What would you do
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,359
Thanks...two things come to mind from this thread:
1) ...grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference; and
2) Anthony de Mello - Awareness pt.1 on waking up - YouTube
As De Mello speaks about most people don't want to wake up. They are born asleep, they live asleep and the die asleep. What is being discussed may work for us because we have had enough. And we may feel enlightened and want to share this great gift with others, yet others' may not desire to be woken. Who am I to decide what is best for others? The proverb, when the student is ready he shall seek the teacher. What has worked for us may not be fair to push onto others (accepting serenity).
Honesty scares and self reflection is difficult. All of your comments have helped me...thank you!
1) ...grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; the courage to change the things I can; and the wisdom to know the difference; and
2) Anthony de Mello - Awareness pt.1 on waking up - YouTube
As De Mello speaks about most people don't want to wake up. They are born asleep, they live asleep and the die asleep. What is being discussed may work for us because we have had enough. And we may feel enlightened and want to share this great gift with others, yet others' may not desire to be woken. Who am I to decide what is best for others? The proverb, when the student is ready he shall seek the teacher. What has worked for us may not be fair to push onto others (accepting serenity).
Honesty scares and self reflection is difficult. All of your comments have helped me...thank you!
Adventures In SpaceTime
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 5,827
Originally Posted by EndGameNYC 
Outstanding.
I was in graduate school and doing pre- and post- test HIV counseling for the NYC Dept. of Health in 1985, so I can vouch for the historical accuracy, and the political, social and economic realities you've described so well in your comments.
To say the very least, working in that often frantic and always heartbreaking environment changed the lives of a great many people.
I was in graduate school and doing pre- and post- test HIV counseling for the NYC Dept. of Health in 1985, so I can vouch for the historical accuracy, and the political, social and economic realities you've described so well in your comments.
To say the very least, working in that often frantic and always heartbreaking environment changed the lives of a great many people.
This is a tough enough thread for me on so many levels.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: "I'm not lost for I know where I am. But however, where I am may be lost ..."
Posts: 5,273
I just don't see it as being so stigmatized any more. I do still see a fair amount of contempt for those who don't take responsibility in getting help or doing anything to end their addiction. But those who have sought answers? I don't see it. If fact, I would venture to say that every single person I encounter is touched in some way by addiction. If not themselves, then a spouse, child, sibling, parent, friend, or coworker. Unless you live under a rock, you understand that addiction brings pain and suffering for everyone involved, and for society.
I do agree that education lowers stigma. I have seen great change in how persons with autism are treated just in the 16 years since my son was born. In the school system, students with disabilities are no longer hidden away in a portable. As a result, other students are not afraid of them. They see. They understand.
So secrecy breeds fear and fear breeds contempt.
Honestly, I'm more stigmatized by my tattoos than I am my past addiction. Go figure.
I do agree that education lowers stigma. I have seen great change in how persons with autism are treated just in the 16 years since my son was born. In the school system, students with disabilities are no longer hidden away in a portable. As a result, other students are not afraid of them. They see. They understand.
So secrecy breeds fear and fear breeds contempt.
Honestly, I'm more stigmatized by my tattoos than I am my past addiction. Go figure.
Guest
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 4,225
Originally Posted by RobbyRobot
Thanks for the recognition of the veracity of my experiences, EndGame. Much appreciated. Sad times back when in the early years. Its very difficult to help the addicted when they are already walking dead in their own minds. Back then, suicide for many in such circumstances was a real consideration. Its no secret that path was sometimes taken, unfortunately. This of course had a terrible consequence for those who were left to struggle on. Sadly, suicide pacts were not nearly as rare as one would want them to be. When death-with-dignity is contemplated as a better answer for the sick then the struggle of wasting away for nothing is taken in context it is unbelievably heart-breaking...
This is a tough enough thread for me on so many levels.
This is a tough enough thread for me on so many levels.
EndGame
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,677
In terms of stigma, there is plenty to go around when discussing both HIV infection and addictions. We all know what often happens when we identify ourselves as addicts or alcoholics, or when it's simply obvious to rest of the world. With AIDS, something that was then (1980s) referred to as the "gay cancer" (I believe originally on the pages of the NY Times), the stigma load was so great and the paranoia so widespread...Not to trivialize any part of it, but it was eerily similar to some sci-fi books/movies that depict a future, dystopian society beset by a deadly plague. Those who carried it were shunned, and people were terrified that they could get the virus simply by being in the same room with someone who was gay. Many people avoided "those parts" of the city which were known areas where gay men lived or otherwise congregated.
In some ways, the reactions to the often sensationalized "news" about AIDS was as much an epidemic as the disease itself, in no small measure due to the abundance of misinformation that was "out there," and that often originated with the news media. People donned surgical masks, wore protective gloves, tended to avoid public rest rooms, stopped shaking the hands of relative strangers (generally avoiding physical contact in all public settings), and deployed all manner of what were believed to be the "necessary adjustments" on a visible scale, lest they become infected. You didn't see these "adjustments" everywhere, but you did see them. I'd argue that this is very different than the stigma attached to alcoholism and other addictions.
Yet both AIDS and alcoholism had/have one very important element in common: They both were/are viewed as "conditions" that were brought on by specific behaviors or "lifestyle choices" that the sufferer could easily avoid and, as such, suffered by their own choice. In what were then not extreme cases, many people believed that those who were infected with HIV, and those who were addicted, were equally responsible for their conditions and, in many "circles," "got what they deserved." I imagine that there are still a great many people who believe this; perhaps some of them recognize themselves in my comments.
A friend of mine with diabetes died on January 1, 2008 from complications due to diabetes. He was a young man at the time, who left behind a wife, parents and two siblings. He was not vigilante about caring for himself, though this was not entirely his fault. His family, though wealthy according to current standards, refused to help him with his treatment because his diabetes was "his fault," and this often left him in despair and precipitated a fatalistic attitude that he never seemed to have before. (He and his wife struggled financially, and he was forced to go on disability due to his health.) Did he get what he deserved? If so, I'm sure this conclusion was cold comfort for his wife, and his parents and siblings only tightened their grip on this belief following his death, sparing, as was their wont, their overblown egos from inconvenient or uncomfortable realities. (His father commented to me more than once at the wake, trying to convince I don't know who, "You know, we helped him as much as we could, but he just didn't take care of himself.")
I don't know that there's an answer to the question as to whether or not AIDS or addiction is the more complicated affliction. I'm not even sure it's a valid question, given the differing etiologies, consequences and treatments for each. But the reality of stigma is extremely complex, taking into account as it does behavioral, social, and economic realities, each of which on its own is burdened by further complexities.
I don't go around announcing my sobriety; nor do I preach sobriety or the AA Big Book Twelve Steps to other people in my life as the answer to all life's ills. I've learned to manage my own internalized stigmatization by building a better life, the very best defense against the next drink, dire fatalism and a life filled with regret and despair.
In some ways, the reactions to the often sensationalized "news" about AIDS was as much an epidemic as the disease itself, in no small measure due to the abundance of misinformation that was "out there," and that often originated with the news media. People donned surgical masks, wore protective gloves, tended to avoid public rest rooms, stopped shaking the hands of relative strangers (generally avoiding physical contact in all public settings), and deployed all manner of what were believed to be the "necessary adjustments" on a visible scale, lest they become infected. You didn't see these "adjustments" everywhere, but you did see them. I'd argue that this is very different than the stigma attached to alcoholism and other addictions.
Yet both AIDS and alcoholism had/have one very important element in common: They both were/are viewed as "conditions" that were brought on by specific behaviors or "lifestyle choices" that the sufferer could easily avoid and, as such, suffered by their own choice. In what were then not extreme cases, many people believed that those who were infected with HIV, and those who were addicted, were equally responsible for their conditions and, in many "circles," "got what they deserved." I imagine that there are still a great many people who believe this; perhaps some of them recognize themselves in my comments.
A friend of mine with diabetes died on January 1, 2008 from complications due to diabetes. He was a young man at the time, who left behind a wife, parents and two siblings. He was not vigilante about caring for himself, though this was not entirely his fault. His family, though wealthy according to current standards, refused to help him with his treatment because his diabetes was "his fault," and this often left him in despair and precipitated a fatalistic attitude that he never seemed to have before. (He and his wife struggled financially, and he was forced to go on disability due to his health.) Did he get what he deserved? If so, I'm sure this conclusion was cold comfort for his wife, and his parents and siblings only tightened their grip on this belief following his death, sparing, as was their wont, their overblown egos from inconvenient or uncomfortable realities. (His father commented to me more than once at the wake, trying to convince I don't know who, "You know, we helped him as much as we could, but he just didn't take care of himself.")
I don't know that there's an answer to the question as to whether or not AIDS or addiction is the more complicated affliction. I'm not even sure it's a valid question, given the differing etiologies, consequences and treatments for each. But the reality of stigma is extremely complex, taking into account as it does behavioral, social, and economic realities, each of which on its own is burdened by further complexities.
I don't go around announcing my sobriety; nor do I preach sobriety or the AA Big Book Twelve Steps to other people in my life as the answer to all life's ills. I've learned to manage my own internalized stigmatization by building a better life, the very best defense against the next drink, dire fatalism and a life filled with regret and despair.
Adventures In SpaceTime
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 5,827
Until medical science does a home run on addiction, stigma is still part and parcel for *recovery efforts* on such addictions and not so much the addiction itself. When the "addicted" wont or don't recover, and sustain that recovery, a new kind of stigma is widespread on such returns to addiction abuse. For many unreasonable reasons, those that return to addiction abuse still suffer stigma, imo. Education is absolutely key in changing the perceptions of general society. We still have a long way to go even though we've already come along way. Its always worth the effort to educate ourselves as individuals and as a collective of individuals in society of course.
Adventures In SpaceTime
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 5,827
Nailed it, EndGame. Yes, you too have well described the scene back when in the early and mid 80's. As you say, even today HIV/AIDS is a real threat for many who refuse to become re-educated and aware of what is what with HIV/AIDS and addiction populations.
I would sit and eat, socialize and so on, and do therapy work as well with those who had confirmation of HIV/AIDS. I then would also become a target of hatred based on fear of those who were absolutely terrified they could somehow become infected from me too. I became a kind of buffer for those who were infected. I was a formidable person already from my own experiences, and the way I stood up for others who couldn't stand for themselves only hardened those who were wracked with fears.
It really was so surreal. Some people would refuse to have me as their group facilitator, even though I was already recognized by such people as ideal for their needs before our taking on of HIV/AIDS clients. These experiences really brought out the best and the worst of so many people.
Symptoms couldn't be recognized for HIV of course. Some people carried HIV and yet didn't early go on to manifest AIDS. This kind of reality just infuriated people to no end. They felt completely betrayed if people didn't come forth so that such people could then be marginalized and controlled. Scary times for all in such micro-environments.
I would sit and eat, socialize and so on, and do therapy work as well with those who had confirmation of HIV/AIDS. I then would also become a target of hatred based on fear of those who were absolutely terrified they could somehow become infected from me too. I became a kind of buffer for those who were infected. I was a formidable person already from my own experiences, and the way I stood up for others who couldn't stand for themselves only hardened those who were wracked with fears.
It really was so surreal. Some people would refuse to have me as their group facilitator, even though I was already recognized by such people as ideal for their needs before our taking on of HIV/AIDS clients. These experiences really brought out the best and the worst of so many people.
Symptoms couldn't be recognized for HIV of course. Some people carried HIV and yet didn't early go on to manifest AIDS. This kind of reality just infuriated people to no end. They felt completely betrayed if people didn't come forth so that such people could then be marginalized and controlled. Scary times for all in such micro-environments.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: "I'm not lost for I know where I am. But however, where I am may be lost ..."
Posts: 5,273
Robby, I would agree with some of what you said, however, I think there is a difference in not tolerating someone behavior and stigmatizing them.
I don't have to think that an addicted individual is a "bad person" to have rather strong opinions on those who refuse to address their problem, if that problem is affecting minor children or affecting society in general (driving under the influence, alcohol related crimes, alcohol related injuries).
If a person is not going to make choices there should be a point that those choices are made for them. That's how it worked for me.
This kind of goes along with the whole guilt/shame thread. Stigmatizing others won't solve the problem, nor will completely absolving them of guilt.
But the idea that anything other than a warm hug is automatically stigmatizing is just not accurate.
I don't have to think that an addicted individual is a "bad person" to have rather strong opinions on those who refuse to address their problem, if that problem is affecting minor children or affecting society in general (driving under the influence, alcohol related crimes, alcohol related injuries).
If a person is not going to make choices there should be a point that those choices are made for them. That's how it worked for me.
This kind of goes along with the whole guilt/shame thread. Stigmatizing others won't solve the problem, nor will completely absolving them of guilt.
But the idea that anything other than a warm hug is automatically stigmatizing is just not accurate.
Adventures In SpaceTime
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 5,827
Originally Posted by EndGameNYC
A friend of mine with diabetes died on January 1, 2008 from complications due to diabetes. He was a young man at the time, who left behind a wife, parents and two siblings. He was not vigilante about caring for himself, though this was not entirely his fault. His family, though wealthy according to current standards, refused to help him with his treatment because his diabetes was "his fault," and this often left him in despair and precipitated a fatalistic attitude that he never seemed to have before. (He and his wife struggled financially, and he was forced to go on disability due to his health.) Did he get what he deserved? If so, I'm sure this conclusion was cold comfort for his wife, and his parents and siblings only tightened their grip on this belief following his death, sparing, as was their wont, their overblown egos from inconvenient or uncomfortable realities. (His father commented to me more than once at the wake, trying to convince I don't know who, "You know, we helped him as much as we could, but he just didn't take care of himself.")
EndGame
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,677
I'll add that there's a level of stigmatization that derives from people believing that, "That will never happen to me. I only need to avoid doing what they did, and I'll be fine. It's their fault." Such thinking serves to help people believe that their safety is much more under their control than it would be otherwise.
This phenomenon has been amply demonstrated in studies on afflictions that are related to behavioral choices and consequences, and with juries presiding over rape cases. "She brought it on herself. The way she dressed, the way she walked...Walking around by herself at night. I would never act that way." Again, I'm safe because I'm not like her. Bringing up the victims' past indiscretions also sways the jury. Defense attorneys are well aware of this reality, and it goes a long way in persuading juries to acquit their clients. Just another reason that explains high acquittal rates. (Not looking to spawn a debate on false convictions or other legal anomalies here. That's a whole different issue, and one that I'm not interested in broaching.)
Unwilling victims are reduced to exemplars of personal failure, individual weakness and inadequacy without the remorse that we demand, and that contribute to my plight. And when the mob agrees with this, the air is rife with stigma; compassion and forgiveness are weak options, providing as they do, little in the way of enhancing my sense of personal safety.
I don't believe that the stigma has melted away. It seems to me, rather, that it has gone underground, much as racism, aggression and violence towards women, and the rampant dislike for people who don't behave as I want them to. We may want to be rid of them so that we can feel better about ourselves as members of the human race and, again, as feeling safer in the world we know. It recalls a famous line from the character Keyser Soze in the film, The Usual Suspects: "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."
This phenomenon has been amply demonstrated in studies on afflictions that are related to behavioral choices and consequences, and with juries presiding over rape cases. "She brought it on herself. The way she dressed, the way she walked...Walking around by herself at night. I would never act that way." Again, I'm safe because I'm not like her. Bringing up the victims' past indiscretions also sways the jury. Defense attorneys are well aware of this reality, and it goes a long way in persuading juries to acquit their clients. Just another reason that explains high acquittal rates. (Not looking to spawn a debate on false convictions or other legal anomalies here. That's a whole different issue, and one that I'm not interested in broaching.)
Unwilling victims are reduced to exemplars of personal failure, individual weakness and inadequacy without the remorse that we demand, and that contribute to my plight. And when the mob agrees with this, the air is rife with stigma; compassion and forgiveness are weak options, providing as they do, little in the way of enhancing my sense of personal safety.
I don't believe that the stigma has melted away. It seems to me, rather, that it has gone underground, much as racism, aggression and violence towards women, and the rampant dislike for people who don't behave as I want them to. We may want to be rid of them so that we can feel better about ourselves as members of the human race and, again, as feeling safer in the world we know. It recalls a famous line from the character Keyser Soze in the film, The Usual Suspects: "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."
Adventures In SpaceTime
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 5,827
Originally Posted by soberlicious
Robby, I would agree with some of what you said, however, I think there is a difference in not tolerating someone behavior and stigmatizing them.
I don't have to think that an addicted individual is a "bad person" to have rather strong opinions on those who refuse to address their problem, if that problem is affecting minor children or affecting society in general (driving under the influence, alcohol related crimes, alcohol related injuries).
If a person is not going to make choices there should be a point that those choices are made for them. That's how it worked for me.
This kind of goes along with the whole guilt/shame thread. Stigmatizing others won't solve the problem, nor will completely absolving them of guilt.
But the idea that anything other than a warm hug is automatically stigmatizing is just not accurate.
I don't have to think that an addicted individual is a "bad person" to have rather strong opinions on those who refuse to address their problem, if that problem is affecting minor children or affecting society in general (driving under the influence, alcohol related crimes, alcohol related injuries).
If a person is not going to make choices there should be a point that those choices are made for them. That's how it worked for me.
This kind of goes along with the whole guilt/shame thread. Stigmatizing others won't solve the problem, nor will completely absolving them of guilt.
But the idea that anything other than a warm hug is automatically stigmatizing is just not accurate.
I'm in good agreement with you. I do think though that your own life experiences puts you head and shoulders above the mean, you know? You have a wealth of real-life experiences which inform you to a higher understanding of so many of the issues in this thread. On top of all that, you also have real success in your life notwithstanding your own hardships and circumstances, if I may say so.
I think it safe to say most members of everyday society (whatever that is of course) don't have your clarity of vision and responsibilities to yourself and others as you so handsomely present.
I too am in complete agreement that intolerance as you described, and corrected actions taken as a result of that same intolerance is not itself stigmatizing.
EndGame
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,677
Originally Posted by soberlicious
Robby, I would agree with some of what you said, however, I think there is a difference in not tolerating someone behavior and stigmatizing them.
I don't have to think that an addicted individual is a "bad person" to have rather strong opinions on those who refuse to address their problem, if that problem is affecting minor children or affecting society in general (driving under the influence, alcohol related crimes, alcohol related injuries).
If a person is not going to make choices there should be a point that those choices are made for them. That's how it worked for me.
This kind of goes along with the whole guilt/shame thread. Stigmatizing others won't solve the problem, nor will completely absolving them of guilt.
But the idea that anything other than a warm hug is automatically stigmatizing is just not accurate.
I don't have to think that an addicted individual is a "bad person" to have rather strong opinions on those who refuse to address their problem, if that problem is affecting minor children or affecting society in general (driving under the influence, alcohol related crimes, alcohol related injuries).
If a person is not going to make choices there should be a point that those choices are made for them. That's how it worked for me.
This kind of goes along with the whole guilt/shame thread. Stigmatizing others won't solve the problem, nor will completely absolving them of guilt.
But the idea that anything other than a warm hug is automatically stigmatizing is just not accurate.
But the idea that anything other than a warm hug is automatically stigmatizing is just not accurate.
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,912
Other examples for long-term stigmatization: depression or sleep disorders.
Before the knowledge on the neurobiology of depression and widely available pharmacological treatments, it was also perceived as a mysterious and "demonic" condition. Severe chronic depression is probably not any less debilitating for the person and problematic for society than the loss of productivity due to addictions. People with depression had been considered lazy and having weak characters for a long time, before medication become readily available. Nowadays taking antidepressants is so common that it's almost unusual if someone is not on them. There is no stigma on it anymore.
Sleep disorders are much rarer, but some of the severe cases can be just as destructive to the life of the individual, their families, employment etc as addictions. Also, many people with certain types of sleep disorders are prone to developing substance addictions as well. I know a few personally. I knew relatively little about sleep disorders until 2006, when I met someone who had narcolepsy and got into a relationship with him. He was extremely secretive about it but the symptoms of that disorder are very visible, albeit pretty mysterious for the uninitiated. I spent years trying to learn everything about sleep disorders then, got into communities much like SR just to learn and try to understand my friend. So met many others, also in the 3D world because I went to conferences they organized for themselves and to raise public awareness. Many cases of sleep disorders carry exactly the same "danger" about coming out with them: health insurance, drivers license, employment... Because there is so little public knowledge on these problems, people tend to perceive that the symptoms and resulting life difficulties are either highly mysterious and some sort of evil, or again, plain laziness. I've seen hundreds of heartbreaking, hopeless, and desperate stories while being involved in that world for a few years. Could I really *get it*, as an outsider, without first hand experience? Nope. I really tried, but, I believe it's impossible to truly get it from an external view point. Much like addiction. These people suffer in silence and secrecy probably even more than any of us with addiction problems. I also saw how my friends, colleagues, etc reacted to my being with this person, in not exactly positive ways. And this was still a highly successful and respected professional, not like the many others who are unable to hold jobs or maintain a family due to their illness. Sleep disorders are also often comorbid with depression - even better!
I think there are many examples for stigmas born from ignorance and denial, and this is why I also think education is important - how else could the stigmas ever be broken? Depression or sleep disorders are not even conditions where people can easily be blamed for bringing it on themselves... they involve unusual behaviors... and yet they provoke repulsion in the absence of awareness and education.
Before the knowledge on the neurobiology of depression and widely available pharmacological treatments, it was also perceived as a mysterious and "demonic" condition. Severe chronic depression is probably not any less debilitating for the person and problematic for society than the loss of productivity due to addictions. People with depression had been considered lazy and having weak characters for a long time, before medication become readily available. Nowadays taking antidepressants is so common that it's almost unusual if someone is not on them. There is no stigma on it anymore.
Sleep disorders are much rarer, but some of the severe cases can be just as destructive to the life of the individual, their families, employment etc as addictions. Also, many people with certain types of sleep disorders are prone to developing substance addictions as well. I know a few personally. I knew relatively little about sleep disorders until 2006, when I met someone who had narcolepsy and got into a relationship with him. He was extremely secretive about it but the symptoms of that disorder are very visible, albeit pretty mysterious for the uninitiated. I spent years trying to learn everything about sleep disorders then, got into communities much like SR just to learn and try to understand my friend. So met many others, also in the 3D world because I went to conferences they organized for themselves and to raise public awareness. Many cases of sleep disorders carry exactly the same "danger" about coming out with them: health insurance, drivers license, employment... Because there is so little public knowledge on these problems, people tend to perceive that the symptoms and resulting life difficulties are either highly mysterious and some sort of evil, or again, plain laziness. I've seen hundreds of heartbreaking, hopeless, and desperate stories while being involved in that world for a few years. Could I really *get it*, as an outsider, without first hand experience? Nope. I really tried, but, I believe it's impossible to truly get it from an external view point. Much like addiction. These people suffer in silence and secrecy probably even more than any of us with addiction problems. I also saw how my friends, colleagues, etc reacted to my being with this person, in not exactly positive ways. And this was still a highly successful and respected professional, not like the many others who are unable to hold jobs or maintain a family due to their illness. Sleep disorders are also often comorbid with depression - even better!
I think there are many examples for stigmas born from ignorance and denial, and this is why I also think education is important - how else could the stigmas ever be broken? Depression or sleep disorders are not even conditions where people can easily be blamed for bringing it on themselves... they involve unusual behaviors... and yet they provoke repulsion in the absence of awareness and education.
EndGame
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 4,677
Originally Posted by haennie
Sleep disorders are much rarer, but some of the severe cases can be just as destructive to the life of the individual, their families, employment etc as addictions.
No one is a hero because they get by on a couple of hours of sleep each night. Chronic insomnia is a severe medical condition that leads to several medical problems, including heart disease, stroke, diabetes and increased pressure on internal organs. Though we may not know everything around what exactly sleep does for us, we do know that it is not merely an option. Going without it has dire consequences, and I don't believe that this should be taken lightly.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: "I'm not lost for I know where I am. But however, where I am may be lost ..."
Posts: 5,273
Originally Posted by EndGameNYC
I don't believe that the stigma has melted away. It seems to me, rather, that it has gone underground, much as racism, aggression and violence towards women, and the rampant dislike for people who don't behave as I want them to. We may want to be rid of them so that we can feel better about ourselves as members of the human race and, again, as feeling safer in the world we know
And my response to Robby was re: the stigmatization of what he called *recovery efforts*. I think that when loved ones, the health care system, the judicial system finally say "sh*t or get off the pot", then it's easy for the addicted/repeat relapser to cry stigmatization. I'm not saying this thread indicated that, I simply brought it up as a matter of thought. Not only have I seen it done, I've done it myself.
All that said, I actually believe in individual rights. If one is not endangering minors or putting a burden on society, then they have every right to remain addicted. It is hard to sort out what doesn't impact others though. As a teacher, I could go in each day, still drunk from the night before. Even if I managed to squeak by getting all necessary tasks done, I will have exposed (over years) hundreds of students to mediocre teaching at best, and at worst blatant poor teaching resulting in gaps in learning that are sometimes impossible to fill if not caught. Would my addiction really have no impact on others? Or just no serious impact? Or not a serious enough impact? Who is to say?
Is it within my rights to half-ass things because I'm a drunk? I guess it depends on whether one thinks their actions happen in a vacuum.
It is hard to say how much addiction effects society as a whole. The most serious problems are obvious, but I believe there is a subtle, yet profound, impact that is just as damaging.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: "I'm not lost for I know where I am. But however, where I am may be lost ..."
Posts: 5,273
I think it safe to say most members of everyday society (whatever that is of course) don't have your clarity of vision and responsibilities to yourself and others as you so handsomely present.
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,359
Originally Posted by soberlicious
All that said, I actually believe in individual rights. If one is not endangering minors or putting a burden on society, then they have every right to remain addicted. It is hard to sort out what doesn't impact others though.
If Institutionalized, which our prisons in the US are now overrun with, the cost per inmate is between $50-75K per year.
I agree with much of what you state Soberlicious and I agree with civil liberties but I fail to see how addiction is someone's right. Sounds good on paper but in practice this is not the case in my opinion.
Adventures In SpaceTime
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 5,827
Originally Posted by soberlicious
Well, gee thanks, very kind of you to blow smoke, but I am no different any other member of society. I think there are small minded idiots, but I also believe they are in the minority these days.
And you are different, as I already described, so there!
As for what counts out as the actual population of idiots, your too generous is my opinion on your low-balling the count.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: "I'm not lost for I know where I am. But however, where I am may be lost ..."
Posts: 5,273
Dooner...that's what I was saying. It's an individuals right to remain addicted if in fact they are not affecting anyone else. As I outlined I believe there is always a ripple effect though. So really, society is affected in subtle, yet profound ways. As I said, no ones actions occur in a vacuum.
Your response leaves me wondering if you actually read my post or if I was completely ineffective in relaying my point. Either is possible I suppose.
Your response leaves me wondering if you actually read my post or if I was completely ineffective in relaying my point. Either is possible I suppose.
Adventures In SpaceTime
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Posts: 5,827
Originally Posted by soberlicious
It's an individuals right to remain addicted if in fact they are not affecting anyone else. As I outlined I believe there is always a ripple effect though. So really, society is affected in subtle, yet profound ways. As I said, no ones actions occur in a vacuum.
They do not enjoy such rights, imo. Not sure why you say they have such rights then go on to say they can't exercise those rights without causing at least subtle to profound ways which ultimately don't support the existence of those so called addiction rights?
I agree with you but I don't see the requirement to talk on the issue as if they had rights to their addiction, which is different then rights to say drink alcoholic beverages.
Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
