PaperDolls

I agree with some of the complaints about the show but I do like it. I used to watch it religiously, not so much any more.

BTW, I sure didn't need the show to say to myself "Oh, I'm not that bad." It's just a denial that many of us live in before we either recover or die.

Zencat

I can understand why some see the show as exploitative. To show people suffering just for profit is I feel not the only intention of the shows producers. There is a definite information sharing going on too.

I watch the show and have been watching since day one. I have a fascination (abet morbid) with peoples cognitive/behavior processes.

jojoba

It's bothersome to me that these people are breaking their anonymity at the public level by appearing on this show.

PaperDolls

Me telling people I'm an alcoholic is not breaking my anonymity - talking about my AA membership is and that's up to ME.

Sort of non-issue me thinks.

jojoba

I was taught that we were to always remain anonymous at the level of TV and film. Maybe I misunderstood the traditon...

PaperDolls

As an AA member, you're correct.

As an alcoholic, no.

jojoba

But I believe those counselors on the show who do the interventions (man and woman--don't remember their names) are AA members. I don't know whether Dr. Drew is or not.

Pigtails

At a meeting last night they read from the part of the Big Book ("There is a Solution") about the "common" alcoholic who hides bottles of alcohol all over the house and who yanks his family out from under what he had built up etc... my first reaction was "I wasn't that bad!!!" But then I realized I didn't have to hide alcohol because I lived alone and/or with or around other problem drinkers. I didn't have a family to destroy, because I hadn't had the time/energy/priority to build one up etc. I really think it is important to compare rather than distinguish, and to realize what lengths we could go to if we continue to drink. I think that when someone is ready, they are ready, and until then, they will always find the "worse off" people to say they're not as bad as, and go back out and drink, until maybe sadly they are that bad off too. When I started AA I too thought I wasn't as bad off as many of the people, and honestly I don't think I'm nearly as bad as what is described in the book, but I know I had a problem and I want to stay sober, so that is really all that matters.

PaperDolls

May be so - but as far as I've seen they've never announced that. So, that's fine. AA members are allowed to be on TV. In fact, they can break their anonymity on TV if they want. Probably never goes over well though.

Pigtails

I think pretty much all TV is exploitive... the point is to draw from real life, or with reality/documentary shows like Intervention, to SHOW real life, in part for education, in part for art, in part for entertainment...

I guess I'm just saying that it's just a TV show and to me it could reach someone to show them how bad off things can get. Better that on TV than soap operas or The Bachelor which to me are totally mindless. Just my opinion.

onlythetruth

First of all, let me point out that it does not matter whether or not the show is entertaining. Things that are morally wrong are morally wrong no matter how entertaining they may be. Most of the time, as a society, we know this. We just seem to forget it when certain categories of people are involved. Like addicts.

Second, for those of you who don't seem to understand where the lie comes in, this is what they do on the show:

1. They find an addict who is very messed up. They do this by taking applications from family members who think their loved one needs an intervention. In the application, which I cut and pasted in my previous post, THEY MAKE THE FAMILY MEMBER PROMISE NOT TO TELL THE ADDICT THE TRUTH (i.e. they make the family member promise to lie to the addict).

2. They then lie to the addict by asking if he would agree to be in a documentary about addiction. The addict agrees, because he has been lied to. He is NOT appearing in a documentary about addiction: instead, he has been set up to have an intervention on national television. How do I know this? Because they SAY SO at the start of each show.

3. The addict, having been lied to about what is actually happening to him, then engages in addictive behaviors for the camera. He knows the camera is there, but he doesn't know WHY it is there, because again, he has been lied to.

4. Once the footage is shot--and of course, the footage is the most awful, emotionally wrenching stuff imaginable, because that's much better for ratings than showing the lower key stuff many of us do--the person then gets the intervention, using, of course, the most confrontational, emotional approach possible so as to pump up the entertainment ($$$$$) value.

5. All of this is presented under the guise of "helping" the addict and "educating" the public. Now, again, in my view it does not matter if the addict is helped or the public is educated, because once you've exploited a vulnerable person to make money, you've committed a wrong that simply can't be mitigated. But even if you buy the "we want to help and educate" argument, think how much better it would be for the addict to be helped in a way that does not publicly humiliate him....and think how much better it would be to educate people about what addiction really looks like instead of giving them the idea that we're all these hell-on-wheels types? Why don't they do THAT, if they REALLY want to help and educate? Because they don't: they want ratings, because ratings equal money, and that means exploiting and sensationalizing are necessary.

It's just wrong, no matter how you look at it.

Spawn

bottom line aren't they trying to help the addict?

TigerLili

If I was in fear of losing a loved one due to alcohol or drugs, I'd lie, cheat and deceive if it would help keep them safe.

Most alcoholics and addicts have displayed dishonest behaviour so who are we do take the moral high ground?

onlythetruth

Not really. That's the premise, but their primary goal is to make money.

onlythetruth

Oh, two wrongs make a right?

I don't think so.

LDT

I would want.....no, NEED......someone that was trying to get me into detox/rehab to have a stronger character than I. I would need someone more truthful than I....someone I trust. Being ambushed by those I love would have the opposite end result of what was intended.......but that's just me.

TigerLili, you pose the question, "who are we to take the moral high ground?"
Answer.....exactly the type of person I would need.

RunnerMD2be

If you're staging an intervention, would you usually give the addict advance notice? I don't understand exactly how the addict doesn't see it coming, especially considering how long the show has been around, and the familiarity it has.

Spawn

I guess if you choose to focus on that.....I see people trying to help out the addict who still suffers.

jojoba

The real tragedy of this show is that these people get sent to cushy new age treatment facilities and so few of them them get sober, when they could have just getting a white chip at a meeting.

Rehab is where you spend $20,000 to get what you could have gotten for free at AA.

PaperDolls

Just because rehab isn't for you doesn't mean it hasn't saved many, many people's lives. Mine included. So let's not go to this place where we say "All rehabs are bad." Please. That's a ridiculous statement.