How Not to Get People Motivated for Recovery from Addictions

Here is a somewhat incomplete list of what to do if you do not want someone to stop some sort of addictive behavior and get healthy.  Or if you want them to flee from your version of recovery back into the streets and possibly to die.

If you don't want them to get into recovery or remain in recovery, then you will:

 1.  Dictate who they can talk to on the telephone or write letters to or hang out with.

 2.  Tell them exactly what they "need to" do in order to get as "healthy" as you are.

 3.  Pull rank.  Remind them that they are problem people and that you have the answers.

 4.  Quote from recovery literature extensively, force them to read it, and teach them how to talk in clichés and platitudes.

 5.  Insist that you know what they need better than they do and insist that you know them better than they do.

 6.  Force them to find a male god similar to or the same as your god whether they are non-theists, polytheists, or other.

 7.  Demand that they "forgive" everyone who abused them in any way and demand that they talk about "their part" in the abuse.

 8.  Show them what "Tough Love" is-- even though you yourself know nothing about the history of the "Tough Love" movement or what an abomination it is-- and show them how to apply "Tough Love" to everyone else around them.

 9.  Take away their privacy.  Living in a fishbowl is oh so healthy.

10.  Give them a damning psychiatric diagnosis that will follow them for the rest of their lives, preferably one that ends with the phrase "personality disorder."


sapphoq itching for a coffee   

 

When a friend heads back into addiction

Art is still drinking and still claiming that his drinking is not a problem.  Art has not drank in front of me.  And there are no bottles at his home.  Perhaps he is only drinking at camp.  I don't really know.

Art's personality is not being improved by his intake of the drug alcohol.  That is for sure.  I've noted a ruder and cruder Art emerging over coffee in the last week.  Consequently, I've had to make a tough decision.

Art has to go.  Or, to put it another way, I have to make myself scarce as far as Art is concerned.  I have found myself mourning the friendship that we have shared over the past decade or more.  We've had lots of good times, he and I.  We've done quite a bit of traveling and drank quite a bit of coffee together.  But that is done for now.

I cannot jeopardize my own well-being for the sake of another.  Art is not an evil human being.  At this time, I cannot afford to hang with him.  Art has returned to a past lifestyle.  I cannot do that.  I don't want to be around the drama that is Art when he uses.  When and if Art is ready to quit using again, someone else will have to help him.  We've been too close.  I can't do it.  There are other people that I can have coffee with and travel with and have good times with.

We become what we do.  And we become again what we do again.  I wish to journey forward as a human being, not backwards into the bondage that is true addiction.

          Where's the coffee?

Thinking of alcohol as different...

Thinking of alcohol as different from other drugs has caused a great many addicts to relapse. Before we came to N.A. many of us viewed alcohol separately, but we cannot afford to be confused about this. Alcohol is a drug. We are people with the disease of addiction who must abstain from all drugs in order to recover.

~ from the N.A. Recovery Text reproduced on-line at  home.mchsi.com/~ciana/NA_Basic_Text_Fifth_Edition.doc

A close friend of mine recently decided to drink again after more than a decade of being abstinent from all drugs.  Art's justifications [not his real first name] for drinking were many and varied.  At the top of the list was the disclaimer, "I never really had a problem with alcohol.  I could take it or leave it."  But marijuana, he told me, was an entirely different story.  He had been unable to moderate his use of pot back in the days of active addiction.  He decided three weeks ago to take up drinking again.

"How's that working for you?" I asked.  [N.B.  I did not ask with a snarky tone of voice].  "Great!" he replied.  Art assured me that he was not overdoing the drinking, that so far he wasn't having a problem with it, that he was enjoying a social drink when out at the bar with a few buddies.  He told me that "no one wants to hang out with" someone who doesn't drink.  He said if he starts to develop a problem with alcohol, then he will "cut back."

Art was not asking for my help in this his latest endeavor.  I had to accept that.  In many ways, I would be the worst person for him to ask for assistance.  We've known each other since high school days, although we ran in different crowds and consequently never used together. 

There is a problem with thinking that an addict can return to using one drug safely, or can pick up a new drug and use that safely.  What we do is what we become.  If we've done it before, we will get in trouble with it again.  If we haven't done it before, we will get in trouble with it for the first time. 

"Trouble" does not necessarily indicate legal involvement or loss of income or relationships or stuff.  Trouble at the most basic level indicates being in trouble with oneself.  We can lie to others as much as we care to about anything.  [Most of] us do not get away with lying to ourselves.

Alcohol is a drug.  It is a chemical with a specific chemical formula.  It is physically addictive.  The addict who has never drank ought to endeavor to stay clear of alcohol.  Similarly, the alcoholic who has never used marijuana [or another street drug] ought to strive to not go out and experiment. 

A high percentage of people [90% is the commonly quoted number, but the number may actually be higher than that] are not addicts.  They don't experience any consequences from social drinking or social drug-taking.  That's great news!

A minority of people [10% is the commonly quoted number, but the number may actually be lower than that] cannot drink or use safely.  Bad things happen to them and around them when they do.  The addicts among us-- including those who are addicted to the drug alcohol-- may repeatedly endeavor to do it differently with or without excuses, justifications, or rationalization.  And just because addicts [including this one] cannot use safely, it does not follow that no one should.  I am not a prohibitionist.

To be honest, I also do not believe that addiction is a "disease."  I understand the sort of thinking behind this claim but I do not agree with it.  Labeling addiction, obesity, co-dependency, and other conditions as a "disease" is a legal and dimly medical argument to get insurance companies to pay for treatments.  I think that there are some numbers of etiologies underneath addiction.  I prefer to think of addictions as being conditions rather than disease entities. 

I am vaguely aware that some work has been done [in Canada, after being run out of the United States] by the Sobels in re-educating known alcoholics to healthy patterns of drinking.  I don't know enough about it to proffer an opinion about harm reduction in general.  I do know enough to know that I am myself beyond the point of being able to return to social usage.  My social use period was over with almost immediately after I first picked up.  I almost died and I am not willing to risk my life or my health on something that might kill me this time.

I am an addict.  I cannot control my usage once I've begun using.  There are drugs out there today that were not out there when I was using-- crack, beer with lime flavoring, hard lemonade, certain "designer" drugs-- but the bottom line for this addict is that what I do is what I become.  So I don't even flirt with the idea of trying them.  The powerlessness over my addiction for me specifies that now that I am an addict, I personally cannot go back to a state of being a non-addict.  I cannot use safely.

That is not to say that I am powerless over "everything."  I certainly am not.  I have a lot of personal power [N.B. power is not the same thing as control] and I intend to use it to my benefit and probably to the benefit of some other people around me.  Systems-change work involves the use of personal power of many members of a community of activists and stakeholders in order to challenge an archaic system.  I have hope today that justice can be had by people who have been and are being denied justice.  I have hope today that a closed system which demands compliance in order not to suffer set consequences can be mediated to include the freedom of individuality and self-expression.  I have hope today that we can create change.  I've considered the possibilities and I have picked my battles.  We need to change the systems that stifle us.

I wish the best for Art.  I really do.  I hope that his flirtation with drinking proves that he can drink safely or I hope that he is able to stop drinking [again] if he needs to.  And I hope he does not return to street drugs or to the abuse of legally prescribed drugs.  Meanwhile, I have some living to do.

                             Where's the coffee?

Vacuuming the Cat

This is a funny video on You Tube showing a cat being vacuumed.  The cat refuses to move and apparently likes the vacuuming.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQAzDVupJPc is where to find this if the embedding thingy doesn't work...






The cat is a calico.  Of the calicos and tortoise shells in my life, I have found all of them to be opinionated.  I've enjoyed them and there is one tortie in particular that left a hole in my heart when she died.  Netta had rabbit fur.  It was so soft.  If she wanted to be picked up, she would sit on the floor near a doorway, just waiting for one of the humans to pass by.  Once she got picked up, she went limp like a ragdoll [and like I imagine Ragdoll Cats to do].

She also taught Twinkle, my red headed kitty who departed for the rainbow bridge this year, how to catch mice.  Who knew they had to be taught?  Netta caught a mouse, killed it, and brought it to Twinkle.  When he tried to kick it back to her, she hissed.  When he leapt upon it, that was acceptable and so she didn't hiss.  Some time after that, Netta and Twinkle came tearing up the stairs and through the cat door.  Twinkle was making excited baby mews.  Netta deposited a dead mouse at my feet.  [Usually, she hid them.  I guess she was showing Twinkle what was expected of a proper cat].  I traded them a saucer of milk for it.

It has been said that female cats are better than male cats at mousing.  Twinkle turned out to be a excellent mouser.  I miss both cats very much.  That is my favorite memory of the two of them together.

sapphoq hunting up coffee

Dangerous Lunatics

Sunday's sermon was on forgiveness. Toward the end of the service, the minister asked, "How many of you have forgiven your enemies?" About eighty percent of the congregation raised their hands.

The minister then repeated his question. All responded this time,
except one small elderly lady. 

"Mrs. Jones?  Are you not willing to forgive your enemies?"

"I don't have any." She replied, smiling."Mrs. Jones, that is very unusual. How old are you?"

"Ninety-eight." she responded."Mrs. Jones, would you please come down in front and tell us all how a person can live ninety-eight years and not have an enemy in the world?"

The little sweetheart of a lady tottered down the aisle, faced the
congregation, and said: "I outlived the bitches."


     Religion has been the butt of some number of jokes, the bane of many a gathering [along with political opinions], and the source of admittedly sometimes heated discussions between theists and non-theists on Twitter [and in "real" life].  I recently received a mass appeal e-mail from an elderly relative written to the un-churched among us asking us to please allow his god to be our god too.  We were to return the e-mail to him after agreeing to this so that way he could be assured that we would find each other in the same heaven after we are all dead.  How unabashedly cheerful! I thought.  Not.

     Since today is Yom Kippur, the Wall Street Journal has published an article at http://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-financial-cost-of-religious-faith-2013-09-13?siteid=yhoof2 by Charles Passey about the monies that the faithful spend during the course of their attendance at organized religious gathering sites.  And in order to remain in good standing with said places.

     Folks in detoxes and rehabs for addictions treatment are almost immediately confronted with the word "God" usually followed by "as we understand/understood Him" in the form of The Twelve Had Betters of traditional 'self-help' or 'mutual aid' programs.  If those folks continue in out-patient and with attendance at meetings after their stint in a hospital, they are sure to find people suggesting that they use the group as their "Higher Power" for now.  They will also be "reassured" that without such a "Higher Power" in their lives, it will be impossible to achieve sobriety/ remain in recovery/ sober up/ stay clean.

     Believers everywhere grouse about the atheists, Dawkins atheists, new atheists, Those People who are ungodly Satan worshippers.  Non-believers everywhere grouse about believers, theists, fundamentalists, fundies, dangerous fundies.  Some folks firmly believe.  Some sort of believe.  Some don't believe.  And some don't frankly give a damn.  Contrary to popular opinion, one can be both an atheist and an agnostic.  One can also be an adherent to an organized religion yet be more of a deist [think "generalist"] in actual philosophy and practice.  The shouters proclaim that the "other side" is full of dangerous lunatics.

     We are all dangerous lunatics.  Every one of us [in a general way] is a dangerous lunatic.  Regardless of where we fall on the spectrum labeled religion, we humans [in general] have proven ourselves to be argumentative, explosive, impulsive, full of hate, and prejudiced.  We humans [in general] have also proven ourselves to be capable of peace-making, thoughtful, deliberate, loving, and willing to celebrate our differences.  Is it our individual stances on religion that separates us into petty categories?  Or is it something else?

     Perhaps our ancestors' ability to survive in a harsher environment depended partly on the ability to conform, to surrender individualism in favor of the group, to bond together in order to confront dangers both known and unknown.  In learning to use language as a tool of communication, we've also learned to label.  This is good.  That is evil.  This is acceptable but that isn't.  That I am able to mentally masturbate on these things is a definite sign that I have a First World Life with First World Problems.  People who have to struggle to find potable water or shelter or safety don't have the luxury of massaging their brain cells with supposes.  I bitch because the recent spat between two mega-companies has left me without the ability to flick a switch in order to watch a series about a fictional serial killer for several weeks.  Some other folks worry about their next child succumbing to a poverty-induced disease.  I have many pairs of clean white socks in my dresser drawers and other human beings go without the basics.  I find within myself exists a certain apathy that shields me from the harshness of true poverty and deprivation.  It is my apathy that renders me a dangerous lunatic.  Whether or not I am a believer of any sort, I am allowing myself to be lulled into a state of macro-consumer.

     It is neither my religion nor my lack of religion that determines my state of being.  There is first the accident of birth.  The facts of my birth determined that I would be a native to First World Problems, that I would not grow up in a bombed out city, that I would have access to an education and transportation and leisure.  The genetic code entrenched in my DNA determined the ease in which I would move around this First World.  The lack of genetic diseases or lethal birth defects gave me a pretty good shot at an average or better than average First World life expectancy.  The functioning of my brain influences how I exist and how I think about my existence.  My choices determine my health risks, how I deal with my assets and liabilities, my challenges and what I do with my abilities.  Birth.  Genetics.  Neurology.  Experiences. 

     Any choices that I make within the religious arenas are also determined by the timing and the geographical location of my birth, my genetics and neurology, and my experiences.  Were I born within certain timeframes and geographic indices, I might not have been ever presented with the dazzling array of religions to choose from as an adult.  Had I been born with a fatal genetic mutation, I might not have attained the age of majority or the ability to choose from various religions.  Had my brain functioning been sub-par, my experiences certainly would have been different than the ones that I've had to date.  It is birth, genetics, neurology, and experiences that determine what choices I have even in respect to religious practices and beliefs.  My tentative conclusion is this:  Religion is a function of rather than a causative factor in the makings of us who are the dangerous lunatics of the world as we know it.

 sapphoq itching for a coffee