There shouldn't be this requirement to label yourself an 'alcoholic'
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 86
There shouldn't be this requirement to label yourself an 'alcoholic'
It seems as if you're only allowed to be a full-blown alcoholic or a social drinker. If you admit you have a problem with drinking, then explain the ways your drinking is not as advanced as the alcoholic stereotype, there's this culture of shouting people down and accusing them of being in denial. People who’re concerned about their drinking should be able to admit that they have a problem with drinking without the requirement to label themselves an alcoholic. Why is this? Because it acts as a barrier for people to admit they have a problem.
The word ‘alcoholic’ implies an advanced stage of problem drinking;
Problem drinking is a spectrum. The above describes an advanced stage (link; stages of problem drinking). The majority of people who’re abusing alcohol or have a problem with drinking are not at the stage. When people say 'I'm not a real alcoholic because x, y, z (I'm not drinking every day, I never drink in the daytime etc.)' they simply don't want to be labelled an alcoholic & put in the same box as the above, not denying they have a problem. This should be respected. Just because a person doesn’t fit that DOES NOT mean they don’t have a problem, NOR DOES IT MEAN they’re using this as a way to deny it.
The 'in denial' accusation is sometimes used as a shaming tactic
Just because someone's not drinking every day, maybe only sticks to beer, only ever drinks in the evening doesn't mean they don't have a problem. At the same time, explaining this isn't denial of a drinking problem, it means that their degree of dependency isn't as severe & the don't want to be called an alcoholic. You should be allowed to admit a drinking problem without being forced to label yourself an alcoholic.
It strikes me that the term 'in denial' is used too liberally & in some ways as a way to shame people into accepting the label.
This has got to stop because it can make people feel that they're not being listened to and not welcome.
The self-fulfilling prophecy
This binary view of alcoholism is very dangerous. This requirement to label yourself an alcoholic if your drinking pattern isn't as advanced as the full-blown alcoholic stereotype ACTS AS A BARRIER to getting help. What's more, the culture of shaming people by accusing them of being in denial makes people feel that they have no-one to turn to.
As a result of these factors, too many people put off getting help and carry on drinking until it gets to a point that they end-up becoming the alcoholic stereotype.
THIS HAS GOT TO STOP!!
There shouldn't be this requirement for people to label themselves an alcoholic nor be accused of being in denial if they explain their drinking pattern doesn't fit the alcoholic stereotype. Get rid of this binary idea that people are either social drinkers or late-stage alcoholics. If people admit they have a problem, but they explain they don't fit the alcoholic stereotype, respect this. People can have drinking problems and dependence without actually being an real alcoholic. More importantly, people should be able to admit & open up to drinking problems without having to identify as 'alcoholic'. If people do not fit the characteristics of the stereotypical alcoholic, they should not be forced or shamed into accepting the label.
The word ‘alcoholic’ implies an advanced stage of problem drinking;
- drinking every day
- drunk all the time
- drinking in the morning
- Drinking really strong stuff
- Having lost a lot
- Gets the shakes and other withdrawal symptoms when they stop
Problem drinking is a spectrum. The above describes an advanced stage (link; stages of problem drinking). The majority of people who’re abusing alcohol or have a problem with drinking are not at the stage. When people say 'I'm not a real alcoholic because x, y, z (I'm not drinking every day, I never drink in the daytime etc.)' they simply don't want to be labelled an alcoholic & put in the same box as the above, not denying they have a problem. This should be respected. Just because a person doesn’t fit that DOES NOT mean they don’t have a problem, NOR DOES IT MEAN they’re using this as a way to deny it.
The 'in denial' accusation is sometimes used as a shaming tactic
Just because someone's not drinking every day, maybe only sticks to beer, only ever drinks in the evening doesn't mean they don't have a problem. At the same time, explaining this isn't denial of a drinking problem, it means that their degree of dependency isn't as severe & the don't want to be called an alcoholic. You should be allowed to admit a drinking problem without being forced to label yourself an alcoholic.
It strikes me that the term 'in denial' is used too liberally & in some ways as a way to shame people into accepting the label.
This has got to stop because it can make people feel that they're not being listened to and not welcome.
The self-fulfilling prophecy
This binary view of alcoholism is very dangerous. This requirement to label yourself an alcoholic if your drinking pattern isn't as advanced as the full-blown alcoholic stereotype ACTS AS A BARRIER to getting help. What's more, the culture of shaming people by accusing them of being in denial makes people feel that they have no-one to turn to.
As a result of these factors, too many people put off getting help and carry on drinking until it gets to a point that they end-up becoming the alcoholic stereotype.
THIS HAS GOT TO STOP!!
There shouldn't be this requirement for people to label themselves an alcoholic nor be accused of being in denial if they explain their drinking pattern doesn't fit the alcoholic stereotype. Get rid of this binary idea that people are either social drinkers or late-stage alcoholics. If people admit they have a problem, but they explain they don't fit the alcoholic stereotype, respect this. People can have drinking problems and dependence without actually being an real alcoholic. More importantly, people should be able to admit & open up to drinking problems without having to identify as 'alcoholic'. If people do not fit the characteristics of the stereotypical alcoholic, they should not be forced or shamed into accepting the label.
G-Woman
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Mississauga, ON
Posts: 979
I don't agree that there is a requirement to label one's self an alcoholic. Do you mean here at SR, or in general in the recovery community?
I do agree that the stigma often associated with that word can sometimes be a barrier to those looking to get help. But whether I call myself an "alcoholic" or not the problem and solution remain the same. It's really just a matter of semantics, and I believe that each individual can use whichever terminology makes the most sense so them in their recovery.
I do agree that the stigma often associated with that word can sometimes be a barrier to those looking to get help. But whether I call myself an "alcoholic" or not the problem and solution remain the same. It's really just a matter of semantics, and I believe that each individual can use whichever terminology makes the most sense so them in their recovery.
Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: East Coast
Posts: 1,906
What zero and Dee said is 100% correct. Doesn't matter what you call it.
I've been seeing this a lot lately though. The complete over analysis of the problem.
It seems like people are going through "real" grief when their getting clean. Like their mourning a real loss.
denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.
A lot of people get stuck on the bargaining and depression. No matter how you define it, it is what it is to you in your life.
For me, I spent years in the bargaining stage.
Tapering, trying to moderate, rationalizing, self diagnosing, research...the mindf^%k is endless.
In the end I just had to accept that if i was still actively drinking, I'd never get to recovery.
I desperately wanted recovery.
When I got there, the want to stay clean was far greater than the want to get drunk.
In the end that's all I needed to begin.
I've been seeing this a lot lately though. The complete over analysis of the problem.
It seems like people are going through "real" grief when their getting clean. Like their mourning a real loss.
denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.
A lot of people get stuck on the bargaining and depression. No matter how you define it, it is what it is to you in your life.
For me, I spent years in the bargaining stage.
Tapering, trying to moderate, rationalizing, self diagnosing, research...the mindf^%k is endless.
In the end I just had to accept that if i was still actively drinking, I'd never get to recovery.
I desperately wanted recovery.
When I got there, the want to stay clean was far greater than the want to get drunk.
In the end that's all I needed to begin.
Member
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: US
Posts: 5,095
Hmmm. I do understand what you are saying, I think. I don't know to whom you are writing the post. AA probably? And you don't really share your personal experience, so its hard to determine how much of this is your personal experience, or just a PSA.
Here's something I experienced that might share similar 'thinking'. When I went to treatment 18 months ago or so part of the 'deal' was to do IOP after completion of the 28 day program. I told the people that I would give it a try. I did. I did 4 half days the first week, assessed my need, evaluated the schedule (what types of meetings were happening on what days) looked at my schedule and decided on 3 1/2 days a week to start with. When I met with the counselor (which I thought was just going to be my first 'true' trauma counseling apt) she told me that because I was not 'willing' to follow treatment recommendations of 4 1/2 days a week, I was not 'willing' to go to treatment. I told her that I did not share the same belief that I was unwilling, I just felt that 3 1/2 days a week met my needs. She repeated the same sentence...I mean the exact same sentence that I was not willing. So I rephrased and said something like 'so its 4 days or no days?'. She painfully smiled at me and repeated the phrase. I reframed my question, just trying to get a 'down to earth' answer but again, the same sentence, enforcing my lack of willingness. Weirdest meeting ever. So I politely thanked her for her time and left.
Now that could have gone much differently. If I had been a newb to abstinence I could have gotten all po'd and drank or whatever. But I was just sort of shocked. I asked myself 'am I williing?'. And the answer was absolutely yes. I knew in every fiber of my being that I was willing. I'm not sure what her deal was or why she would not let me attend 3 days of IOP, especially after completing the 28 day program (maybe because I gave them so much shlit about 3/week urine tests that they were charging my insurance company 1400 bucks a piece for...yes, you read that right) but it didn't matter. I knew, in my heart, that I was not going to drink. And that I was willing.
Ok so where am I going with this? The shaming part. The guilt trip. The labels. Someone else telling me what I am and what I'm not. This is tricky. Because there is no doubt that delusion and denial are HUGE parts of addiction. And it does help to have people other than myself guiding me. So I have to be open and willing. But there is a point where I decide what that means. Because in the end, it doesn't really matter what anyone else says. If I'm not ready to hear it, than its likely to just pizz me off.
So its a balancing act. If YOU don't identify as an alcoholic, then don't. If you need to differentiate yourself from what you believe society pre-judges alcoholics to be, then do it. This is an inside job. I call myself an addict....in AA I call myself an alcoholic (group consciousness) to everyone, I don't drink. No explanation needed. Honesty to self it all that matters.
Here's something I experienced that might share similar 'thinking'. When I went to treatment 18 months ago or so part of the 'deal' was to do IOP after completion of the 28 day program. I told the people that I would give it a try. I did. I did 4 half days the first week, assessed my need, evaluated the schedule (what types of meetings were happening on what days) looked at my schedule and decided on 3 1/2 days a week to start with. When I met with the counselor (which I thought was just going to be my first 'true' trauma counseling apt) she told me that because I was not 'willing' to follow treatment recommendations of 4 1/2 days a week, I was not 'willing' to go to treatment. I told her that I did not share the same belief that I was unwilling, I just felt that 3 1/2 days a week met my needs. She repeated the same sentence...I mean the exact same sentence that I was not willing. So I rephrased and said something like 'so its 4 days or no days?'. She painfully smiled at me and repeated the phrase. I reframed my question, just trying to get a 'down to earth' answer but again, the same sentence, enforcing my lack of willingness. Weirdest meeting ever. So I politely thanked her for her time and left.
Now that could have gone much differently. If I had been a newb to abstinence I could have gotten all po'd and drank or whatever. But I was just sort of shocked. I asked myself 'am I williing?'. And the answer was absolutely yes. I knew in every fiber of my being that I was willing. I'm not sure what her deal was or why she would not let me attend 3 days of IOP, especially after completing the 28 day program (maybe because I gave them so much shlit about 3/week urine tests that they were charging my insurance company 1400 bucks a piece for...yes, you read that right) but it didn't matter. I knew, in my heart, that I was not going to drink. And that I was willing.
Ok so where am I going with this? The shaming part. The guilt trip. The labels. Someone else telling me what I am and what I'm not. This is tricky. Because there is no doubt that delusion and denial are HUGE parts of addiction. And it does help to have people other than myself guiding me. So I have to be open and willing. But there is a point where I decide what that means. Because in the end, it doesn't really matter what anyone else says. If I'm not ready to hear it, than its likely to just pizz me off.
So its a balancing act. If YOU don't identify as an alcoholic, then don't. If you need to differentiate yourself from what you believe society pre-judges alcoholics to be, then do it. This is an inside job. I call myself an addict....in AA I call myself an alcoholic (group consciousness) to everyone, I don't drink. No explanation needed. Honesty to self it all that matters.
Member
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 135
I don't mind what labels people use. Some people find labels useful, others don't (or may find them a problem).
What I have learned is important in recognizing whether you are the type of drinker who can learn to moderate, or whether you are the type of drinker that needs to embrace abstinence. I know categorically I am the latter. I learned the hard way that one year sober (followed by relapse) and then four years sober (followed by relapse) did not somehow normalize my brain so that I could drink 'normally' again.
So I don't care much about labels, but I am sure there is a place for groups of people (who can call themselves anything they like) who together are sure that they require an answer that is based on abstinence, and it is better not to try and mix that with people who are following an approach aimed at moderation.
But personally - yes, I consider myself an alcoholic because I cannot moderate. I also have not woken up on any park bench, and I didn't drink anything stronger than beer (but I could drink an awful lot of beer!). I consider myself an alcoholic because I can't gain control over alcohol - it will always control me.
What I have learned is important in recognizing whether you are the type of drinker who can learn to moderate, or whether you are the type of drinker that needs to embrace abstinence. I know categorically I am the latter. I learned the hard way that one year sober (followed by relapse) and then four years sober (followed by relapse) did not somehow normalize my brain so that I could drink 'normally' again.
So I don't care much about labels, but I am sure there is a place for groups of people (who can call themselves anything they like) who together are sure that they require an answer that is based on abstinence, and it is better not to try and mix that with people who are following an approach aimed at moderation.
But personally - yes, I consider myself an alcoholic because I cannot moderate. I also have not woken up on any park bench, and I didn't drink anything stronger than beer (but I could drink an awful lot of beer!). I consider myself an alcoholic because I can't gain control over alcohol - it will always control me.
Member
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,312
Interesting post, Vulcan. I think that there is so much misinformation and misunderstanding that alcoholism ends up getting dumped into an “all or nothing” category.
I misunderstood it for years and it took me a long time to realize that yes, I am an alcoholic even without all the “typical” symptoms.
Alcoholism, as a diagnosis,seems on par with mental health diagnoses. As in, they are highly misunderstood and misrepresented.
I misunderstood it for years and it took me a long time to realize that yes, I am an alcoholic even without all the “typical” symptoms.
Alcoholism, as a diagnosis,seems on par with mental health diagnoses. As in, they are highly misunderstood and misrepresented.
Forum Leader
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 16,945
There's a lot of misunderstanding in the world Vulcan. And unfortunately it's probably never going to stop. You've posted a large number of threads over your time here pointing things about "society" out. I understand the way it feels to be addicted and that it seems unfair, but what are YOU doing to deal with your own addiction? At the end of the day that's all that matters really - we need to own our problem and take action. What society thinks is not relevant as we control our own destiny.
Member
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 25,373
I don't know...is this an article you clipped from somewhere?
I agree with Fricka, I don't know your take on this or how it applies to you.
I went to AA meetings for a few months in the beginning. The meetings were both helpful and harmful to me so I stopped going and I'm now four and a half years sober without any relapses or any particularly big problems quitting. I suppose I am "alcoholic" because I fit a lot of the qualifications, but I don't call myself that to anyone other than other alcoholics.
I didn't like it in meetings that you are required to intro yourself as, "I'm Bim. I'm an alcoholic." I tried not saying that and got jumped on - so I don't know what the solution is when introducing oneself at meetings/in a share. I chose just to stop talking at meetings after that, which really isn't an optimal use of the group but I was not comfortable labeling myself forever-more as an alcoholic. Ultimately it was one of the things that pushed me away from meetings.
However, I do see the value in it for some people who haven't accepted that they cannot ever drink again. Conversely I also see your point that it keeps some people away from treatment or drinking longer than necessary - trying with futility to find a way to not label themselves.
Maybe me saying it out loud to a whole roomful of people IS what made it sink in, so I can't say one way or another which is right.
It's complicated. Some members use this language of, "REAL alcoholics," and seem to harbor resentments toward those who weren't at death's door or locked up - which seems pretty dramatic - but hey, whatchagonnado? I mean, those are the ones who (they say) have to work that program - so who am I to judge?
Regardless of what you want to call it - if drinking is causing problems, the solution is to stop drinking. Whatever that takes. I found my way vulcan, I hope you find yours.
I agree with Fricka, I don't know your take on this or how it applies to you.
I went to AA meetings for a few months in the beginning. The meetings were both helpful and harmful to me so I stopped going and I'm now four and a half years sober without any relapses or any particularly big problems quitting. I suppose I am "alcoholic" because I fit a lot of the qualifications, but I don't call myself that to anyone other than other alcoholics.
I didn't like it in meetings that you are required to intro yourself as, "I'm Bim. I'm an alcoholic." I tried not saying that and got jumped on - so I don't know what the solution is when introducing oneself at meetings/in a share. I chose just to stop talking at meetings after that, which really isn't an optimal use of the group but I was not comfortable labeling myself forever-more as an alcoholic. Ultimately it was one of the things that pushed me away from meetings.
However, I do see the value in it for some people who haven't accepted that they cannot ever drink again. Conversely I also see your point that it keeps some people away from treatment or drinking longer than necessary - trying with futility to find a way to not label themselves.
Maybe me saying it out loud to a whole roomful of people IS what made it sink in, so I can't say one way or another which is right.
It's complicated. Some members use this language of, "REAL alcoholics," and seem to harbor resentments toward those who weren't at death's door or locked up - which seems pretty dramatic - but hey, whatchagonnado? I mean, those are the ones who (they say) have to work that program - so who am I to judge?
Regardless of what you want to call it - if drinking is causing problems, the solution is to stop drinking. Whatever that takes. I found my way vulcan, I hope you find yours.
Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 94
Originally Posted by BullDog777 
What zero and Dee said is 100% correct. Doesn't matter what you call it.
I've been seeing this a lot lately though. The complete over analysis of the problem.
It seems like people are going through "real" grief when their getting clean. Like their mourning a real loss.
denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.
A lot of people get stuck on the bargaining and depression. No matter how you define it, it is what it is to you in your life.
For me, I spent years in the bargaining stage.
Tapering, trying to moderate, rationalizing, self diagnosing, research...the mindf^%k is endless.
In the end I just had to accept that if i was still actively drinking, I'd never get to recovery.
I desperately wanted recovery.
When I got there, the want to stay clean was far greater than the want to get drunk.
In the end that's all I needed to begin.
I've been seeing this a lot lately though. The complete over analysis of the problem.
It seems like people are going through "real" grief when their getting clean. Like their mourning a real loss.
denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance.
A lot of people get stuck on the bargaining and depression. No matter how you define it, it is what it is to you in your life.
For me, I spent years in the bargaining stage.
Tapering, trying to moderate, rationalizing, self diagnosing, research...the mindf^%k is endless.
In the end I just had to accept that if i was still actively drinking, I'd never get to recovery.
I desperately wanted recovery.
When I got there, the want to stay clean was far greater than the want to get drunk.
In the end that's all I needed to begin.
I called myself an alcoholic, not because of any criteria other than I was addicted to alcohol.
2/2016
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Texas
Posts: 582
I do not consider myself an alcoholic. I do have a problem with alcohol. I do not like to stop with one drink. I drink to get drunk. Alcohol was causing me problems. I gave it up like the bad habit it was. I will never drink again. I do not drink. Is that better somehow?
Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 573
The word ‘alcoholic’ implies an advanced stage of problem drinking;•drinking every day
•drunk all the time
•drinking in the morning
•Drinking really strong stuff
•Having lost a lot
•Gets the shakes and other withdrawal symptoms when they stop
According to who? You? I couldn't disagree with you more about this statement.
Grateful
Join Date: May 2013
Location: NC
Posts: 1,763
Problem Drinker
Alcohol Use Disorder
Alcoholism
It makes no difference to me what I call it. All that matters is that I recognized that a) it was affecting my life negatively, b) it was progressively getting worse and c) I could not moderate or quit altogether when I tried for more that a short period of time. All I know is that alcohol almost killed me and it didn't care one bit what I called myself.
Alcohol Use Disorder
Alcoholism
It makes no difference to me what I call it. All that matters is that I recognized that a) it was affecting my life negatively, b) it was progressively getting worse and c) I could not moderate or quit altogether when I tried for more that a short period of time. All I know is that alcohol almost killed me and it didn't care one bit what I called myself.
Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,229
I agree that the "label" kept me in denial. My idea of an alcholic wasnt what i was so i never really saw my drining as problem drinking even after i was a sober i didnt feel that i was ever an alcholic really. it wasnt till a year later i was like ugg yeah i'm an alcholic.
I think alcholics come in all shapes an sizes really.
but the thing is even the alcholics who fit the stereo typical label an ddefination tend to be in denial or so hooked by the drink wtf does it matter. wtvr you call it a problem drinker is still a problem drinker.
I think alcholics come in all shapes an sizes really.
but the thing is even the alcholics who fit the stereo typical label an ddefination tend to be in denial or so hooked by the drink wtf does it matter. wtvr you call it a problem drinker is still a problem drinker.
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
There is no such requirement, although I will agree (as several posters have mentioned upthread) that there is a push in certain recovery and therapy circles to label oneself or to follow certain specific protocol. But it's evidenced here at SR that many create their own plan and successfully quit drinking.
Find a method that works for you, whereby you can stop drinking for good, and you won't have to worry about any requirements at all. For me personally, once I took responsibility for my actions and started making decisions that resulted in me not ruining my life and the lives of those I care about, then everyone stopped telling me what I "should" be doing...because I was already doing it. I quit drinking for good, so the convo with the "experts" was over.
Find a method that works for you, whereby you can stop drinking for good, and you won't have to worry about any requirements at all. For me personally, once I took responsibility for my actions and started making decisions that resulted in me not ruining my life and the lives of those I care about, then everyone stopped telling me what I "should" be doing...because I was already doing it. I quit drinking for good, so the convo with the "experts" was over.
Member
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 5
Labels
I understand that labels are annoying. Alcoholism is a disease just like diabetes. People with diabetes refer to themselves as diabetics. Just like those of us who have alcoholism refer to ourselves as alcoholics. If the word alcoholic offends me, I would consider the context. Depending on how it's used it can have different connotations. I don't think it should be synonymous with words like: barfly, wino, lush, drunk, partier, etc. but it does get used that way 
oh well.
oh well.
12 Step Recovered Alcoholic
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 6,613
AA posits that there are broadly three categories of drinkers. The first two groups are non-alcohlic, as in the average temperate drinker, and the hard drinker. The distinguishing fetaure of these two groups is that they can stop or moderate given sufficient reason.
In the latest DSM both of these groups could at times attract an alcohol use disorder diagnosis, and could be anywhere on the scale. These would make up far and away the majority of people on the AUD scale. At the very extreme, severe end of the scale would be the chronic alcoholic.
This is the the goup that AA calls the "real alcholic" and they name two specific sypmtoms that do not apply to the other groups. They are lack of control and choice. Given the best of reasons and most powerful desire, these folks say they could not stop or moderate. They had lost control and mostly lost the power of choice. This isn't a diagnosis so much as it is shared experience.
I was invited to compare my experience and see how it stacked up. I discovered I was in the same class. Plenty of people come along and consider that this would be different to their experience, so they go off to find other solutions.
As far as I can tell, my type of alcoholic makes up only a small proportion of people who find themselves with some kind of drink problem. I found a very specific solution which I was willing to apply, and it worked against all odds.
Most problem drinkers probably don't have to go to these kind of lengths. Everyone has their own experience and it is up to them to decide what fits, but if they make a wrong pick, the price could be high
I was just thinking of an experience with my mechanic a few years back, which might illustrate my point. My car was overheating. He said the radiator was blocked and needed a cleanout. I disagreed and said I thought the problem was with the fan. He replaced the fan at some considerable expense. I took the car home, it overheated. I took it back and had the radiator cleaned and the problem was fixed. However I was considerably out of pocket on the fan.
I had the mechanic treat my wrong diagnosis and it didn't fix the problem. In that sense a label can be a useful tool in solving a problem.
In the latest DSM both of these groups could at times attract an alcohol use disorder diagnosis, and could be anywhere on the scale. These would make up far and away the majority of people on the AUD scale. At the very extreme, severe end of the scale would be the chronic alcoholic.
This is the the goup that AA calls the "real alcholic" and they name two specific sypmtoms that do not apply to the other groups. They are lack of control and choice. Given the best of reasons and most powerful desire, these folks say they could not stop or moderate. They had lost control and mostly lost the power of choice. This isn't a diagnosis so much as it is shared experience.
I was invited to compare my experience and see how it stacked up. I discovered I was in the same class. Plenty of people come along and consider that this would be different to their experience, so they go off to find other solutions.
As far as I can tell, my type of alcoholic makes up only a small proportion of people who find themselves with some kind of drink problem. I found a very specific solution which I was willing to apply, and it worked against all odds.
Most problem drinkers probably don't have to go to these kind of lengths. Everyone has their own experience and it is up to them to decide what fits, but if they make a wrong pick, the price could be high
I was just thinking of an experience with my mechanic a few years back, which might illustrate my point. My car was overheating. He said the radiator was blocked and needed a cleanout. I disagreed and said I thought the problem was with the fan. He replaced the fan at some considerable expense. I took the car home, it overheated. I took it back and had the radiator cleaned and the problem was fixed. However I was considerably out of pocket on the fan.
I had the mechanic treat my wrong diagnosis and it didn't fix the problem. In that sense a label can be a useful tool in solving a problem.
Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: NC
Posts: 1,737
Regardless what you call the issue, the decision is exactly the same: are you going to continue to drink problematically or stop?
If I stopped drinking in my early 20's when it was still a mere 'problem' I would not have become an alcoholic. However, I do not think I have ever had the capability (much less the desire) to only have one drink and call it a night. If others are capable of changing the way they drink such that is no longer a problem, more power to them. For me, I suspect it was always going to be an all or nothing proposition.
If I stopped drinking in my early 20's when it was still a mere 'problem' I would not have become an alcoholic. However, I do not think I have ever had the capability (much less the desire) to only have one drink and call it a night. If others are capable of changing the way they drink such that is no longer a problem, more power to them. For me, I suspect it was always going to be an all or nothing proposition.
Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
