• H&R Moderators: VerbalTruist | cdin | Lil'LinaptkSix

Lapse vs Relapse

Jabberwocky

Frumious Bandersnatch
Joined
Nov 3, 1999
Messages
84,998
I was talking to my better half tonight about this tonight. I am of the opinion that there is a useful distinction to be made between a Relapse and a Lapse.

  • A Relapse might be defined as old behavior rearing it's ugly head over a substantial period of time (1+ week) after a prolonged period of sobriety/abstinence (1+ year). Chemical Dependency this is reignited in an individual after a relapse.
  • A Lapse might be defined as old behavior rearing it's ugly head over a relatively short period of time (>1 week) after a prolonged period of sobriety/abstinence (1+ year). Chemical Dependency this is not reignited in an individual after a relapse.

Now I have come to understand that a Relapse is when one has a Lapse that is not address in healthy ways and grows into something that resembles old behavior. A Lapse is simple using a drug on an occasion(s), not returning to the same behavior or patterns that characterized one's addiction prior to getting clean. Relapse is when the Lapse is left insufficiently addressed and is allowed to develop into the same kind of behavior one engaged in while one was active in their addiction.

Is one value of distinguishing the two that it may be "easier" to bounce back from a single event than a sustained fuck up? And that after longer periods of sobriety, if we haven't really been "working" our recovery, we may be more likely to veer into relapse rather than lapse?

Your thoughts? Specifically about CBT and dealing with the immediate aftermath. I'm very keen to see what you all might be thinking, because I have more questions =D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was talking to my better half tonight about this tonight. I am of the opinion that there is a useful distinction to be made between a Relapse and a Lapse.

  • A Relapse might be defined as old behavior rearing it's ugly head over a substantial period of time (1+ week) after a prolonged period of sobriety/abstinence (1+ year).
  • A Lapse might be defined as old behavior rearing it's ugly head over a relatively short period of time (>1 week) after a prolonged period of sobriety/abstinence (1+ year).

Your thoughts? Specifically about CBT and dealing with the immediate aftermath. I'm very keen to see what you all might be thinking, because I have more questions =D

Most people's lapses end up leading to relapses, but I'm glad that it can be well known that a one-time use doesn't always lead back into addiction. :)

This is something I've learned in CADC classes.
 
The other night was rough. I was in pain and wanted sleep so I drank a bit of vodka. Is that a lapse? It wasn't my oxy but it was still a substance I went for for comfort It pisses me off my brain is now wired to look for the "quick fix" It made the depression worst so I'm not doing that again. So was it a lapse even though it wasn't opiates?
 
Do you have a history with ethanol? Did you blackout and do something regrettable?
 
Interesting thread. I think the difference you mention, TPD, is real and important. Your distinction seems as good as any I'd come up with :).

At the risk of veering into the weeds here, I'll mention that the distinction between lapse/relapse starts to tug at some of the inadequacies of a purely disease-based idea of addiction. People "relapse" from diseases (illnesses in general). But in common English, it's weird to think of someone "lapsing" from heart disease, cancer, ALS, etc. Rather, people tend to lapse from an inward complex that's supposed to be marked by continuity. Lapsed Catholics have veered from a set of beliefs and a community. A lapse in memory is a tear in the fabric that holds our understanding of the past together.

I don't want to put too much stock in linguistics here. And I don't mean to imply that there isn't an aspect of addiction that's well imagined as a disease. But I think the fact that we recognize both lapses and relapses so easily when we talk about addiction suggests that there's more going on here than just a disease.

Maybe part of the distinction, then, has to do with the aspects of the experience of addiction that fire into action when we slip in various ways. Maybe relapses mark a rekindling of the experience of the disease-like aspects of addiction. On the other hand, we might be tempted to call something a lapse when it marks a chip in a structure that helps us understand ourselves (e.g. self-identifying as a person in recovery instead of an addict).

If that makes any sense, I think it complements rather than contrasts what TPD said at the outset of this thread. Just another layer of the same set of experiences.
 
I agree! I also love linguistics :)

To add to my distinction, perhaps the lapse can be "easier to bounce back from than the relapse. Resiliency may very well be a relative, so I like that you are stressing the seriousness of addiction in how you understand addiction. Perhaps that is the ultimate value in the disease concept (that and a lot of other things).

I've amended my first post to reflect your input a bit more simco. Much thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Do you have a history with ethanol? Did you blackout and do something regrettable?
No no issue with booze never did anything dumb it just made me depressed and pissed off I went for that "quick fix". Last thing I need is a depressant so not doing that again
 
That really makes a lot of sense when you think about it.
The times I "relapsed" while getting sober were really just incidents of one night of binge drinking or at most a weekend. I never spiraled down into my regular pattern from pre-sobriety. Although if you're experiencing "lapses" every month or so, that's a lot more serious.
But I like your way of thinking and I think there's immense pressure to stay sober the rest of your life with no room for mistakes and that's a lot to handle emotionally.
 
I am of the opinion that there is nothing useful in obsessing over semantics in any area of recovery and that everyone benefits by not putting such weight on labels and starts examining issues, behaviours and problems faced outside of a desire to fit everything in to a neat little framework or box.
 
I am of the opinion that there is nothing useful in obsessing over semantics in any area of recovery and that everyone benefits by not putting such weight on labels and starts examining issues, behaviours and problems faced outside of a desire to fit everything in to a neat little framework or box.

I agree there. Everything gets over analyzed. I have shell shock and had quite a few bad head smacks. But because of labels on paper I have ptsd , cptsd(wtf?) , TBI ,social anexity disorder(no just fireworks and big crowds suck obviously). It annoys the piss outta me
 
Trauma is a bitch. But I still like to explore ideas surrounding how fucked up I am =D psychonaut for life baby :p
 
Maybe part of the distinction, then, has to do with the aspects of the experience of addiction that fire into action when we slip in various ways. Maybe relapses mark a rekindling of the experience of the disease-like aspects of addiction. On the other hand, we might be tempted to call something a lapse when it marks a chip in a structure that helps us understand ourselves (e.g. self-identifying as a person in recovery instead of an addict).

If that makes any sense, I think it complements rather than contrasts what TPD said at the outset of this thread. Just another layer of the same set of experiences.

This is exactly what I am getting at. Have you read Mate's In the Realm of Hungry Ghosts? He gets at just this point, and really hashes out the significance of identity throughout the transformation from identifying as a broken, fucked up Addict to a capable, empowered and above all healthy individual focused on their Revolver and their future. Spirituality is all about transformation, becoming a better person and such. Samara (Samskara) Rite of Passage shit. ;)
 
Trauma is a bitch. But I still like to explore ideas surrounding how fucked up I am =D psychonaut for life baby :p

I think it's all about cutting out the problem drug(s), which are normally hard ones like cocaine, heroin, methamphetamine, etc. That's real recovery.

Quitting all drugs is a great goal too, and I have just as much respect for people who take that route, but it's not necessary for recovery to begin. <3
 
Yeah, i absolutely see a massive distinction between lapses and relapses.
In my case, non-physically dependant use is a lapse.
Falling back into addiction - losing control - is a relapse.
It's a distinction my drug counsellor has helped consolidate. In other words, don't beat yourself up for the occasional slip-up.
Both lapses and relapse are parts of recovery.
 
I think in order to truly empower yourself the distinction between lapse and relapse must be recognized.

The times I relapsed I ended up going on a run. For me it is usually characterized by a return to obsession that begins before I pickup for the first time...which leads to a lot of self defeating behaviors. Relapses are reinforced by the AA and NA mentality that you are back to square one if you take a drink or smoke a joint or anything, even though it could just be a lapse.

I look at a lapse as being the time that you aren't really thinking about using but it happens anyway and you recognize that you did not like and then go right back to not using. Recognizing the difference has been very helpful for me in understanding my MO when it comes to drugs. It has also helped me defeat the obsession before it really takes root.

I honestly think it is important to the individual to really examine the times they have relapsed (if it has happened) in comparison to the times they have just had a lapse.
 
Top