ERIC ED452004: Prevention of Alcoholism, Drug Abuse, and Health Problems among American Indians and Alaska Natives: An Introduction and Overview.

35 Pages·2001·0.58 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
RC 022 941
ED 452 004
Trimble, Joseph E.; Beauvais, Fred
AUTHOR
Prevention of Alcoholism, Drug Abuse, and Health Problems
TITLE
among American Indians and Alaska Natives: An Introduction
and Overview.
National Inst. on Drug Abuse (DHHS/PHS), Rockville, MD.
SPONS AGENCY
2001-00-00
PUB DATE
34p.; In: Health Promotion and Substance Abuse Prevention
NOTE
among American Indian and Alaska Native Communities: Issues
in Cultural Competence; see RC 022 940.
DA03371; DA07074
CONTRACT
Information Analyses (070)
PUB TYPE
MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.
EDRS PRICE
*Alaska Natives; *Alcoholism; American Indian Culture;
DESCRIPTORS
*American Indians; At Risk Persons; Cultural Awareness;
*Cultural Relevance; Demography; *Drug Abuse; Family
Influence; Health Promotion; Mental Health; Peer. Influence;
*Prevention; Research Needs; Rural Urban Differences
ABSTRACT
This chapter reviews the literature on substance abuse and
prevention efforts in Native communities. The first section describes
demographic characteristics of America's indigenous people, including tribal
and government definitions, interaction and validation styles, and
rural-urban differences. It concludes by warning that use of broad ethnic
glosses to describe any ethnic group in a research venture is poor science,
and that research involving American Indians must consider the cultural
variations and numerous subgroups that have distinct lifeways. The second
section presents an overview of the substance use and misuse field, noting
that the research on prevention is very limited. Topics covered include
setting, rates and patterns of substance use, etiology and correlates of use,
prevention, social skills, peers, family, school-based programs, policy,
community-wide efforts, community readiness, and cultural sensitivity.
Conclusions drawn include: the family is central in American Indian culture
and must be involved in prevention approaches; peer influence is significant,
but to a lesser degree than among non-Natives; cultural identification is not
directly related to substance abuse prevention, although it may be critical
in treatment; many factors affecting youth in general also impact drug use
among American Indian youth; much more is known about risk than about
resiliency factors for American Indian youth; and evidence of the
effectiveness of school-based programs is very limited. Seven recommendations
are given for the advancement of prevention strategies, themes, and research
among American Indians and Alaska Natives. (Contains 72 references.)
(TD)
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
1
Prevention of Alcoholism,
Drug Abuse, and Health
Problems Among American
Indians
and Alaska Natives: An
Introduction
and Overview*
EDUCATION
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
Improvement
Office of Educational Research and
Joseph E. Trimble
INFORMATION
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES
(ERIC)
CENTER
reproduced as
Fred Beauvais
been
This document has
received from the person or organization
originating it.
Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction quality.
in this
Points of view or opinions stated
represent
document do not necessarily
official OERI position or policy.
I grew up with it. Everyone drank where
I grew up. Everyone
did. You know, kids, and the adults,
and, I guess growing
up
that was just the way to
go. There wasn't any other way. It was
like you can't wait to be
21 so I can go into bars legally
even
though I was already in them.
That was just a way of life.
When we sobered
up, it's still like you kind of don't fit in. It's
really difficult, humiliating almost.
It's almost easier to
go
along with the flow than
to sober up.
Anonymous American Indian informant
(1995)
This chapter was supported in
part by funds provided by the
*
RS-
National Institute
on Drug Abuse (Grant Numbers DA03371 and
DA07074).
2
1
BEST COPY AVAILABLE
reflect the
moving words
and profoundly
These compelling
Indians and
countless American
sentiments of
thoughts and
of
is considered by most
Indeed, alcohol misuse
Alaska Natives.
and
most serious
population to be their
America's indigenous
that affects almost every
problem, a problem
significant health
health,
mental and physical
Discussions about
facet of life.
and
community structure
problems, and
deviance, familial
form
include, in some
American Indians must
function among
is
and misuse. Yet it
of alcohol use
the influences
or another,
and misuse
that if the widespread use
extremely bold to assume
American Indian com-
significantly reduced in
of alcohol was
prob-
and psychosocial
prevalence of health
munities that the
events have led to many
eliminated; historical
lems would be
stressors in these com-
that create numerous
structural problems
though, that culturally
reasonable to conclude,
munities. It is
if effective,
prevention strategies,
and drug use
resonant alcohol
deviance,
illness, disease,
the reduction of
would contribute to
discussion of alcohol
disruption. Further, any
and community
as they are,
Indian communities, grave
problems in American
for
American Indian people
that there are many
must recognize
problems. Stereotyping
little or no personal
whom alcohol poses
clearly be avoided.
Indian people should
of all American
of
into the prevention
presents an inquiry
This monograph
Native
Indian and Alaska
in American
alcohol and drug use
topic of preven-
into the broad-based
communities. Our inquiry
restricted
and maintenance is
health promotion
tion as a tool for
is the area
part because it
and misuse in large
to substance use
occurred,
development has
the research and
in which most of
American
prevalence among
incidence and
due to its high
inquiry in perspective,
Natives. To place our
Indians and Alaska
overview of substance
section will provide an
this introductory
and Alaska Natives
American Indians
misuse among
use and
chap-
background for the other
as
and as a consequence serve
motion,
the inquiry in
this monograph. To set
ters contained in
information on the demo-
provides important
the first section
people. The sec-
America's indigenous
graphic characteristics of
and misuse
of the substance use
ond moves to an overview
field.
2
3
Demographic Characteristics of
American Indians and Alaska Natives
The terms American Indian and Alaska Native are "ethnic glosses"
(Trimble, 1991, 1995). They refer to the aboriginal populations of
North America and are terms imbued with political and socio-
cultural considerations. In this chapter, American Indian and
Indian are typically used for the sake of brevity and are not
meant to demean the distinct heterogeneity that exists among
the many native tribes and villages and those who prefer to
identify with these entities rather than with the broad glosses.
The terms race and racial should be avoided where possible
because they do not have relevance for American Indians and
Alaska Natives. These concepts are "academic anachronisms"
and have little scientific and practical value, in part because of
their elusive, unbounded nature (see Yee, Fairchild, Weizmann,
& Wyatt, 1993).
The term American Indian is an imposed, invented ethnic cat-
egory originally foisted on the Arawak, a now-extinct
Caribbean-basin tribe. The category continues to be used to the
extent that almost all indigenous native peoples of the Western
Hemisphere are referred to as Indians. Many pejorative, histori-
cal, and stereotypical images are incorporated in the meaning
when it
is used by outgroup members, but contemporary
American Indians have also found some value in self-
identification with this broad gloss. Speaking to this point,
Trosper (1981) cogently argues that "American Indians have
transformed themselves from a diverse people with little com-
mon identity into an ethnic group" and that they "have done so
by mobilizing, with respect to a charter, the shared history of
broken treaties" (p. 257). By forging a common ethnic category,
America's indigenous population has created a social and polit-
ical force that has far greater strength and influence than do
individual tribal governments; the emergence of the pan-Indian
category has created a conventional label with which one can
identify (see Hartzberg, 1971).
3
4
If
Tribal-Specific Definitions
themselves and, indeed, linguistic-
Tribal groups had names for
Within their own lan-
specific names for other tribal groups.
Navajo
of tribes such as Lakota, Cheyenne,
guages, the names
beings" or "the people." Within
(Dine), and Hopi mean "human
burned thighs" or "those who
tribes, bands such as "those with
such as "Eagle" or "Raven"
plant near the water" and moieties
idiosyncratic or
specific names that refer to some
were given
tribes such as the Lakota
spiritual characteristic. In addition,
stereotyped physical fea-
referred to other tribes according to
the Cheyenne were referred to as
tures and characteristics:
the Winnebago as Hotanke
Sihiyena (people with a shrill voice),
Sna-hde-hde-ha (those
(loud-voice people), and the Navajo as
distinctions were typically ignored
with striped blankets). Such
and novelists, leaving the
by American colonialists, historians,
that American Indians
world with the erroneous impression
but singular lot.
were a distinctive
Definition
Government Attempts at a
Bureau of Indian Affairs
The Federal Government, through the
legal definition of an
(BIA), found it necessary to provide a
in the United States
American Indian, the only ethnic group
undergone numer-
afforded this distinction. The definition has
BIA
the past 100 years or so, but currently the
ous revisions in
whose American
defines an American Indian as a person
and /or who is a
Indian blood quantum is at least one-fourth,
557 federally rec-
registered or enrolled member of one of the
of BIA eliminated
ognized tribes. The hard-and-fast criteria
Indian background who affiliated in
many people of American
of some 60 federally nonrecog-
one form or another with one
signed formal
nized tribes, ones that in many cases never
of scattered,
treaties with the Government or that were part
(see Snipp,
small groups in the Northwest and the Southwest
1989, 1996).
with the
Some recognized, or "treaty," tribes do not agree
Some
BIA criteria and have developed their own specifications.
and
have lowered the blood quantum criterion to one-eighth
4
5
even one-twenty-eighth and a few have increased it to one-half.
One tribe in Oklahoma in the late 1960s opened
its rolls to any-
one who could prove ancestral ties; the specific blood quantum
was not viewed as an important criterion. About 7 percent of
the
tribes require that
one have more than one-fourth blood quan-
tum and about 32 percent have
no set blood quantum criteria.
Whatever the criteria, individuals must be able
to establish their
claim by providing documentation showing
that one or more of
their relatives
or ancestors are on some version of a tribe's roll
or census (Thornton, 1996).
The United States Census Bureau and the
Department of
Education (DOE) each developed their
own criteria. The Census
Bureau allows each citizen to declare his
or her ethnic origin on
the basis of the
group with which he or she most identifiesin
a word, the criterion is self-enumerative. After conducting
an
extensive survey
among American Indian people throughout
the United States, DOE staff
generated some 70 distinct defini-
tions of "American Indian." After
a careful review of the results,
DOE decided
on a definition that closely resembles BIA criteria
but provides
more latitude for tribal-specific criteria, regardless
of Federal status (U.S. Department
of Education, 1982).
Government definitions
are developed largely to determine
who is eligible for services provided
by treaty arrangements and
congressionally mandated
programs. The definitions do not
include the extent to which
an individual follows tribal custom
and tradition or the degree
to which he or she professes
an eth-
nic identification.
Interaction and Validation
Styles
Among most American Indians, merely
being federally recog-
nized and fitting the definitional
criteria of the BIA and DOE
are not sufficient. For many, it is vitally important
to glean a
sense of the way someone lives and subscribes
to traditional
and readily identifiable lifestyle
patterns. As a consequence,
when two strangers meet and it
is apparent that both
possess
distinctive physical characteristicsdark,
straight hair; dark
brown eyes; brown skin; high
cheekbones; broad nasal struc-
5
6
featuresthey seek to
elicit
other distinguishing
ture; and
ethnic
substantiate degree of
each other to
information from
will ask questions
nesting procedure, one
affiliation. Using a
"Who
do you belong to?"
from?" "What tribe
"Where are you
commonly
effort to generate some
related to?"in an
are you
doesn't quite fit the
If one or the other
shared background.
well turn to identify-
the conversation may
physical stereotype,
American Indian and
grandparent was not
ing which parent or
be. This is usually a
blood quantum might
what the person's
of
rather carefully. If all
is often handled
delicate subject, so it
the conversa-
authentic and genuine,
the information appears
shares stories about pre-
in which each
tion may lapse into one
conversation takes
experiences. Often the
sumed common life
contem-
in which the daily,
of "homeland centrism,"
on a form
emphasized over
individual's origins is
lifestyle of the
porary
Indians from
traditions. Hence, American
tribal customs and
influences more
discuss socializing
reservations are likely to
than to give
lifeways back home
indicative of contemporary
subtle way the con-
customs. In a very
attention to classic tribal
that the par-
provide evidence not only
versation-is designed to
but also that they
Indians by definition,
ticipants are American
that demon-
back that upexperiences
have the experiences to
identification with
and strength of the
strate the authenticity
one's ethnic origins.
Demographic Patterns
self-identification proce-
currently uses a
The Census Bureau
definition is a
Indian identity. Their
dure to establish American
and the BIA,
developed by tribes, States,
departure from those
their claim. The
to document
is necessarily required
as no one
with the data main-
therefore are at odds
Census Bureau data
In 1990,
monitored by State agencies.
tained by the BIA and data
citizens were
declared that 1,959,000
the Census Bureau
Census Bureau
Natives. In 1960, the
American Indians or Alaska
Indian. Thus,
they were American
noted that 552,000 reported
population had
American Indian
between 1960 ancl 1990 the
rapid 30-year population
255 percent. The
grown by about
6
increase is somewhat incrediblesuch population increases are
almost unheard of in the field of demography. This suggests that
many more citizens chose to identify with their American
Indian heritage in 1990 than in 1960.
The Census Bureau's use of a self-identification criterion
indeed had some effect on growth as individuals likely declared
an ancestral identification without having legal ties to a tribe.
Some of these individuals are those who claim multiple tribal
backgrounds, yet their blood quantum for any one of them is
insufficient for them to become officially registered or enrolled.
For example, such individuals may have a combined American
Indian blood quantum of one-half but no one tribal quantum is
acceptable by each of the tribes represented in their ancestral
background; they may have all of the facial features demonstra-
tive of American Indians (that is, they look "Indian") but are not
qualified to be recognized by either State- or federally
recog-
nized tribes.
Many Americans of American Indian mixed ethnic ancestry
choose to identify as American Indian or Alaska Native, because
it creates a new identity for them that brings with it pride along
with the desire to learn tribal customs, traditions, and lan-
guage. Additionally, there are some people who, regardless of
their degree of blood quantum, are obligated by family tradi-
tions to continue their identities as American Indian or Alaska
Native. Typically, they are descended through matrilineal
or
patrilineal lines that are part of a highly complex clan
or moi-
ety system. To sever the ties by refusing to identify or ignoring
their ancestry often brings about banishment from the clan and
hence the tribe, often casting a shadow of foreboding
on the
entire extended family.
In 1990, slightly over half of the American Indian population
resided in urban areas. The demographer Matthew Snipp main-
tains that "roughly half of the all urban American Indians
can be
found in as few as 16 cities, including Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Los
Angeles-Long Beach, Phoenix, Seattle-Tacoma, Riverside-San
Bernardino, New York City, and Minneapolis-St. Paul" (1996,
p.
38). According to the sociologist Russell Thornton, urban
American Indians are less likely to speak
or understand their
LE
7
BEST COPY AVAIL&
8
cultural activities, report
participate in tribal
tribal language,
those who
American Indians than
tribal affiliation, or marry
reservation communi-
communities, villages, or
reside in rural
the
Thornton argues, "both
trends continue,"
ties. "If these
Native American
distinctiveness of the total
genetic and tribal
110). He
lessened" (Thornton, 1996, p.
population will be greatly,
result in increased
is likely not only to
adds that "urbanization
in con-
Native Americans come
intermarriage as more and more
further the
peoples, but also to diminish
tact with non-Native
distinctive tribal peoples tied to
identity of Native Americans as
areas" (p. 111).
specific geographical
samples
Indian and Alaska Native
In identifying American
researchers often rely
social science research,
for behavioral and
differentiate their respon-
labels to describe and
on the generic
respondents
they assume that their
dent groups. In so doing
lifeways
understanding of their tribal
share a common, modal
believes that all
though the researcher
and thoughtways; it is as
commonly held,
Alaska Natives share
American Indians and
styles, and states. In
fact,
culturally unique mannerisms,
describe
rely on an ethnic gloss to
researchers who solely
ignore the rich-
Alaska Natives actually
American Indians and
and the numer-
variations within these groups
ness of cultural
by distinct lifeways and
that are characterized
ous subgroups
thoughtways (Trimble, 1991).
ethnic group in
to describe any
Use of broad ethnic glosses
that
Apart from the fact
venture is poor science.
a research
violates certain
misrepresentations, their use
glosses are gross
fosters stereo-
external validity and indeed
tenets concerning
such as
that "categories of people
types. Heath (1978) argues
often
rubric of 'ethnic groups' are
those compared under the
sense" (p. 60).
units in any sociocultural
not really meaningful
epidemiological
is...little wonder that
He goes on to add, "it
ethnic minori-
under such rubrics (i.e.,
and other data collected
meaningless"
groups) are virtually
ties and other nationalistic
(p. 60).
rely on labels to describe
At an individual level one may
Use
subsequently their identity.
their ethnic affiliation and
as
small part of the identity process,
of the label, though, is a
8
9
one is likely to expand the labeling to include other
subjective
eport
identifiers such as natal background, acculturative status,
who
ego-involvement, and attitudes toward own and other groups;
nuni-
behavioral preferences such as language usage, friendship
h the
affiliations, music and food preferences, and participation
rican
in cultural and religious activities may also be included
)). He
(Trimble, 1991). Hence, any research involving American
eased
Indians and Alaska Natives must take into consideration
con-
these factors and those discussed earlier to account for the
er the
depth of one's identity.
ied to
Overview of Substance Abuse
mples
n rely
Prevention Among American Indians
!spon-
Idents
and Alaska Natives
eways
hat all
In 1982, the American Indian anthropologist Spero Manson
held,
edited the first known book devoted exclusively to the subject of
I fact,
prevention among American Indians and Alaska Natives. The
?.scribe
book's contents covered five sections that included research,
e rich
training, services, evaluation, and recommendations. This semi-
iumer-
nal work set an important and significant tone for a field that at
ys and
that time had received little or no attention. Manson (1982)
pointed out in his opening chapter that "relatively little preven-
'oup in
tion research has been conducted in the area of American Indian
ct that
mental health. Much of that which exists represents a very nar-
certain
row focus" (p.
11). Considerable prevention research has
stereo-
occurred since his work was published. Yet the published works
;uch as
have largely focused on the substance abuse field and in many
e often
instances deal with commentary and recommendations rather
(p. 60).
than with the research on prevention. Indeed, many important
)logical
and relevant etiological and epidemiological studies exist docu-
rninori-
menting over time the prevalence and use rates of alcohol and
ngless"
drugs. The findings are compelling and continue to point to the
need for more prevention-specific research, a point echoed more
Lescribe
than 18 years ago by Manson and his colleagues. What follows
ty. Use
is a detailed summary of these findings.
cess, as
9
AVAILABLE
BEST COPY
10