Cane2theLeft
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2008
- Messages
- 12,673
^very true.
In my classes you pretty much nailed the consensus that we're taught. They often describe the 1/3-1/3-1/3 phenomenon... these groups aren't exactly 33% of the population each but they use that for concision. Essentially about 1/3 have virtually no interest in drug use and will only partake in very limited experimentation, very limited social drinking, etc.
The next third can have quite an extensive use history but the natural consequences generally create a border for their use and they learn how to use responsibly and stop/moderate when necessary. This group is rather elusive since they rarely every come into treatment unless they are coerced to legally/professionally.
The last group are the typical-junkies so-to-speak. They've lost control, can not moderate their use, probably will never be able to and will likely require SOME form of assistance when the consequences of their use eventually become severe enough.
Given the above construct that I believe is largely accurate (but probably more along the lines of 5/10-3/10-2/10 or something), some people can certainly benefit from moderate management. This can be effective for people in the middle group who do not have serious problems but maybe are pushing it and times and would actually be able to follow MM guidelines.
Trying to utilize MM principles for most of the third-groupers I think while providing some harm reduction in the interim, can be very damaging in the long run and give people false senses of security and maintain their problematic use under the surface... I believe this is evidence by Audrey Kishline (founder of MM) getting shit-faced after years of successful moderation and killing two people in a DUI accident.
I fully agree with you, most of the treatment world is ridiculously rigid in their views and 12-step groups exemplify this. I think one-size fit all approaches may help a lot of people (if they are properly designed) but likewise will leave A LOT of people behind. I've been working on ways to develop more personalized strategies for figuring out why people use and how they can get better based on David Keirsey's temperament/personality psychology which shows fundamental and demonstrable differences in personality types, intelligence types, roles/motives, etc.
Thanks for the kind words: they're always appreciated.
Since you are currently studying addictions counseling, I'm wondering how you feel about "Moderation Management" programs?
I think that for any substance there will be a certain number of people who are incapable of using it responsibly and who need to avoid it. But I also think that many others will be capable of learning how to use said substance responsibly and safely. And unfortunately 12-Step/Abstinence has become the One Size Fits All approach to substance abuse issues.
In my classes you pretty much nailed the consensus that we're taught. They often describe the 1/3-1/3-1/3 phenomenon... these groups aren't exactly 33% of the population each but they use that for concision. Essentially about 1/3 have virtually no interest in drug use and will only partake in very limited experimentation, very limited social drinking, etc.
The next third can have quite an extensive use history but the natural consequences generally create a border for their use and they learn how to use responsibly and stop/moderate when necessary. This group is rather elusive since they rarely every come into treatment unless they are coerced to legally/professionally.
The last group are the typical-junkies so-to-speak. They've lost control, can not moderate their use, probably will never be able to and will likely require SOME form of assistance when the consequences of their use eventually become severe enough.
Given the above construct that I believe is largely accurate (but probably more along the lines of 5/10-3/10-2/10 or something), some people can certainly benefit from moderate management. This can be effective for people in the middle group who do not have serious problems but maybe are pushing it and times and would actually be able to follow MM guidelines.
Trying to utilize MM principles for most of the third-groupers I think while providing some harm reduction in the interim, can be very damaging in the long run and give people false senses of security and maintain their problematic use under the surface... I believe this is evidence by Audrey Kishline (founder of MM) getting shit-faced after years of successful moderation and killing two people in a DUI accident.
I fully agree with you, most of the treatment world is ridiculously rigid in their views and 12-step groups exemplify this. I think one-size fit all approaches may help a lot of people (if they are properly designed) but likewise will leave A LOT of people behind. I've been working on ways to develop more personalized strategies for figuring out why people use and how they can get better based on David Keirsey's temperament/personality psychology which shows fundamental and demonstrable differences in personality types, intelligence types, roles/motives, etc.