QUESTION 1 DOK 1
When Hunter Biden, son of President-elect Joe Biden, was recently interviewed by Amy Robach at
ABC News, Robach
ought up Hunter’s substance use issues, noting that he had been “in and out
of rehab seven, eight times.”
Hunter responded, “Say it nicer to me.” He went on to co
ect Robach’s language, saying that he
had “sought treatment for an issue, like most people” and noted that the interviewer was
“insensitive.”
What was surprising about this exchange was sadly not what Robach said, but that Hunter Biden
challenged it.
As a researcher who studies the lived experiences of individuals with substance use issues, I am
frequently disheartened by the words chosen to talk about substance use treatment and people
who use drugs.
1
2
3
4
UNDERSTANDING: When Fletcher tells you that she is a researcher who studies people
with substance issues, how does it affect the way you understand or view her argument?
In other words, do her credentials make her argument more convincing?
QUESTION 2 DOK 3
The language used when talking to or about people who use substances is often hurtful. Instead
of recognizing and understanding the chronic relapsing nature of addiction, this language
egards individuals who struggle with substance use as morally reprehensible.
Negative language
Terminology such as, “addict,” “junkie” and “abuser” continue to be commonplace. In Hunte
Biden’s case, the interviewer’s characterization was that his multiple episodes of treatment
indicated a personal failure.
Negative language about individuals who use substances contributes to how society views these
individuals. For example, one study had clinicians read case vignettes that either used the term
“substance abuser” or “substance use disorder.” The clinicians who read the “substance abuser”
vignettes were more likely to conclude that the character in the vignette was personally culpable,
and were more likely to support punitive treatment for the character.
Provide an in-text citation for this article. You may have to find the article online to
determine the date.
CITATION = (author last name, year of publication)
For example = (Taylor, 2021)
QUESTION 3
5
6
MAKING CONNECTIONS: Think of a time when you had a what you consider to be a
"personal failure." Do you think it mattered to you how other people described that
failure? Why or why not?
QUESTION 4
7
SUMMARY: Summarize what this paragraph says in your own words. Ask yourself, "what
does the author want me to know about this paragraph?" Avoid vague answers; be as
specific as possible.
QUESTION 5
The language used when talking to or about people who use substances is often pathologizing
and hurtful. (Shutterstock)
I recently completed a study for which I interviewed 10 individuals attending outpatient
treatment for substance use and 10 clinicians providing outpatient counselling.
I asked all of the participants how they perceived language around substance use, particularly as
it related to relapse and recovery. I heard multiple stories of how disempowering the language
around substance use can be, and how many of the participants who struggled with substance
addictions felt judged and misunderstood by
oader society.
Recovery and relapse
Relapse has become a negative word that is equated with failure instead of as a normal part of an
individual’s treatment trajectory. One participant identified:
“The reality is one day something is going to happen in your life that is going to
e so overwhelming that you’re going to reach for that bottle or that drug and it
OPINION: Do you agree or disagree?
*Remember that it is important to keep the summary of the text and your opinion
separate to show where ideas come from. Do not combine them.
8
9
10
11
e so overwhelming that you re going to reach for that bottle or that drug, and it
just depends what you do with it afterward.”
Another participant shared a similar view:
“I’ve been trying since I was 23. So, if I didn’t understand relapse, there’s not a
chance I’d still be alive talking to you today. Because, um, I would just figure that
I’ve failed at recovery and that’s it.”
Treating relapse as personal failure, is another example of how language around substance use
continues to stigmatise the individual, and ignore the complex realities of substance addiction.
As another participant described, individuals who are no longer using substances are described
as “clean.” From his perspective, the implication is that if you are not “clean,” you are somehow
“dirty.” This participant shared how his parents use this language when talking to him about his
own experience:
“Well, especially my mother’s husband, which is a trigger. Like, ‘are you still
clean? Have you made a mistake yet?’ You know they’re asking me if I’ve slipped
up.”
12
13
14
SUMMARY: Explain what the author says the link is between the language we use to
describe substance users and "relapsing."
QUESTION 6
15
16
Avoiding words that perpetuate bias
There continues to be an ingrained hierarchy of social acceptability when it comes to drugs.
Caffeine and alcohol are seen to be socially acceptable, whereas other drugs such as crack cocaine,
methamphetamine and opiates are considered unacceptable and the individuals who use these
drugs are viewed as social outcasts.
Community members, academics and researchers continue to call for a change in the language
we use to talk about substance use and addictions. For example, in 2014 the editorial team of the
journal Substance Abuse, called for an increased consideration of the language used to describe
the experiences of substance use disorders, including incorporating people-first language,
promoting the recovery process and avoiding slang that perpetuates stereotypes and biases.
As we leave behind the holiday season, when imbibing and cele
ating are socially normalized, it
is important to consider the internalized judgment placed on individuals who use substances and
struggle with their use. The words we choose to talk to and about individuals who use substances
are critical, as they contribute to how drug policy, substance use treatment and societal
understanding are framed.
17
18
MAKING CONNECTIONS: Has someone ever described you using language that you
found offensive or perpetuated stereotypes or bias? How did it make you feel?
OPINION: Do you agree with Biden and Fletcher that it's important to be sensitive about
the language we use to describe people? Why or why not?
QUESTION 7
19
OPINION: As someone going into the healthcare industry, how important do you think it
is to understand how substance users feel about the way people treat them or talk about
them?
QUESTION 8
As a study participant concluded:
“I certainly didn’t intend for this to happen to me. Nobody does. Yeah, I wish
society would understand. But how can you understand when you have not been
there yourself, right? Some do, some do. But in general, I don’t think so.”
Individuals who live this experience, like Hunter Biden, continue to highlight that we need to
learn to “say it nicer,” to speak without judgment, and a willingness to learn to understand.
20
21
22
SUMMARY: In your own words, summarize the main point of the article. What did she
want you to know.
Include an in-text citation for your summary.
QUESTION 9
EVIDENCE: What kind of evidence did the author use to support her main point?
Explain whether or not you think her evidence was convincing.
QUESTION 10
D ib th t i th i I it f i dl ? A th it ti ? D it l t ? I it biti
QUESTION 11
Describe the tone in the piece. Is it friendly? Authoritative? Does it lecture? Is it biting
or sarcastic? Funny?
ASKING QUESTIONS: What questions do you have about this text?
QUESTION 12
THINKING CRITICALLY: What do you think the consequences would be of using more
neutral language about substance use when talking to substance users?
QUESTION 13