Gottalife

While I have no problem with this post if it were applied to me, I know that not everyone uses satisfying or exetended sobriety as a yard stick of success.

In New Zealand there are many forces at work on the alcohol problem who have their own ideas as to what is a successful approach. It is widely accepted that many alcoholics will never be able to abstain completely, therefore any reduction in drinking is seen as a positive step.

If an alcoholic could be restricted to one low level binge every 40 days, that would be a good thing for society. Health costs would be reduced, work productivity improved, police and courts would have a reduced work load, wives and children would suffer less there are many benefits. On top of that, the alcoholic doesn't have to do much other than wait and live a less than optimum emotional life. And they might be willing to accept that. This process even has a name, harm minimisation.

I think of it more as palliative care. That is where there is no hope of actual recovery, we take whatever measures we can to prolong life, even very poor quality life, accepting that it is going to be miserable most of the time, a continuous battle to control drinking, etc etc. but at least the risk to the community has been reduced.

To me, that is a very poor deal for the alcoholic, but there was a time when I would have thought it was quite a good way to go, having no experience of anything better. I can understand why someone might find that acceptable.