There has been a bit of a discussion on Phil’s thread about Noel Pearson related to the influence of the grog on Indigenous communities. I was arguing that making communities “dry” will only go a short way towards solving deep rooted social and economic disadvantage, and that it would be worth people’s while looking at evaluations done by government on communities where this policy has been enforced.
At the moment two classes I’m lecturing on Mondays at ACU, Sociological Research Methods, and Sociology of Health and Illness coincidentally had two issues uppermost in my mind which were relevant to that discussion, so in my breaks I was able to comment on what I’d just been discussing and thinking about.
Let’s take the first issue. When I was teaching methods, I was looking at the uses of theory. Far from being some sort of wooly academic exercise, we all use theories everyday to make sense of our world. And politicians and the media use theories to justify representations of certain problems and policy solutions. But most of these theories are wrong, and reflect ingrained assumptions which cannot be supported other than by partial or anecdotal evidence.
A good example is alcohol use among Indigenous people. Participants in the debate, and the media, and “common sense” all tell us that alcohol use is a big problem. It’s something of a sociological rule of thumb that if a particular group has a lower status, any instance or anecdotal evidence of deviant behaviour is likely to be taken to be the norm, and any behaviour widespread in a minority of the low status group will be wrongly taken as representative of the whole. Whereas in the dominant group, let’s say upper income white Australians, such behaviour (in this case alcoholism or binge drinking) is taken to be an exception, and to have individual rather than structural causes, and its incidence is usually underestimated.
So we all think we know that there are “facts” on which we can base debate and policy. But in fact what we have turns out to be a theory, and a mistaken one which is not supported by the evidence.
The majority of Indigenous people do not live in remote communities but in cities.
Here’s some statistical evidence which demonstrates that fewer Indigenous people than non-Indigenous people drink, and those who do drink drink less often.
As again I was cautioning my methods students, we are discussing aggregates, and the numbers we are dealing with are representative of the population as a whole, but not of some geographical areas where studies have been done (in the Northern Territory, for instance). Conversely, though, similar correlations between binge drinking and lower socio-economic status exist in both Indigenous and non-Indigenous populations, and no doubt if you collected the data, you would find geographical regions where large numbers of non-Indigenous Australians drink to excess.
In 1994, the National Drug Strategy (NDS) conducted a national survey among 2993 Indigenous people in urban areas – population clusters of 1000 people, in which about 67 per cent of Indigenous people reside [16]. In the survey report the results were compared to those of the general population in the 1993 NDS Household Survey. No national survey has been undertaken since, and these data still provide the best baseline estimates of the prevalence of substance use among Indigenous people.
The proportion of current drinkers among Indigenous people in the 1994 NDS Survey [16] was less than among non-Indigenous people. The proportions of each group that had never consumed alcohol (15% and 13%) or who drank less than once per week (29% and 27%) were about the same. However, a smaller percentage of Indigenous people reported drinking at least once a week (33% vs 45%) and more reported that that they used to but no longer drink (22% Vs 9%).
As well as there being a lesser percentage of current drinkers in the Indigenous population, the 1994 NDS Survey [16] found that generally they drank less often – 49 per cent reported consuming alcohol more regularly than once a week compared to 61 per cent of non-Indigenous people. However, on those occasions on which they did drink, 70 per cent of males claimed to drink more than six standard drinks (61g of alcohol) and 67 per cent of females claimed to drink more than four standard drinks (41g of alcohol). This compared to 24 per cent of males and 11 per cent of females in the non-Indigenous population. Importantly, the 1994 NDS Survey found that those who were more socioeconomically disadvantaged were more likely to engage in high risk drinking (and to smoke cigarettes) than other members of the Indigenous population [17].
Studies of alcohol consumption among Indigenous people have also been conducted at local, regional, or territory levels. The results of these show considerable variation. Some of this is likely to be a methodological artefact, but as with smoking, the studies suggest geographic variation that is hidden in the aggregate 1994 Survey results. This is also suggested by a study of regional variation in per capita alcohol consumption in the NT [18].
These studies have shown that the proportion of males who consume alcohol is at least 30 per cent greater than that among females. However, a large survey of NSW secondary students [19] and study of young people in Albany, WA [20] both found that there were no significant differences in the percentages of males and females who reported consuming alcohol. These results suggest that in the future we might see an increase in the proportion of Indigenous women drinkers.
That’s from this summary of a literature review.
Now there might be more recent data around, and indeed time series data would be useful, but I deliberately haven’t gone looking in academic databases but just hunted around for what anyone with a net connection and the ability to google could find. But in any case, with most sorts of data like this, you find the relationships demonstrated remain relatively constant over the time period of a decade or so. If you don’t – as in the fact that young women have been shown to have massively increased both the frequency and quantity of their drinking since 1990 (and there’s a whiff of that result in this data) – you have big news, and big social changes afoot.
The second issue relates to the fact that it’s difficult to get fact out there, even when statistically demonstrated, when myths remain so widespread and so tempting for media and partisan purposes.
Now I shouldn’t be taken to be arguing that Indigenous alcoholism is a minor issue, or to be dismissed. What I am arguing is twofold. The first is that generalisations which suggest that all Indigenous people or most or whatever have substance abuse problems are similarly wrong. You are more likely to drink regularly and to drink at all if you’re not Indigenous.
I’m also arguing that the evidence demonstrates that there is a strong correlation between substance abuse and addiction and socio-economic disadvantage. So logically, the provision of economic opportunity and educational opportunities ought to have more effect on drinking and the pathologies related to it than prohibition.
In the next instalment of this series, I’ll have a look at which gender has a strong correlation between low socio-economic status and obesity and which has a relatively strong correlation between middle income status and obesity. Anyone care to play amateur sociologist and hazard a guess?
I’m no sociologist, but my guess (informed purely by keeping my eyes open at shopping malls) would be that obesity in women correlates more strongly to low socioeconomic status. I may have made some problematic value judgments in coming to that conclusion, but what do the stats say?
All will be revealed, Bismarck! I’ll let people take a stab at guessing first. I would also be interested in what the reasons are.
By the way, there’s been a recent study of obesity in Brisbane – correlated with postcodes. New Farm, where I live, is the least obese suburb…
An interesting phenomenon with politics on a state and federal level is that despite sociological research of the sort Mark has identified and an ongoing concensus amongst acedemics, govt. policy and action is based on the shallow knee-jerk perceptions that all Aborigines are drunks and until they stop drinking nothing can improve.
The following quotes are from a Qld. Premier’s department review of the grog laws, written about 1 year ago. The report has since been buried and the Qld govt. has driven ahead with it’s grog laws including unilaterally imposing the toughest restrictions in the state on Palm Island.
what use is sociological research and proffessional reviews of programs if governments ignore them?
If all the king’s horses and all the kings men are saying housing, jobs and health, why does Humpty Dumpty still say grog and police? Because Humpty Dumpty does not want to challenge public ignorance and prejudice. Instead he clings to these things, hoping they will stop him falling off his wall.
Even with the best sociological brains in the business, government programs are still determined by social prejudice, not research.
(from the Qld. Premiers department review into the MCMC program (grog laws), Aug 2005.) – no link as it has been removed from DATSIP website.
“The Plan is a disordered aggregation of strategies, activities, products and lower order tasks�
“There is little indication from the community case studies that the alcohol supply focussed MCMC policy was having a significant effect�
“Certainly, increases in drink driving and liquor offences may indicate more people were driving from communities to access alcohol elsewhere.�
“The progress on family violence issues was limited and was not driven by a strategic or coordinated effort under MCMC�
“It is clear that current approaches are not resulting in significantly improved outcomes�.
“A series of adverse impacts of the Alcohol Management Plans were noted by all of the communities. The strong consistent perception in all the communities related to the futility of a supply solution without first addressing the demand issues and setting up processes for coping with unintended consequences of the legislation.�
“The evaluation found no evidence of risk assessment and risk management planning�
“The evaluation also found no evidence of a structured change management process for working with agencies within Government.�
“It appears that there was inadequate investment in program design and change management planning�.
“Furthermore, the inadequacies of the implementation design meant that agencies’ were not able to collectively translate the ‘large-scale alcohol management plan’ to the local level in an integrated manner for each community.�
“Due to a lack of clarity about the roles and responsibilities across government agencies, there was no coordinated and targeted action on alcohol demand reduction initiatives through the first two and half years of the MCMC policy.�
“The community case studies found that there appeared to be a conceptual confusion within Government about basis of ‘governance’ as it applies to Indigenous communities�
“…the (Implementation) Plan did not appear to come to terms with some of the important practicalities associated with available capacity or cultural and historical practices in each of the communities.�
“There are approximately 1287 families living in overcrowded dwellings in the MCMC communities. The housing and related infrastructure costs to address unmet housing need is estimated to be $812 million for the MCMC communities or $1.1 billion for the 34 discrete Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community council areas�.
“Unmet housing need and the poor quality of a high proportion of existing housing stock adversely affects the achievement of positive outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community members with impacts in areas such as health, family violence and education�
“………… raises a question about whether the alcohol restrictions have reduced consumption or just moved drinking off the communities�
“The strong, consistent perception in all the case study communities related to the futility of a supply solution without first addressing the demand issues and setting up processes for coping with unintended consequences of the restrictions. These consequences included driving to access alcohol and increased contact with police and courts.�
“The approach to alcohol management outlined in MCMC involved three elements. These were:
· supply restrictions and enforcement;
· separation of the management of canteens from councils; and
· demand reduction initiatives including rehabilitation, treatment and diversion.
Of these three elements, only the supply restrictions and enforcement were implemented.�
“While there may have been some reduction in injury rates and general rowdiness in some case study communities, convictions and fines had increased with reported increases in financial pressures placed on families in the community.
The increases in offences may indicate that the site of drinking and alcohol-related harm may have simply shifted as a result of MCMC.�
Hi Mark,
I found the following after a quick google on obesity and socioeconmic status. Non-academic sources were used although the google search does bring up some academic references.
“One of the most striking facts about obesity is the powerful inverse relation between obesity and socioeconomic status in the developed world, especially among women1.” The New England Journal of Medicine, 1993.
“The epidemic touched virtually all socio-demographic groups examined by the AIHW, but while the problem is widespread it is not randomly distributed. Those most likely to be obese are poor, Indigenous and living outside metropolitan areas. Queensland has the highest rate of obesity (18.5 per cent) and the ACT the lowest (13.5 per cent); the poorest women (22.6 per cent) are twice as likely to be obese as the richest (12.1 per cent). Men are more likely to be overweight but men and women report equal rates of obesity. The most vulnerable groups are aged between 45 and 64 in the most disadvantaged socio-economic group: men and women without post-school qualifications, the lowest incomes and Indigenous people.” AIHW, 2004.
From these 2 sources one would answer that females who are of low socioeconomic status are more likely to be obese. Why? Now that is the more interesting question.
It may well be that SES influences obesity but then the question arises as to why it has a greater impact om women. Alernatively obesity may influence SES, with obese individuals being restricted in the types of employment they can obtain. Once again, why the differential impact on women?
The latter possibility suggests a role for stimatization and here we may have an inkling as to why females are more susceptible. They may suffer from the stigma of obesity in the workforce more than males and may therefore have more restricted work opportunities.
Not the full answer but at least something to stimulate a few more questions Of course we can also consider the psychology behind obesity as both sociological and psychological processes are important for understanding the interplay between SES and obesity.
Well, the higher a woman is on the socioeconomic food chain, the less likely she is to have either made or inherited that wealth for herself, so I’m sure one of the factors here is the unvoiced reality that thin women are status markers for rich men, just like any other expensive commodity. Beemer, tick, BlackBerry, tick, skinny blonde wife, tick, etc. Very few fat girls get to marry up.
Also, of course, there are the various other factors: carbs are cheaper; women with less education know less about nutrition; working (-class) women have less of a chance to get to the gym, especially if they can’t afford to pay the fees in the first place.
The factors of knowledge and education plus price of food access to gyms plus membership costs are VERY important ones to consider. Whilst health professionals may acknowledge that attending the gym is important and that changes in diet are required as part of an intervention to reduce obesity there will be some individuals who simply cannot afford to access or adopt these lifestyle changes.
Mark, alcohol in remote communities is a real hornet’s nest of an issue. I’m coming into this a bit late, and going off at a tangent but…
Pearson’s position, and that incidentally of WHO, is that alcohol abuse has become an social determinant of poor health, lower living standards in its own right. The thing about a lot of these remote Indig communities is that they exist in isolated areas so it’s easier to place alcohol restrictions on them than larger urban areas (where, yes, a larger proportion of the Abl population live). The international literature on alcohol indicates that supply reduction is more effective as a strategy for limiting the effects of substance misuse than education or rehab (that being said, you would want to include these as well). The OPAL roll-out proposed for petrol-sniffing in central Australia works on the same principle — altho we’re looking at a geographically large area with small communities within it, it should be possible to restrict the supply of petrol within this area because of its relative isolation, etc.
You’re right to point at the different ways ‘alcoholism’ is construed across classes. Here in Alice Springs, there is a large alcohol problem amongst the non-Indig population (if you look at the high rates of per capita alcohol consumption). But generally only Aboriginal people end up in the clink or the sobering up shelter, because non-Indig people can afford the taxi-fare home or their mates drive them. The cops don’t usually provide their taxi service.
But desparate times call for desparate measures. Three people have been murdered on the stretch of river outside my block of flats in the last six months. I can’t say that grog causes these kind of incidents, but it’s frequently a catalyst or exacerbates existing tensions. A high level of emergency presentations at A & E record high alcohol levels (.3 being a figure recorded regularly). There is a sense in which alcohol has become a cause in itself, taken on a life of its own in the damage it causes to Indig communities out here. Much and all as I like drinking nice wine, I would happily see all the grog shops of Alice switched to low-alcohol beer only if it were possible, in order to contain some of these effects.
I come from the old self-determination days, and I think St Noel is a bit of a pain in the arse, quite frankly. (There was a story that when his grog plan was intro’d in certain parts of the Cape, heavily psychotic people were wandering round the streets because they hadn’t planned to deal with the effects of people suddenly coming off grog.) It’s not that I don’t think the underlying socio-economic don’t need to be addressed as well (or that I believe any of the essentialist garbage pedalled about Aboriginal people being genetically predisposed to becoming drunks); it’s just that alcohol abuse has such devastating effects on people’s health and in escalating levels of violence. I think it’s a shame that the Left couldn’t win these issues back in some way, and build a more coherent platform which would encompass alcohol abuse and socio-economic causes of Indig disadvantage.
Mark
This survey actually confirms a pretty serious alcohol problem in indigenous communities.
The biggest statistical difference by a long shot – was the amount drunk per session by indigenous drinkers males (6 or more) and females (4 or more). A whopping 46% for males and 56% for females difference between indigenous and non-indigenous communities.
All the other differences you pointed out, were statistically insignificant or small ie. the percentage difference between current drinkers in indigenous and non-indigenous was 2%, those who drank less than once a week was likewise 2%. There was a 12% difference in those drinking once a week and more indigenous people who had stopped drinking 13% (which probably reveals a greater amount of ex-problem drinkers).
The difference isn’t the percentage of people in each community consuming alcohol – it’s the amount consumed per session by those drinking, which is so statistically different.
This evidence suggests that problem drinking in indigenous communities is more related to binge-drinking and drunkenness, rather than consistent drinking or functional alcoholism, which would probably show up statistically higher in non-indigenous communities with binge drinking problems also.
I would think there are many D&A reports showing a correlation between very high amounts of alcohol consumption and binge drinking related to unsafe activities and crime eg: assaults, drink-driving, sexual assault, vandalism, domestic violence, dangerous pranks etc.
The survey is v. old and I would also assume that substance abuse has increased across society and in indigenous communities, and now include poly drug use. Starting ages have also come down.
My theories. Apart from the gym, trophy wife, thin-chicks-get-the-nice-job factors above…
Low SES and obesity:
Delicious food that isn’t fattening is more expensive than delicious food that is fattening.
Gender disparity:
Low SES men are more likely to do hard physical labour for a living.
Jo
The differences among non-drinkers and former drinkers are statistically significant. And this is the one that goes to the stereotype.
The other factor is that the survey is based on self reports. I know from my own experience in the past that you’re often tempted when you’re asked by a GP how much you drink to minimise it. I’d be surprised if the amount consumed per session among Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in the same socio-economic category was in reality all that different.
I’m not sure also that you’ve taken into account the fact that the survey captures largely urban Aboriginal people who don’t live in “Indigenous communities”.
Binge drinking is on the rise generally in the last decade, and very markedly so among young women. But where’s the same level of moral panic there?
As I said, the stats aren’t current, but what I was looking for was something that would be easily accessible via google to anyone interested in finding out facts as opposed to received opinion. I don’t know if you look at a lot of social epidemiology research, but the surveys needed to get reliable data sets are often very expensive, and whether or not there is current data depends heavily on funding priorities. I was surprised that given the salience this issue has in the media and political debate, there was apparently no data collected by the Federal or State governments that was recent. That in itself tells us something.
Nevertheless, I’ll hunt down any more recent data via academic databases when I get a chance.
El, I agree with a lot of what you say, and thanks Reg for your comment.
Mark C, you’ve spoiled my fun with the guessing game.
The short story is that there’s a strong link between low socio-economic status and obesity in women, but the most obese group of men are middle-income and the least obese for both genders high income.
I did read a few studies on it last night, but I’m on the run today and logged into the net from an internet cafe, so I’ll save up a discussion of those for when I get a chance.
A quick inspection of the literature suggested to me that while the correlations had been found, not much further work had been done on the causal factors. That’s very interesting to me, and I’d love to hear what people’s speculation is.
sorry, worded some of my post v. poorly –
should’ve read:
the biggest statistical difference by a long shot is the percentage difference of indigenous to non-indigenous drinkers who drink more 6 or more (males) or 4 or more (females) when they do drink, being 46% and 56% higher in indigenous communities.
Sorry Mark. Didn’t mean to spoil the fun! Hopefully you will post on obesity and SES as I think there are quite a few factors that could be discussed.
I intend to, Mark – I think it’s a really interesting area – just a matter of finding the time this week.
Mark,
I’d pointed out very clearly based on the stats provided by you, that the overwhelming statistical difference between indigenous and non-indigenous communities is the amount drunk per session, by indigenous drinkers according to your own “evidence”. And that one stat. could also account for the types of anti-social behaviours, which are disproportionately seen, in some indigenous communities.
But suddenly, this part of the report is now unreliable according to you, because of ‘your own under-reporting to your GP’, or that you guess that similar socio-economic groups across the groups would account for this HUGE statistical difference!
You stated “So we all think we know that there are “facts� on which we can base debate and policy. But in fact what we have turns out to be a theory, and a mistaken one which is not supported by the evidence.�
Well, the evidence you presented in this case, actually supports the exact opposite of what you were saying – and in fact, there IS a huge statistical difference between communities, in relation to the amount of alcohol consumption per session by individuals within those communities.
As for teen female drinking – there is quite a lot of moral panic about raunch culture and teen drinking. When hospital admissions, increased sexually transmitted diseases, infertility due to these diseases, sexual assaults, long-term alcohol dependence show up in greater numbers, then expect the debate to be very much louder.
I don’t mean to sound rude or unnecessarily provocative or angry btw. just assertive!
Mark:
I worked in an Aboriginal community where there seemed to be a higher proportion of men who had given the grog away than in any other remote-and-rural place I had been. “Anectdotal only”; I didn’t keep statistics. But it was nice being able to mention this whenever the stereotype of drunken Abos was trotted out.
Pavlov’s Cat:
You said
How true!!! Although there are have been a few very good efforts at putting relevant, useful nutritional information in forms that are readily accepted and understood by those it is supposed to benefit.
Jo
It’s difficult to make judgements about the reliability of statistical data without examining the actual processes of data collection and analysis and validation. My point about self reports goes to basic research methodology. People are unlikely to mislead on a survey question on something very clear cut such as whether they do or do not drink alcohol at all. But it’s well known that self reports on substance consumption have to be taken with a grain of salt because people minimise what they see as being an admission that reflects badly on them. I wasn’t meaning to use my own experience to hang this on as evidence, just to use it as an illustration of a phenomenon that’s well documented – for instance in experimental studies which compare people’s self reports of alcohol consumption with observation of the same people’s actual consumption. So it’s not that the report is “unreliable”, just that there are other indications that the statistical difference perceived by you might be an artefact rather than a reality. For a number of reasons, there’s also a good basis to believe that more accurate answers to these sort of questions might come from Indigenous people. You can’t read any particular statistical study in isolation from others which might indicate or contra-indicate the same trends, and you can’t read it without considering also the differences in the reliability and validity of answers to particular types of questions.
If I were to sit down and do some serious work on this issue, I’d also be looking for other studies on the prevalence of binge drinking among non-Indigenous people. Often what you’re doing when you’re assessing the validity of research is comparing it with, and trying to fill in its gaps from, other complementary studies that might have larger or more recent data sets, or for that matter more targetted and focussed data sets, or which might be testing for different variables.
You also need to consider the direction of causality and which variable is the independent variable. If you have a finding that heavy drinking is very similar among Indigenous and non-Indigenous people from a low socio-economic category, and the finding is robust, you can only conclude that the causal link is between poverty and deprivation and drinking and that race has nothing to do with it. Now that’s not a matter of my opinion, but the only conclusion that’s actually supported by such a finding.
Anyway, I don’t accept that you’ve made out your point for those reasons.
And I remind you again that I am not seeking to minimise the dangers or the prevalence of alcohol abuse within Indigenous communities, but to point out that the perception that all Indigenous people are drunks, or are more prone to be drunks than non-Indigenous people is bollocks. And I also want to point out that the communities where alcoholism is a massive problem are not representative of the whole picture of Indigenous Australia, and therefore it’s totally fallacious to base Indigenous policy for all Indigenous people on the situations prevalent among particular Indigenous people.
I don’t think I can explain it any more clearly, and I lack any further time to debate this today.
It was clear to me when reading this post.
Great post, Mark.
Thanks, weathergirl!
Must dash now.
Interesting post.
w/r/t the obesity issue (and this is a guess), is it possible that the spike in obesity is partly determined by a differential between very ancient eating-habit urges (i.e., store up the fat against the day of famine!) and very recent advances in food production (surprise! there IS no famine!)? I believe I read above that obesity spikes highest in rural areas, which I think would tend to correlate with this idea. If one ate in a way that maxed on carbs and fats, but also periodically lived through periods of food scarcity, on the whole one would probably remain thinner. But if the periods of food scarcity simply never arrive, and all other things remain equal, then whammo! obesity.
It’d be similar to the (in part) reasoning for the massive overbreeding in Third World countries: the old habit was to have lots of children, in the sober expectation that many of them would die. Now, child mortality rates have dropped precipitously across the spectrum, but the old habit has not caught up with the new reality.
Well, it’s just a guess. Anyway, interesting post.
I wonder whether child bearing would be a factor in the disparity between low-SES men and women’s obesity rates? Preganancy itself leads to weight gain. If the woman was employed in a low-income job, there is little incentive to return to work after the baby is born, which might see her staying at home existing on Centrelink payments. Social isolation might arise through not being at work, and not being able to afford the sort of social networking that high-income stay-at-home mums can do. From that point, there would be a whole network of factors pointing to obesity – boredom, low self-esteem, low disposable income, reliance on convenience food, etc.
“If one ate in a way that maxed on carbs and fats, but also periodically lived through periods of food scarcity, on the whole one would probably remain thinner”
No – periods of food scarcity actually encourage the body to store more when food IS available. This is one reason yoyo ‘diets’ do not work.
What on earth is an “indigenous person” outside the polemics of the morally vain?
Mark I’m probably as dumb as dogshit, but I really don’t get why – you can use stats. from a report which you called “evidenceâ€? and “ factâ€? in your original post, but when I point out other stats in the very same report, suddenly the report requires a gigantic list of conditions and clarifications be met, which is not at all, how you presented this information in the first place, plainly stating “Here’s some statistical evidence which demonstrates that fewer Indigenous people than non-Indigenous people drink, and those who do drink drink less often.â€?
While your “statistical evidence� is drawn exclusively from data in this report and you make this assertion twice “You are more likely to drink regularly and to drink at all if you’re not Indigenous�, on the other hand, I’m not permitted to mention that the overwhelmingly significantly distinct statistic in the same report is that you are more likely to drink to excess, by accepted health standards, if you are an indigenous female who drinks, compared to non-indigenous females who drink, by a factor of 67% to 11% etc. or the male difference being some 70% to 24%?
In response, you post an undergraduate’s nightmare list of work to be undertaken, before I should even think of hinting at this statistic’s veracity!
IMO, the report actually underlines why stereotypes of indigenous drinking are so pervasive in that – while the overall percentage of indigenous people who drink is actually slightly less by 2% than in non-indigenous communities as you pointed out, the indigenous drinkers who do drink, according to the report, a very large percentage, drink excessively compared to non-indigenous communities.
I understand the premise of this post is about the stereotyping of all indigenous communities as being dysfunctional or myths that all indigenous people are alcoholics etc., however, I don’t understand why some “facts� are being privileged to support your argument exclusively.
As for reasons and answers – IMO its all about inter-generational poverty, lack of employment opportunities, historical dispossession, breaking down of ancient cultural and tribal relationships, lack of services, education, training, skills, poor governance and so on, and I would think the answers are just as broad – more Govt services, more employment opportunities, more small business, more regional and rural development, more D&A programs, more D&A rehabilitation, more scholarships for indigenous youth in sport, arts, law, general education. More indigenous policing, more indigenous health workers, more restorative justice programs, more corporate involvement in infrastructure, better governance and representation, more of everything…except alcohol!
Btw, Mark, I REALLY do appreciate the opportunity to post about all types of issues on this site, and very much enjoy the v. intelligent debates, and postings by the vast majority of LP people, and so thanks so much for doing all this!
No probs, Jo, I was trying to keep it relatively straightforward because I’m not teaching 2nd year methods on this thread!
The two facts that we can take from this report are the two I’ve mentioned. For a number of reasons, which I’ve explained, the figures about self reports on the amount consumed are less reliable. I’ve tried to show why, and the fact that if you were going to come to some more definite conclusions about them, you’d need to look at a range of other research.
The most certainly demonstrated thing in the report is the correlation between low socio-economic status and heavy drinking. That should come as no massive surprise, but again it’s worth highlighting that the figures taken overall do not point to the conclusion that “common wisdom” suggests – and thus policy should be evidence-based rather than stereotype based.
The reason that some facts are being “privileged” is that for technical reasons I’m more confident that they are facts.
One of the goals that we have in teaching research methods is how to interpret statistics – and quantitative studies – it’s very much more complex than people think – and unfortunately it’s not an art or a science that’s widely disseminated – particularly among journos who really should be expected to do better.
I totally agree with your second last para btw!
Leftist Queers, the concept is actually defined in Australian law. Look it up.
Mark
I am not convinced that it is a useful concept in discussions such as this.
Well, if people like Noel Pearson, Mal Brough and Peter Costello want to make policy based on perceptions about substance abuse among Indigenous people, I’d have thought it was obviously a “useful concept in discussions such as this”.
J_p_z, you raise an interesting point. Poorer societies previously associated ‘obese’ with ’successful’ as in being able to afford more-than-sufficient quantities of food (all those fat, spoiled, ‘little emperors’ in China seem to bear this out). Now in rich Westernised societies, with widespread cheap availability of obesity-inducing food products and a tendency to sedentary lifestyles, ‘thin’ is regarded as ’successful’ — it takes dedicated spare time and money to remain thin (not strictly true but I think that’s the unconscious perception). Similarly you see old texts prefer ‘alabaster’ as a preferable complexion for ladies, as ‘tanned’ is a state of peasantry and other outside low-status work, whereas in modern times it has been ‘tanned’ as the marker of status (dedicated leisure time for sun bathing and other activities) and ‘pale’ a condition of the under-sunned office or domestic worker. That’s my take anyway.
So my guess is that low-status women are likely to the fat ones. Thinness is far more a marker of status among women than it is for men. Middle aged upper-middle-class men appear to often wear their spare tires as a badge of pride (myself included) and their socio-economic status enables them to override the ‘disadvantage’ of not being one of the beautiful people. Also male fashions tend to me more forgiving of the spread — for example the lounge suit which is easily tailored to be quite slimming on a man and obviously, the height of good style. Whereas ’stylish’ women’s fashions seem pretty unforgiving of undesirable bulges.
However, I wouldn’t be surprised if a ‘Paris Hilton’ effect on lower class females manages to overturn my initial assumptions, especially if coupled with the increasingly prevalence of the ‘cut’ gay male body stereotype acting on upper middle class males.
I don’t know if it’s the total diet so much as the ‘treats’.
Cheaper treats tend to be more processed and fat, sugar, and carbohydrate laden than more expensive ones. If a treat is a bucket of chicken on a Friday, a wealthier person doesn’t buy three buckets of chicken but goes out to nice restaurant. A low fat flat white rather than a can of coke. A bucket of chips rather than a florentine etc.
Also for people on lower incomes food is often the only treat, whereas the wealthier have other ways of treating themselves in other less calorie laden ways – shoes, spas, ski holidays.
I suggest drug and alcohol abuse (as opposed to use) in every individual’s case is a result of trauma of some sort. The correlation between alcohol use and such things as domestic violence exists because those suffering unresolved trauma turn to drugs and alcohol. Drugs & alcohol are everpresent parts of peoples lives as they try to escape, often binging, and so it is a factor in violence just as in every other part of an addicts life.
I suggest an exploration of the underlying social circumstances that leads to personal breakdown would give explanations of why people drink so much as well as why they engage in family violence, suicide, etc. – not just the nature of drinking, binge or otherwise.
e.g. correlation between unemployment, overcrowding, contact with criminal justice system, sexual assault, etc. would provide a better insight into social dysfunction than drinking patterns.
Alcoholism is not the cause of family violence etc, the two are symbiotic symptoms of other causal factors which should be explored to arrive at research relevant to strategies for healing and family peace.
The present heavy focus on grog only reinforces “grog consciousness” which can never be overcome until some real healing in other areas occurs.
el
you said
” The international literature on alcohol indicates that supply reduction is more effective as a strategy for limiting the effects of substance misuse than education or rehab”
I wonder if you would share where you got this from as it contradicts the premiers department report into grog laws which said supply reduction was meaningless without demand reduction through health and education programs. (the above ignored, buried report) This same report suggests that supply reduction simply moves problem drinkers to other areas.
It would be iinteresting to see how it works in other places.
from my last post…
I just thought of an example of what I am talking about.
Some years ago “Sisters Inside” did some research on women prisoners in Qld which showed the usual correlation of drug and alcohol use and the prisoners’ lives and crimes. Such research was common knowledge and shed no new light. However the significant thing they found, which had not been analysed before, was that something like 75% of women prisoners had suffered sexual assault which shone a new light on the sociology of women prisoners, and provided a more realistic framework for developing correctional programs appropriate to women.
looking at Aboriginal communities through Alcohol coloured glasses has caused us to miss the point a bit.
Fail to see Mark why the stats leading to your facts are not equally as self-reported and hence just as unreliable as the stats leading to Jo’s misperceptions.
Is it because you believe non-indigenous feel greater shame about excessive drinking and so are more likely to under-report the volume they drink but are happy with the frequency thing as afterall it’s very middle-class to have that glass of vino with the evening pasta?
The conclusion might then be that binge drinking is equal across demographics or else that we can’t measure it at all.
But this shouldn’t lead us to a conclusion that binge drinking in say a certain remote community is harmless. When we know for certain it is a very bad thing. And needs to be addressed. Regardless of the stats. In an ideal world all the remedies listed by Jo would be funded and resourced. I agree. And then grog would be just another life-style issue as it is for the majority. But given that Australia is not going to cough up for Jo’s wishlist because of our inescapable racism, then let’s have that band-aid. And ban grog in certain locales.
People are bleeding.
I’ve explained that already, wbb, and I’ve emphasised over and over again that I don’t at all think binge drinking in remote communities is harmless. I think it’s a huge problem. I don’t think that if communities went dry, all problems would disappear. Go back up the thread and read Reg’s comment for more, and also what I said on the previous thread.
I also pointed out that there are other studies on binge drinking which compare observation to self-reports and that’s one of the things I’m basing my assessment on.
I don’t mean to sound curt, but I’m tired and about to go to bed and I’m also tired of trying to explain that these problems are more complex than simple dichotomies would suggest, so therefore it’s not the case that if you believe that the stereotypes are wrong, and that binge drinking is more a symptom, but a symptom that itself does harm, that somehow you’re condoning it or trying to minimise it.
Why can’t you see that putting something in its correct dimensions and understanding the complexities leading to social dysfunction are actually necessary if not sufficient conditions for understanding the situation?
http://www.thefinalanswertoeverything.com/
Binge drinking is definitely deadly, not just to the one drinking but to the people he just happens to meet on the way home.
“I don’t know if it’s the total diet so much as the ‘treats’.
Cheaper treats tend to be more processed and fat, sugar, and carbohydrate laden than more expensive ones”
It isn’t just the ‘treats’. Processed and packaged foods are more prevalent than they used to be and, due to time pressures etc, are a popular replacement for home cooked meals. These products tend to have higher levels of sugar, salt and fats than the home cooked equivalent. They are also more likely to contain trans-fats (these are the nastiest of the nasty fats.)
More expensive does not equate with healthier in the way you mean either. Because a ‘treat’ is more expensive it does not mean it will contain less fat, sugar or salt than the equivalent cheaperversion. Imported belgian chocolate is no better for you than cadbury’s.
I agree that food is often the only way low income earners can have reward and treat themselves.
PollyT
True , it isn’t just the treats but if we looked at what people needed to eat to feed themselves, I don’t think there’d be a radical difference across income levels about what you could eat as part of meals and how this would make you fat. Bowl of cereal for breakfast, sandwich or two for lunch, and pasta for dinner. None of these need to be processed and often non-processed is cheaper and not much more time consuming. Basic carbohydrates are what they’ve been in many countries for ages – rice, pasta, potatoes. So by ‘treat’ I guess I’m also including the over and above stuff.
My instinct says that being poor doesn’t mean you have to eat fattening crap but this is also a matter of educating.
I agree it doesn’t mean healthier but portion control is important and with more expensive food you get more pleasure from less. As with drugs, the better you get, the less you need. A whole mars bar vs one belgian chocolate.
I’ve only just seen this post. I would love to believe that Aboriginals do not have a serious alcohol problem but I’m afraid the results of a survey based on self-reporting is trumped by what I have seen with my very own eyes.
If you go to an NT town like Alice Springs for very first thing that will hit you is the extent of Aboriginal drunkeness. It is absolutely everywhere. You can not escape the staggering, vomiting black skinned zombies who are all over the place every day of the week. I also don’t believe the social worker who told me something like 95% of Aboriginal males in Alice Springs are alcoholics was a liar. Other towns like Katherine and Darwin aren’t much better.
Here in Melbourne I used to work in the city and I’d often catch the tram through Smith and Gertrude Streets in Fitzroy. Once again, day and night drunken Aboriginals stagger about in significant numbers. I will never forget the disgusting sight of an Aboriginal guy vomitting in the gutter then giving his girlfriend a nice sloppy tongue kiss.
Self-reported survey results are highly dubious. At least that is what I learnt in Quantitative Resreach Methods at Uni. I’d also suggest it is common sense.
Another factor worth mentioning is that alcohol doesn’t affect us all in the same way. Maybe Aboriginals are genetically less able to handle their liquor.
If you’ve only just seen it, steve, then have a look at the distinction in the link between urban aborigines and non-urban. And then reflect on extrapolating from anecdotal evidence – particularly evidence that’s particularly visible. I’ve seen with my own eyes etc. lots of drunk white guys in the street. Just that they’re well dressed when they vomit in the gutter, and lots of their sexual/intimate behaviour in public also leaves something to be desired.
If the self-reports are as worthless as you say, then so are the self-reports of non-Indigenous people to which they’re compared.
How would you propose measuring alcohol consumption?
Don’t you self-report when your GP asks you about yours?
Perhaps you could apply your expertise to a breakthrough in public health research?