Phil.McKeer
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2015
- Messages
- 905
Regarding the semantics in terms of labeling addiction/dependence a disease, I agree, strictly speaking, it does fit the criteria for the definition of "disease".
My problem is that, like TPD elaborated so succinctly a couple posts down, labeling it as such seems to be harmful to the sufferer in a number of different ways. Also, substance abuse/addiction/dependence has so many factors that don't exist in classic pathological diseases that have to be taken into account and which complicate matters quite a bit.
A quick example - i had a friend who developed a problem with alcoholism. He couldn't function without having a stiff drink before engaging in any activity, for instance, going to work. Eventually he decided he needed help and enrolled himself in AA. Of course, weeks later, having been able to abstain completely from his DOC, he explained to me his belief that God had saved him and he was powerless without the intervention of the almighty. He promptly relapsed a week or so after that and has been in his downward spiral since. I strongly believe that the AA doctrine that says you have a disease and that you'll always have it no matter what, and the doctrine which requires you to submit to a higher power for recovery, both contributed to my friend losing confidence in himself. I saw it as a self fulfilling prophecy - believe you are powerless and you will become powerless. He couldn't even fathom that the few weeks he had been sober were completely his own doing.
Also, many people think "well, if I have a disease, then I can't overcome it by sheer willpower or any other personal agency I possess - so I'll just maintain the status quo".
The disease model of addiction isn't necessarily WRONG, but it is counterproductive.
My problem is that, like TPD elaborated so succinctly a couple posts down, labeling it as such seems to be harmful to the sufferer in a number of different ways. Also, substance abuse/addiction/dependence has so many factors that don't exist in classic pathological diseases that have to be taken into account and which complicate matters quite a bit.
A quick example - i had a friend who developed a problem with alcoholism. He couldn't function without having a stiff drink before engaging in any activity, for instance, going to work. Eventually he decided he needed help and enrolled himself in AA. Of course, weeks later, having been able to abstain completely from his DOC, he explained to me his belief that God had saved him and he was powerless without the intervention of the almighty. He promptly relapsed a week or so after that and has been in his downward spiral since. I strongly believe that the AA doctrine that says you have a disease and that you'll always have it no matter what, and the doctrine which requires you to submit to a higher power for recovery, both contributed to my friend losing confidence in himself. I saw it as a self fulfilling prophecy - believe you are powerless and you will become powerless. He couldn't even fathom that the few weeks he had been sober were completely his own doing.
Also, many people think "well, if I have a disease, then I can't overcome it by sheer willpower or any other personal agency I possess - so I'll just maintain the status quo".
The disease model of addiction isn't necessarily WRONG, but it is counterproductive.