Alcoholism. Disease or weakness?
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 3,054
I think one f the differences between how individuals weigh issues like this up - and how medical bodies go about the same task is in numbers, similarities, and a defined parametre for what makes something classifiable.
I believe that's the way it's meant to be rather than purely from personal experience - especially when we don't have large portians of knowledge or tools (like brain scanning gear!!).
This debate is done repeatedly but I'm not having a go at that - I can understand why. I wonder what would happen to the same discussion if it was agreed it had to be beased on medical information as opposed to varied individual's experience?
There's a very good reason why things are weighed up from hundreds and thousands of people rather than just a handful. It might be helpful to people that think WHO, DSM IV-Tr, the AMA and the BMA are all wrong to at least look at WHY they are in agreement that alcohol addiction is more than just choice.
At least it would mean discussing medical issues with the reasoning that defines them.
I believe that's the way it's meant to be rather than purely from personal experience - especially when we don't have large portians of knowledge or tools (like brain scanning gear!!).
This debate is done repeatedly but I'm not having a go at that - I can understand why. I wonder what would happen to the same discussion if it was agreed it had to be beased on medical information as opposed to varied individual's experience?
There's a very good reason why things are weighed up from hundreds and thousands of people rather than just a handful. It might be helpful to people that think WHO, DSM IV-Tr, the AMA and the BMA are all wrong to at least look at WHY they are in agreement that alcohol addiction is more than just choice.
At least it would mean discussing medical issues with the reasoning that defines them.
Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 689
Originally Posted by equus
It might be helpful to people that think WHO, DSM IV-Tr, the AMA and the BMA are all wrong to at least look at WHY they are in agreement that alcohol addiction is more than just choice.
If you have a look at my post above, you'll see that I think any addiction is far more, and far more serious, than simply choice. At the same time, I also don't feel comfortable with the term disease. I think there's room for more than black or white thinking here.
As to the medical community's definitions, I see current medicine and psychiatry as rather deficient and narrow in the work of recovery and addiction. And it's hardly surprising that medical practitioners would develop classifications that fit into known and familiar models in the field.
Some of the most gifted practitioners in the field I know or know of do not have an M.D. next to their name, but come from a variety of other disciplines and training.
gf
Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Pugetopolis
Posts: 2,384
Just some general info, the AMA classified alcoholism as a disease, in the 1950's I think. As far back as the 1700's Dr. Benjamin Rush talked of it as a "strange malady, a madness." As far as I know, AA itself has never called it a disease. I have seen it called an illness, an affliction, and a malady. AA literature talks about a physical allergy manifested in "a phenomenon of craving" for more alcohol when the alcoholic puts in alcohol in his/her system. The term allergy was used in the late 1930's. I don't know if it is a true allergy, but I think allergy is defined as an abnormal reaction to a substance that is harmless to most people. I certainly react to alcohol differently than my sister.
The second component is described as a mental obsession, characterized by strange mental blank spots in which all the reasons for not drinking either don't show up, or are pushed aside by ideas like "this time I will handle it better." This feature is baffling, both to the alcoholic and those around him. In my case, people would say "why did you do that after all the trouble you've had with drinking?" Sometimes I couldn't give them an answer.
Behind the mental component is a sort of a "soul sickness" if you will. An inability to live at peace with one's self and the world around you. For alcoholics, sobriety is the most intolerable condition of all. Life gets so untenable, the alcoholic must drink. Sobriety starts with abstinence, but this component must be addressed if sobriety is to be maintained. Unless the alcoholic finds a way to make peace within himself and with the world around him, he will always drink again. For some this way is the 12 step way. For some it is religion, for some it is therapy. For some it is a combination of all three. A small percentage seem to recover on their own.
The second component is described as a mental obsession, characterized by strange mental blank spots in which all the reasons for not drinking either don't show up, or are pushed aside by ideas like "this time I will handle it better." This feature is baffling, both to the alcoholic and those around him. In my case, people would say "why did you do that after all the trouble you've had with drinking?" Sometimes I couldn't give them an answer.
Behind the mental component is a sort of a "soul sickness" if you will. An inability to live at peace with one's self and the world around you. For alcoholics, sobriety is the most intolerable condition of all. Life gets so untenable, the alcoholic must drink. Sobriety starts with abstinence, but this component must be addressed if sobriety is to be maintained. Unless the alcoholic finds a way to make peace within himself and with the world around him, he will always drink again. For some this way is the 12 step way. For some it is religion, for some it is therapy. For some it is a combination of all three. A small percentage seem to recover on their own.
Wipe your paws elsewhere!
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 3,672
Jim, you are a welcome addition to forum. I thank you for all you share here. It helps me to better understand what my (recovering) alcoholic partner has been through as well as his ongoing struggle to remain sober.
Member
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 689
I'm just realizing what my real trouble is with this disease question. It's not whether alcoholism should be identified as a disease or not.
It's that alcoholism is in itself identified as the problem.
Alcoholism is not the core problem!
Neither is drug addiction. Or eating disorders. Or gambling. Or love addiction. Or sex addicton. Or work addiction. Or compulsive shopping. etc. etc.
The problem -- the disease -- is terrible emotional and pyschological pain created by significant wounding, trauma, neglect, emotional abuse, physical abuse or sexual abuse.
And all these other identified 'isms' are the outcome of that core problem, all developed as ways to manage, control and avoid the pain and get our needs met in destructive ways.
When are we going to separate the activity used to try and cope with the problem (any form of addictive behavior) from the problem itself?
gf
It's that alcoholism is in itself identified as the problem.
Alcoholism is not the core problem!
Neither is drug addiction. Or eating disorders. Or gambling. Or love addiction. Or sex addicton. Or work addiction. Or compulsive shopping. etc. etc.
The problem -- the disease -- is terrible emotional and pyschological pain created by significant wounding, trauma, neglect, emotional abuse, physical abuse or sexual abuse.
And all these other identified 'isms' are the outcome of that core problem, all developed as ways to manage, control and avoid the pain and get our needs met in destructive ways.
When are we going to separate the activity used to try and cope with the problem (any form of addictive behavior) from the problem itself?
gf
Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 5,075
Originally Posted by DesertEyes
--- before I left a man who was a total jerk, I would think long and hard about it ---
What do you think of that statement? Do you think it's healthy for a woman to live with a man who is a total jerk? To put up with the "jerk-ness" and think long and hard about leaving? I don't think it would be healthy.
My point is that the _behavior_ is what a person should be judged by. It doesn't matter what disease they have, or not have, or what childhood they had or didn't have. Only the _behavior_ is what matters.
What do you think of that statement? Do you think it's healthy for a woman to live with a man who is a total jerk? To put up with the "jerk-ness" and think long and hard about leaving? I don't think it would be healthy.
My point is that the _behavior_ is what a person should be judged by. It doesn't matter what disease they have, or not have, or what childhood they had or didn't have. Only the _behavior_ is what matters.
Ayers, I don't know if it's been suggested, but there is some very good reading out there re the disease aspect. A's react physiologically different than non-A's to alcohol in their system. When they've been drinking long enough, it also affects their brain function. You can accept the disease concept, but that doesn't mean accepting the bad behavior. It's apples and oranges.
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 3,054
Disease, causes, symptoms - 3 words three meanings non interchangable!
Out of interest how many people actually look up what disease means? Or consider what it is that makes disease different from symptom?
Psychlogical stress is bad for us - it causes a whole variety of illness and disease but because 'a' caused 'b', it ('a') does not become 'b' nor does it mean that 'b' cannot be classed as anything because it was caused by 'a'.
If we want to understand and learn the CAUSES of addiction the best start is with a few hours (scratch that - we're talking addiction) MANY hours of journal reading.
Sorry for sounding like a pain in the bum BUT this whole confusing mess (ie people worrying about duty when someone is ill, what is disease and what is the person, defining people by addiction, staying when they are being treated like crap, believing in crystal balls, the whole disease SHEBANG!!) is going to stay locked in circular arguments.
I found by learning decisions were made easier for me, I had no problem distinguishing the person from the problem, I had no problem keeping boundaries of how I expect to be treated, and very little guilt. On the whole for someone who's hubby is 5 months down the line of being sober I have a damn site less fear than many too.
My ESH? Accept with genuine humility that I'm not going to be able to re-write the whole thing, that the chances of me finding where the BMA, AMA and WHO went wrong and personally coming up with a better idea are downright slim! So instead of trying to re-write it all I set some time aside to read it! That worked for me!
Good luck with whatever you decide works for you.
Out of interest how many people actually look up what disease means? Or consider what it is that makes disease different from symptom?
Psychlogical stress is bad for us - it causes a whole variety of illness and disease but because 'a' caused 'b', it ('a') does not become 'b' nor does it mean that 'b' cannot be classed as anything because it was caused by 'a'.
If we want to understand and learn the CAUSES of addiction the best start is with a few hours (scratch that - we're talking addiction) MANY hours of journal reading.
Sorry for sounding like a pain in the bum BUT this whole confusing mess (ie people worrying about duty when someone is ill, what is disease and what is the person, defining people by addiction, staying when they are being treated like crap, believing in crystal balls, the whole disease SHEBANG!!) is going to stay locked in circular arguments.
I found by learning decisions were made easier for me, I had no problem distinguishing the person from the problem, I had no problem keeping boundaries of how I expect to be treated, and very little guilt. On the whole for someone who's hubby is 5 months down the line of being sober I have a damn site less fear than many too.
My ESH? Accept with genuine humility that I'm not going to be able to re-write the whole thing, that the chances of me finding where the BMA, AMA and WHO went wrong and personally coming up with a better idea are downright slim! So instead of trying to re-write it all I set some time aside to read it! That worked for me!
Good luck with whatever you decide works for you.
Member
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 3,054
For anyone interested in the uncreative dictionary meaning and medical evidence this might be relevent:
http://www.soberrecovery.com/forums/...ase-57608.html
http://www.soberrecovery.com/forums/...ase-57608.html
Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: El Paso, Tx
Posts: 5,862
Originally Posted by Ayers1995
TG- That's my problem. I think they chose to drink, therefore chose the fog and therefore chose their actions. If not, then what?
They have no choice because it's a disease?
They have no choice because it's a disease?
If you did have the answer anyway, then what?
Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
