LaFemme

OK, I was about to post this on the main forum but thought better of it:-)

First, I believe 100% alcoholism is a disease. What bothers me is that if this is true then some of our other assumptions about alcoholism seem to need to be revisited, IMO.

1. Rock Bottom - If alcoholism is a disease, do we really have to wait until it's at its worst to treat it? What about early detection with cancer, we all know that is vital to recovery. Alcoholism has a recovery rate of under 25%, maybe that is because we have to let people hit their "bottoms" before they can get better. P.S. - I know they say everyone has a different bottom, I get that, I also know that as awful as I was when drinking I have it in me to go a hell of a lot lower than I did, does this mean I am doomed to failure (at least on this attempt)?

2. Self-Diagnosis - What other disease do we tell the patient "Only you can say whether or not you have this disease?". Come on, I'm in Manhattan right now, and I'm pretty sure I could go out and find someone I could diagnos with alcoholism without too much work. Yeah, in early stages it is harder to diagnos but you could at lest be able to make a preliminary diagnosis that a person was on the path to being an alcoholic and get them into treatment. Not everyone would be amenable to this, but I would have welcomed help at least 7 years ago had it been offered.

3. Selfishness - You are an alcoholic because you are selfish and self-absorbed...wait I thought I was an alcoholic because it was a disease?

4. HP - You can only get better by relying on a Higher Power - Then it's not a disease. Imagine if we relied on God to cure of all that ails us...why don't we all become Christian Scientists then?

OK, that's my rant for now. The reason this upsets me is that I believe it is the ideas we (as a society) have about alcoholism that prevent many people from getting help.

What do you all think? Am I wrong in thinking that these ideas are mutually exclusive?

Thanks, I feel better already:-D