Abstract
Post-structuralist theory questions the rational pursuit of an underlying ‘truth’ that often characterizes social scientific inquiry, proposing instead the simultaneous existence of multiple and often contradictory truths. The problem family can, from this perspective, only be known through the different discourses that produce it. This paper suggests some of the political advantages of developing methods of reading ‘problems’ related to drugs and alcohol. Without this critical attention to language, we risk perpetuating the ways in which problems are talked about and thought about. Drawing on examples from debates surrounding teenage pregnancy and youth drinking, the paper argues that post-structuralism allows us to analyse the specific ways in which professional discourses write social problems, and hence to own them and to re-write them.
