N.A. or not N.A?: that is the question. For or against 12-step recovery?

[Dickon]

It has amazed me how many people on here looking to quit opiates and other drugs have never even heard of Narcotics Anonymous (N.A.). I'm, therefore, curious to conduct a straw poll as what people on here think about it.

My two cents are that although I do not plan on becoming an N.A. member this time round, the only reason that this is even a remote possibility is the vast number of invaluable lessons I learnt about getting and staying clean in N.A. meetings. I think it's simply the best place for a lost soul in the agony of active addiction to first seek help. It's a really fantastic thing, it's free and (almost) universally available.

I know one objection is the use of the word God in the 12-steps themselves, but this is a completely specious objection. The phrase is "God, as you understand him (or God: the him might be on the out for sexism reasons)". An atheist could understand God as "A fictional concept created by man". That's consistent with the 12-steps, or how about God as "the totality of matter and forces in the universe, combined with the laws that govern motion", or maybe "God is a word that stands for what you make of it", etc. Don't let a lapsed monotheistic past colour your views!

So I embrace the non-hypocritical but somewhat odd position that I'd recommend it to anyone with no experience of staying or getting clean, but find it a little too strong on answers for my taste.

Dickon added 2 Minutes and 32 Seconds later...

P.S. I don't think I need to do this but just in case there is some very very oblique self-incrimination I add that this doublemerged post in entirity is to be viewed as fiction ...for entertainment purposes only.....

Reputation Comments on this post:

	thanks for sharing your thought provoking ideas and questions
	Good question
	nice way to bring it up

[JohnnyGanja]

I am definately against the program. Maybe it is just me and my impressions that I got from my experience with rehab and The 12-steps.

HOWEVER, if it can help somebody and keep them clean and it works for them, then by all means do what you gotta do--If Christ can make you a better man than Siddhartha, then I am all for it.

But the program was meaningless to me--it seemed to me the people were born-again christian drug-addicts. I know it says "God, as you understand him..." blah blah blah, but I have never seen one group that every member wasn't a newly saved christian or was not striving to be. Everyone in the groups (at least IME) have the same basic belief of God. When I was in rehab, I was scolded and thrown out of our daily meetings for voicing my opinion on religion and how we needed instead to give ourselves more credit and have faith in ourselves if we really want to stay sober, why put all faith in the hands of the Ghost King and leave our fate to hope in that deity. I was eventually thrown out of in-patient rehab for my continued debates about God and Christianity and because the other patients said I was offending them.

Also, 90% of the meetings for AA and NA both...all take place in churches.

Personally I think if one wants to get clean, its a matter of "How bad do you want it"...I don't need a 12 step instruction manual to sobriety to promise me that if I complete those steps I will be sober--The 12 steps is just an incomplete version of the REAL program: the 13 Step program--the 13th step being 'relapse'.

Now I do not mean to offend anyone who the program is working for, this is just my opinion and what I have seen from the program. But all groups did for me was piss me off and waste my time. Getting clean is not a science or a will of God...it is a choice. If you want it bad enough, you will have it. I understand this may sound as though I am saying its easier than people think to get sober. That is not what I am saying. Its extremely tough and most people need help.

In rehab and at meetings it is told by the head of the group or whatever that only 2% will stay clean. I have seen people I was in-patient with and people I met at groups afterward and every single one I bumped into is using their D.O.C. again. its sad ....

But I hear tell it works for a lot of people so I can not be against that--if it works then I support them in staying sober that way--

Its just that for me it is all bad...I did it myself

Reputation Comments on this post:

good points

[Dickon]

Lies follow....

Jonny, that's exactly the kind of reply I was looking for here. You might like this thread : http://www.drugs-forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57213 if you want to go and do some religion bashing. Just a thought if you ever wanted to let of some steam.

There is a one point that you have well made, i.e. that only a very small x% make it. Relapse is just all-too-common, and people with 15 or 20 years away from the drugs are rare. However at least in short-medium term evaluations, all studies I've ever come across (and I can't quote chapter and verse here) for addiction/alcoholism found that being a member of a 12-step fellowship improved outcome significantly. I don't know if you're a believer in the disease concept of addiction, but if you had a serious cancer would you take the 2%-chance cure or the 4%-chance cure? Even if the cure isn't palatable, it seems more effective than any other out there at the moment.

If it was a choice between relapse and NA I know I'd be driving over to the next meeting. But I'd like to try it my way. Well I'm 8 1/2 days in, and so far so good: hardly a recomendation for the Dr D method....YET! How long have you been clean, or aren't you?

Relgion : Was it a childhood enforcement of some kind of belief system that poisoned you against it,or was it just one of those things that just baffled you, or was it certain shitty religious folk or something else that poisoned you against it? The only spiritual practices I've ever had any luck with are Zen and Yoga.

Love to all and more views please:

Dr D.

[Spare Chaynge]

Swim has 9 months clean and sober about to take 10. Swim strongly disagrees with 12 step programs. There is no sense in some sort of universal plan to get people of drugs. Recovery is a very individual thing. We are not computers NA can not be installed and wala magically sobriety follows.

So many things wrong with Na swim does not have the time to explain them all.
Take for example the the addicted that has been clean and sober for a bit giving advice to an addict who is trying to get some time. On paper it works good in reality the sponser ends up giving fucked up advice to the sponsee.

Also take for example the either or fallacy of Na or any 12 step program. its either this program in all aspects of life or Jails institutions and death. This is just completely not true. It is a argument flawed on its very nature.

A lot of people in aa,na, or ca. Are not even addicts they just have other pre existing mental disorders that led them to become addicted at one point in their life.

This brings to point what is the defitiniton of an addict. To swims understanding the current medical model for addiction , is an ACQUIRED Addiction. It is not a life long addiction.

The idea of the disease being one of a spiritual malady is just midevil plain and simple.

What other disease is attributed to being basically godless? Any dr who says something like oh you have aids you should pray would loose his liscence.

On paper AA looks ok if you can overlook many many literature fallacys one after another.. for example the Either or fallacy, The slippery slope fallacy(scare tactic).

Spare Chaynge added 0 Minutes and 33 Seconds later...

Something like this would be a lot better.
Rough Reformatting of the 12 Steps to Recovery:

1.)We admitted we were addicts, and that using had made our lives unmanageable.
2.)We came to believe that doing something entirely different, especially not using and sharing with other addicts, could help restore us to sanity (or at least, somewhat of a normal life).
3.)We made a decision to turn a significant amount of our energy, focus, and action toward involvement with other addicts choosing not to use.
4.)We honestly and thoroughly took a look at our past, including our actions and reactions to events. Especially important, we looked for where we had been the source of our own troubles.
5.)We admitted to ourselves and to our closest recovering addict(s) the exact nature of our wrongful and hurtful actions and behaviors.
6.)We were entirely ready to commence a new program of action and behavior mindful of our character defects.
7.)We humbly began the above program of action, recognizing our imperfections along with our progress.
8.)We made a list of all persons, places, and things we had harmed and became willing to make necessary amends.
9.)We made direct amends whenever and wherever possible, except if greater harm than benefit might result in doing so.
10.)We continued, through our daily lives, to recognize our character defects and admitted our wrongs when they occurred.
11.)We continued to grow and develop as we were intended to prior to allowing our addiction to control us. For some of us, this process involved seeking spiritual and/or religious growth, and for some of us this did not.
12.)Having greatly improved the quality of our lives and those we interacted with as a result of this program of action, we tried to carry this message to suffering addicts and to practice each of these principles in all our affairs.

Funny how they’re still great suggestions. Funny how giving a damn about your own recovery precedes the effectiveness of either the mystical or demystified versions of the steps. And still funnier yet, it’s not that surprising that failing to do either of the sets of suggestions could make anyone’s life (not just the addict’s) harder/unmanageable.

Further,
For me, the intention is not to claim greater knowledge of addiction. Rather, I feel critical debate and thinking are healthy, important, and necessary means of understanding our lives and actions, as well as the options available to us. If we fail to do so, we do the world a great disservice. And if hoping to help the lot and lives of addicts by expanding their options for action is not a helpful way to “carry (a) message”, may I suffer the wrath of god and relapse (or shall we say, the god of wrath and relapse). I don’t mean to refute spiritual practices where an individual finds it useful. I merely mean to move away from the medieval and unscientific definition of addiction as a “spiritual malady”. Such a definition really begs the question. It simply doesn’t hold up to any logical test or comparison to another disease. Why does addiction get the special privileged designation of “spiritual”? It just does not make any sense. To me, assumption prior to logic is dangerous (especially when dealing with life/death diseases). The big book even states “contempt prior to investigation” will reinforce ignorance (see end of appendix 2: “spiritual experience”). Interestingly, I couldn’t agree more.

And further,
Nothing stops you from failing whether or not you follow the mystical or demystified 12 steps. It’s now in your hands to act on what you know. Obviously it’s not a perfect answer; obviously no “program of action” or “design for living” is perfect; nor is self knowledge a cure (something I will concede with the BigBook). However, if any of these were true, BigBook or no BigBook, relapse would never happen. They’re good ideas, simply that. Relapse after significant detoxification and clean time is a logical, albeit dangerous and irrational, decision/action process. At this point I have to say, that I would never want to impose the belief that spirituality means nothing (the BigBook forces the notion of spirituality as everything). In fact I believe the opposite; remember my cancer example: God/spirituality/whatnot may help for obvious psychologically pacifying reasons, but radiation cures/treats. Any mechanism that puts your psyche to rest is powerful psychologically. No wonder seeing other addicts recovering seems to help in a unique way that visiting a non-addict psychologist could never do (no matter what spiritual or unspiritual program is being followed). The problem with AA/NA/CA as I see it, is that there is no comparison group; so, it “works if you work it, and doesn’t if you don’t”…how convenient yet illogical and self-perpetuating.

That’s all I have for now; let me know what you think. I just feel some healthy debate needs to be done somewhere regardless of the rooms of “Anonymous”. Either way you crack it, it’s addicts helping other addicts.



Written by my grad student friend at ut... Simon the socialist sociologist.



NA is a good program and has helped many many people get off drugs.. It should not be abandoned if it has worked for swiy keep on doing it. Every one is indivuidual

Reputation Comments on this post:

	really good response
	awesome post, thanks for the thoughtful comments
	DAMN SC!!! That was a GREAT READ!! Very well-thought-out! I LOVE IT!!!`

[chillinwill]

Red Rock's personal beliefs on NA and AA are that it is helpful if it works for you. Since Red Rock is an addict, he has been to many many meetings before in his past. He has come to discover that he has now achieved almost 7 months clean now from his drug of choice, heroin and has done this without practicing the NA principles or working the steps so to speak. Red Rock believes that whatever an addict can do and whatever works for them to get clean, then by all means do it that way. For some people this might mean NA or AA, for others it could mean meditation or just doing some common sense things like staying away from the people, places, and things.

Red Rock has fully put himself and participated in NA in the past and the most clean time he could ever get out of that was 3 months. He had a sponser, worked the steps, daily meetings, read the big book, talked to people in his network, etc. This never fully worked for him though and this might help another addict though.

Red Rock believes NA contradicts themselves in many ways though. Here they are saying to stay away from the people, places, and things, yet, relapse is rampant in meetings and for Red Rock, it was very disappointing and not helpful to see someone with say 6,9 or 12+ months having to go back up there and picking up a white key tag and starting all over. Red Rock believed that while some people were fortunate enough to have many many years of recovery, that it is very discouraging to see all the relapses going on. Also, even though abstaining from drugs and alcohol is clearly a huge step for people, NA and AA have many many people chain smoking and drinking caffeine and coffee like there is no tomorrow. They have just replaced their addiction with something else granted that it has less negative consequences though.

The principle of why NA and AA works might be because of the fellowship, especially before and after the meetings but Red Rock has plenty of fellowships now that don't involve addicts and it has helped him stay clean. The reason that this is working for Red Rock this time is that he finally made up his made he had had enough of all the bullshit and drama and chaos addiction has caused in his life and wanted to move on. While he still gets cravings from time to time, he just does something else to occupy his mind such as taking dog for a walk, running, playing a video game, watching a movie, even coming on DF and posting has helped tremendously.

Red Rock knows he will think of some more stuff to say but for the moment, he is going to go fix some lunch. He will post on here some more has more comes to him

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Good post. Informative and balanced. I'm with you on the fags (and to a lesser extent the caffeine).
	Nice reply

[Panthers007]

As a kid in school, my first experience with religion was being banned from playing with the other kids because their parents found out I didn't attend Sunday School. This form of bigotry and intolerance grew with age. By the time I was in Junior High (age 12) the kids were actively yelling anti-semitic slogans and beating up the Jewish kids bloody in the hallways. As the teachers watched and did nothing.

When my parents and I brought this deplorable fact to the attention of the school administration, the Jew-bashers came for me the next day. I was a student of Kung Fu karate and made short work of them. So I was labeled violent and dangerous and told I was to be suspended from school. Lesson: Thou Shalt Nt beat Up The School Bullies. They are Holy icons doing the Lord's work.

If I had a drug (and/or alcohol) problem, sitting in a room with drugged versions of these kids-now-adults<koff> would send me to a bar lickety-spit.

These religion-reared Nazis comprised about 75% of the population in that town - which was/is considered "progressive."

[Dickon]

A turnip's not yet been taught to sing the following Song that I've written:

I sometimes forget we're in cyberspace and not in England. In England religion is usually kept slightly under ones cap (a sort of slightly embarassing secret, unless one is a Bible-basher, Witness, etc. I have one witness who thinks he comes to our house to do missionary work, but we're (My wife and I) trying to do missionary on him!) My best friend was Jewish when I was growing up and I vaguely knew he did some odd things from time to time, but it was never an issue.

But religion in America is an evil cancer, if you ask me. I saw a poster that about summed it up "The Christian right is neither". Panthers you have my full aproval for beating up the bullies, it's what I will teach my son. I'll try to teach him to do it sneakily and not get caught though! One of the last Southpark Episodes has a very good take on the subject, if you like Southpark.

My best wishes to all trying to penetrate through to the heart of anything and encountering the usual sheep trying to stop you

D

[JohnnyGanja]

Originally Posted by Dickon

If it was a choice between relapse and NA I know I'd be driving over to the next meeting. But I'd like to try it my way. Well I'm 8 1/2 days in, and so far so good: hardly a recomendation for the Dr D method....YET! How long have you been clean, or aren't you?

Relgion : Was it a childhood enforcement of some kind of belief system that poisoned you against it,or was it just one of those things that just baffled you, or was it certain shitty religious folk or something else that poisoned you against it? The only spiritual practices I've ever had any luck with are Zen and Yoga.

Love to all and more views please:

Dr D.

SWIM has been clean from heroin for 4 years. He wouldn't be making any of these statements if he was still an active addict.

I like how you insult me in a polite way. Thats funny.

No actually I am very open to religion and "higher powers" and blah blah blah what not. I was a practicing Buddhist for many years--I grew Christian, Methodist to be specific. Nothing was forced on me. I just find that using the modern day Christian Church as a back drop to sobriety is a joke. Now I have nothing against Christ whatsoever. Jesus was a good man. But taking one look and saying its the only way is just narrow-minded.

I am not saying anything against religion here as I am a firm believer of using spirituality and positive thinking to help get one sobered up. I am just very much so against organized religion because that gives you people like yourself politely insulting my childhood and my supposed "closed mind." I am simply of my own beliefs that include putting trust in yourself and faith in your own ability to make yourself better. God is not going to make you clean--YOU are going to get YOU sober.

But anyway. I am not really trying to bash the NA/AA crowd---I mentioned in my previous post that I am against the program when I am in it. It is not for me. I also said that if it works for other people, then by all means go for it...I have no problem with people going to NA...as long as it works, I wish you the best

[Dickon]

A snail in a parallel universe hums....

Johnny you've got me so wrong, but then again I think I read you wrong first, so I win the prize for being most wrong!! I just wrongly picked up from your first post an anger towards religion. It almost certainly is me not you who is closed minded on these things. Or I'm not exactly closed minded but the religious folk leave me stranded at page 1. I am very bad at pretending to follow something if I'm lost on page 1. I just don't understand people going on about the literal truth of the Bible. The Bible contains contradictions by the score. Anyone who says otherwise is simply a cretin (my mind is closed) at least in that area of their thinking. I could get by seeing the Bible as some kind of mystical road-map, but you tell that to Joe-Christian and they look at you as if you've got 666 tattooed across your forehead. I get more spirituality from reading the book "The Never Ending Story" myself (this is NOT a flip comment). Anyway I'm straying slightly from my own topic here. Except that I think views about religion and/or God and views about NA are often strongly linked, so I won't delete this post. It's brilliant to see someone 4 years off Heroin without NA. I am really hoping to have given up on NA, as it's answer-giving modality does not fit with my question-asking one. But were I given a straight choice (a totally hypothetical one of course) between NA and relapse it would be no choice. I am like you perhaps are, backing myself here. I'm older, wiser, and I'm not a one-man band any more.

I'm sorry if you felt attacked. I want this place to be somewhere where any view can be attacked as by a rabid dog if necessary, but people are completely off limits.

D

[drug-bot]

swims doesnt see the value of na or aa programs, swim believes those few who succeed in the progams do so out of a sort of placeabo effect (which isnt bad if it helps people) and just the support and companionship (its no na/aa or higher power magic). its nothing special about na/aa, if an addict can find meaning in life and support and companionship from friends and family they have a higher chance at remaing clean.

On a personal note swims a recovering heroin addict (3 months so far and has no desire to use), he never liked na or aa cause the spiritual (arguably religous) overtones in the 12 steps. swim got off heroin by enroling in a methadone clinic, getting a part-time job, going college full time, and enjoying the support of family and friends.

Originally Posted by Dickon

all studies I've ever come across (and I can't quote chapter and verse here) for addiction/alcoholism found that being a member of a 12-step fellowship improved outcome significantly. .

heres an interesting artical from the new york times that talks about scientific studies showing 12 step programs no more effective than any other form of substance abuse treatment or individual cognitive therapy.-

Review Sees No Advantage in 12-Step Programs



By NICHOLAS BAKALAR
Published: July 25, 2006
When Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programs are examined in controlled studies, a new review reports, scientists find no proof that they are superior to any other intervention in reducing alcohol dependence or alcohol-related problems.
The researchers, led by Marica Ferri of the Italian Agency for Public Health in Rome, found little to suggest that 12-step programs reduced the severity of addiction any more than any other intervention. And no data showed that 12-step interventions were any more — or any less — successful in increasing the number of people who stayed in treatment or reducing the number who relapsed after being sober.
Alcoholics Anonymous is a self-help group that offers emotional support for alcohol abstinence and holds that alcoholism is a spiritual and a medical disease.
In some of the studies reviewed, A.A. was compared with other psychological treatments including cognitive-behavioral therapy, which encourages the conscious identification of high-risk situations for alcohol use; motivational enhancement therapy, based on principles of social and cognitive psychology; and relapse prevention therapy, a variation on the cognitive-behavioral approach. It was also compared with other spiritual and nonspiritual 12-step programs.
One study compared brief advice to attend A.A. meetings to motivational methods for encouraging 12-step involvement. Another evaluated the effectiveness of hospital-based 12-step programs, compared with community-based 12-step efforts.
The paper was published last week in The Cochrane Library, a journal devoted to systematic reviews of health care interventions. In all, the researchers examined eight trials involving 3,417 men and women ages 18 and older.
None of the studies compared A.A. with no treatment at all, and the researchers said that made it more difficult to draw conclusions about effectiveness. About one-fifth of alcoholics achieve long-term sobriety without treatment.
There is no single known cause of alcoholism, but the researchers wrote that about two-thirds of alcohol dependence could be attributed to genetic factors and one-third to environmental causes like stress or emotional problems. Men and women are equally affected, and age does not appear to affect prognosis.
A member of the staff of the general service office of Alcoholics Anonymous said the organization did not comment on published studies of the program, but some experts objected to the methods and conclusions of the review.
“Although the randomized controlled trial is the gold-standard methodology in comparing between conditions,” said Thomas G. Brown, an assistant professor of psychiatry at McGill University, “it washes out a factor that may be important in potentiating A.A.’s benefits, namely patient choice and preference.” In other words, having a patient choose the form of treatment, rather than being assigned to it as in most studies, could be an important factor.
Despite the largely negative findings, John F. Kelly, a clinical psychologist at Harvard, said he still believed that A.A. and other 12-step programs were effective.
A.A. and other 12-step programs “are not cure-alls,” Dr. Kelly said, “but I would say at a minimum, they help.”
Dr. Edward V. Nunes, a professor of clinical psychiatry at Columbia, said research had demonstrated that certain elements of A.A. were effective. “Some of the wisdom embodied in A.A., such as the notion of persons, places and things that trigger drinking, are very much a part of cognitive-behavioral therapy, which is a scientifically driven, empirically validated treatment,” Dr. Nunes said.
The review covered only carefully controlled trials. But Sarah Zemore, of the Alcohol Research Group of the National Alcohol Research Center, said studies that observed the results of a treatment without setting up randomized control groups could also be informative.
“Does A.A. or some other mutual-help group work for people who seek it voluntarily?” she said. “Obviously, a randomized trial cannot address that question. But observational data can.”
It is unlikely that substance abuse experts will widely reject A.A. on the basis of these findings.
“A.A. has helped a lot of people,” Dr. Nunes said. “There are a lot of satisfied customers. On the basis of that, we have to take it seriously.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/25/health/25drin.html


that being said if na/aa helps swiy or other people please continue it, addiction/alcoholism can really be a fatal disease. -peace

Reputation Comments on this post:

	Interesting Article.
	great find about the advantage in 12 step programs!

[Dickon]

^ ^ ^

If SWis or isntY is on the methadone, they might have made huge strides to normalizing their lives, but it is ultimately a substitution of one addiction for another (and we're all grown ups here and know the quid pro quos that go with swapping heroin for methadone). If you're off the methadone you have my hugest respect, and are a shining example to me, as I'm 9 1/2 days off it, and it's been a bit of a nuisance to abstain from to say the least.

I really liked that information, I guess the fellowships were compared with no support in the studies I looked at, as opposed to comperable alternatives, which is obviously a much more realistic comparison. Well thank you for giving me increased incentive to do it alone, well with all you guys on here!!! At least, let me rephrase that, to do it my way (in the words of Ol' Blue Eyes) Alone I'm not (a beautiful wife and enchanting 20 month old boy are constantly with me!)

More hard science please, as well as personal tales!!!

Dr D

[thebige]

Swim will chime in real quick........whatever works for the swim in question,then it is a step in the right direction ......But for swim he does not belive in using any programs for cleaning up,not that there is anything wrong with them......Swim just does not belive in labeling himself,what he thinks is a negitive title.
If I drink,then I'm using alchohol
If I take junk,then I'm using drugs
If swim called himself a addict,junky.........that just puts him farther away from getting back to what swim feels is his "norm"..............personal tale.

[dyingtomorrow]

SWIM couldn't deal with the spiritual/religious crap in N.A.

If there's anything that will make you skeptical about the existence of a god that "loves you," it's seeing the shit you see for a couple years as a street junkie. Shit, even a suburbs junkie.

[Ilsa]

swim, and this is just her opinion but she considers it to be a reasonably well-informed one, thinks the whole disease model of addiction is highly questionable. the brain is extremely plastic--ie the more a thought/behavioral pattern is repeated, the stronger that more easily elicited that pattern of neuronal firing is in the brain. N/A is great if it works for whoever it works for, but swim takes issue with placing control into the hands of a 'higher power'. every day is a choice, and while some may be more predisposed to addiction than others, and that is not their fault, it is still their resposibility to be aware of that and develop appropriate coping skills. for example, swim's dad is a juvenile on-set diabetic (the genetic form of diabetes). that's not his fault, but it's still his responsibility to check his blood sugar before he gets in a car and drives, potentially placing others in danger.

the point is that the more someone says 'i have this disease, i'll never be able to touch drugs/alcohol without totally relapsing, etc', the more it becomes ingrained. and some ppl really do have to be totally abstinent, but for swim and many others, the key is learning to use recreationally without abusing for escape. does this make any sense? swim's philosophy on use/abuse is ever-developing and can seem paradoxical on the surface, she admits.

namaste to all

ilsa added 8 Minutes and 2 Seconds later...

Originally Posted by thebige

Swim will chime in real quick........whatever works for the swim in question,then it is a step in the right direction ......But for swim he does not belive in using any programs for cleaning up,not that there is anything wrong with them......Swim just does not belive in labeling himself,what he thinks is a negitive title.
If I drink,then I'm using alchohol
If I take junk,then I'm using drugs
If swim called himself a addict,junky.........that just puts him farther away from getting back to what swim feels is his "norm"..............personal tale.

swim's previous post basically encompasses swithebige's thoughts. it's sucks a lot for those ppl who want someone to lead them around, make all their decisions, and develop their life philosophy for them, but the truth is that each individual has to find his/her own way through it all. it's not easy either. ask swiDickon or swiRichard, but the rewards are much greater, swim feels, when one makes the (monumental at times) effort to really reason it out for themselves (maybe with the support of a group) rather than follow some dogmatic teaching like the 12 steps--and be forever labelled an ex-junkie, or ex-alcoholic. may as well go to church and have a priest do an exorcism, right? (was sorta kidding on the exorcism bit, don't want to offend anyone, swim just enjoys the occasional incendiary statement to stir the pot)

[dyingtomorrow]

Originally Posted by ilsa

swim, and this is just her opinion but she considers it to be a reasonably well-informed one, thinks the whole disease model of addiction is highly questionable. the brain is extremely plastic--ie the more a thought/behavioral pattern is repeated, the stronger that more easily elicited that pattern of neuronal firing is in the brain. N/A is great if it works for whoever it works for, but swim takes issue with placing control into the hands of a 'higher power'. every day is a choice, and while some may be more predisposed to addiction than others, and that is not their fault, it is still their resposibility to be aware of that and develop appropriate coping skills. for example, swim's dad is a juvenile on-set diabetic (the genetic form of diabetes). that's not his fault, but it's still his responsibility to check his blood sugar before he gets in a car and drives, potentially placing others in danger.

the point is that the more someone says 'i have this disease, i'll never be able to touch drugs/alcohol without totally relapsing, etc', the more it becomes ingrained. and some ppl really do have to be totally abstinent, but for swim and many others, the key is learning to use recreationally without abusing for escape. does this make any sense? swim's philosophy on use/abuse is ever-developing and can seem paradoxical on the surface, she admits.

namaste to all

I completely agree. I think one of the main reasons people become addicts is because they either don't have, or lose the skills that regular people have to cope with stress*. That's why I have to admit there is some truth to the "gateway drug" thing. Once people start getting it in their mind that drugs = stress relief, it becomes a slippery slope. A lot of people find some comfortable homeostatis, like just doing coke and drinking on the weekends. Unfortunately with highly addictive drugs like opiates, which are so incredibly good at canceling out stress, the physical need for them creates a whole new and bigger problem. It then becomes a lot harder for the person to develop stress coping skills even after recovery, because now not only their mind is telling them to get opiates every time they get stressed, but their body is screaming for them in this bizarre, powerful, physical-subconscious manner. Of course, it is only a problem because society made it a problem for people who find stress relief through opiates, as opposed to pot or alcohol users who can easily and cheaply get their drug, but that's a different discussion.

I think your idea of trying to get people back to the point of being capable of recreational use, instead of abstinence, is completely fascinating. I never thought or heard of that - but it seems like the person would be so much more mentally healthy if they actually recovered the strength to consciously control their use, while recognizing the potential dangers and threats to the things they value in their life and acting on that. Rather than being taught to feel like a permanently disabled burnout who has no control over themselves.

* there might be philosophical reasons for this, which are a whole different issue in my opinion

[Spare Chaynge]

To get back to controlling the using, do yall think one would have to refrain from drug use for a period of time to regain those coping mechanisms again.

[julian]

I think people have a lot of misconceptions about 12 step programs here. The program not only about getting off drugs. It is about how to live a better life. The program can be applied to anyone, not just drug users. 12 step programs are more about taking responsibility for your actions, freeing yourself from denial, accepting life as it really is instead of what you want it to be, improving relationships with people in your life, and learning to deal with emotional stress. The program happens to apply neatly to many drug users (not all of course) who struggle with these issues as well as addiction.

I do not support nor do I disapprove of NA/AA. I do believe the programs do have something to offer though, even if they cannot offer me freedom from drug abuse.

[Spare Chaynge]

Most kids can agree that these programs have a lot to offer when on paper. When in practice 12 step programs fail. Similar to how communism looks good on paper but when put into practice does not live up.

If some kid were to work the program on his own just by going by the book it would probably work out a lot better than trying to go to meetings where 12 steps are twisted out of context.

[infekt]

Funny thing about NA/AA:

Bill W. was a regular LSD user in the late 50's (maybe arly 60's). He claimed it was almost like a mircale cure.

[infekt]

I used to be for it, now I am against it. It just is a very ineffective way of treating this problem. In fact, if they believe its a disease, then why isn't treated like a disease? I don't really think its a disease, not anymore anyways.

Maybe it's just the meetings I've been to, but I can't really click with the people. Too many war stories, and too much closed-mindedness (funny how open mindedness is one of the core principles). Also the whole higher power concept, I don't believe it's necessary.

I also doesn't believe in the idea of a "clean date", and that it starts over everytime swim relapses, especially if that relapse is a one time deal..

[chillinwill]

infekt,

I agree with what you had to say about the whole clean date idea. For some people, this might be helpful, but from what Red Rock has experienced, this deters a lot of people from NA. Red Rock occasionally will drink or take psychedelics but will refrain from his drug of choice heroin and even cocaine as he knows these will take him down slippery slopes. God forbid if he went into an NA meeting and said that, of course they would all say he wasn't clean but Red Rock disagrees with that philosophy. By abstaining from his drug of choice mostly without the help of NA, he has already seen the benefits and has grown in leaps and bounds in only 7 months and some change

[Ilsa]

^^^exactly the problem...while it is invaluable to have a strong support system (which AA/NA can indeed provide, to an extent), it's also important to have a support system that allows for individuals to explore what works for them individually. this is also where swim parts ways with NA/AA and the disease model in general. and the disease model is slowly changing swim thinks; ppl are questioning and proposing alternatives. here is a page that outlines various models of recovery, including the life process model, which opposes the disease model directly.

swim def relapsed several times in quitting iv coke--each time served as a painful reminder, both physically and financially, of why she was trying to quit. eventually she just got sick of it. swim's friend kept a box of bloody tissues for a few years that she'd look at whenever she got cravings...it's all about negative conditioning, which is a formidable challenge when it comes to retraining one's impulse control (or, more appropriately, lack thereof) but it can be done. swim did it and doesn't mess with coke at all anymore. opiates are a weekends-only thing, and although swim probably still spends a liitle much on them, all her responsibilities are taken care of first and foremost.

another thing swim would like to share, from an anecdotal standpoint, is this: a good friend of hers, who has always depended heavily on NA during his clean periods, seems to have adopted an all-or-nothing attitude towards his abuse of drugs. swim isn't saying NA caused this; her firned is using the NA philosophy of abstinence as an excuse to say 'well if i can't be perfectly clean i may as well do a bang-up job of fucking up.' while this is the rationalization of someone in the deepest throes of addiction, it does make swim wonder how he'd do with treatment that was focused on moderation and self-control rather than total abstinence. swim also realizes that some drugs, by nature, are not given to moderate use and recognizes this as a complicating factor, but still considers it an interesting idea.

Reputation Comments on this post:

good post and very cool link!

[CrookedEye]

SWIM never thought sitting around with a bunch of other addicts, telling (glory) tales of past use, coupled with the arising problems that came afterwards, was that helpful.. SWIM has quit by getting away from addicts and the stories and finding better ways to occupy his time.., With that being said, he knows people who it has helped, at least for awhile, and cannot really say that it's good or bad, just that his way was what worked for him.. SWIM would suggest trying any methods that are available, if one is serious, and with luck, hopefully that person will find the way that works for him..

[chillinwill]

Red Rock is a technological guy in terms of the computer and internet and he can see how times have changed when the AA/NA programs came out and there was no internet or really instant communication like there is today. Since Red Rock spends a lot of time on DF, he finds he has almost nil cravings and this site occupies his time. Plus it fulfills the community and fellowship in a sense (not in person) but it works for him. Whatever one can do to stay away from their drug/drugs of choice that is causing them problems and get clean, then by all means, do it. Some things work better for others while some things won't do shit for someone else

Reputation Comments on this post:

good point re: df

[Ilsa]

^^^right on. swim has read in various places (most recently psychology today, actually) that ppl who really want to get clean often do it via alternative means (ie not traditional rehab/NA/AA) such as forums like this, lifestyle changes and culling of friends who are detrimental to the user's goal of getting clean or at least functional. and even for programs like NA/AA to yeild benefits the person has to want to change what he/she is doing (swim has seen many friends go into rehab for the sake of others and not themselves, which most often seems to end in relapse). which is not to say that traditional means of treatment aren't useful in thier own unique ways; however, many want to avoid the stigma of being labelled an addict, and like swim, disagree with the idea that one will forever be a 'recovering addict' and must be totally abstinent. what she's getting at here is that ppl seeking ways to overcome addiction can be just as resourceful finding them as addicts are in finding their drugs--which says a lot, as swim is sure many here will agree. doing whatever works to develop self-control, coping methods and the like is progress towards the ultimate goal, whether it's abstinence, functional use, harm reduction, etc.

and red rock makes a great point re: occupying time on df. the forum provides opportunities for self education, helping others, and just generally giving members something constructive to do--all better options than boredom-induced wastedness

Reputation Comments on this post:

true