Peter

[quote=GettingFree]
Heck, I even found it hard to trust someone (Bill Wilson) whose notion of recovery included replacing one addiction for another (nicotine) which can be as deadly, albeit more socially acceptable. [/unquote)At what point in his life did Mr. Wilson convey the notion that in order to recover you had to replace one addiction for another?

GettingFree

Bill Wilson was a chain smoker into his 70s, for more than 30 years after founding AA, and eventually died of emphysema in 1971. There was tacit acceptance from the top down, if you will, that nicotine addiction was acceptable in a recovery program from alcohol addiction. AA meetings were well-known for being filled with cigarette and coffee consumption, particularly until the non-smoking movement brought laws into effect in many areas that restricted smoking indoors in public places. From what I have gleaned, even though the link between cigarettes, alcohol and co-addictions has been known for some time, and the link between cigarettes and disease and death for longer, there still is no 'policy' in the AA orgnization on nicotine addiction.

It's interesting to note that an article in the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that more alcholics die from tobacco-related diseases than they do from alcoholism.

The idea of nicotine addiction in the context of recovery raises some serious questions:

What are the implications -- spiritual, emotional and physical -- of continuing to be dependent on a substance or allowing it to remain in control of your life?

Can you really say that you've had a "spiritual awakening" and have been "restored to sanity" by a Higher Power if you still have an active addiction in your life?

Or in terms that I relate to more -- can you really say you've healed and addressed the issues underlying addiction when you're still in an active addiction that is clearly destructive and often lethal?

Just a thought.

P.S. Let me add that I do believe Bill Wilson made an important contribution, to be sure. However, it appears to me that there's room for an orgnization founded 70 years ago to evolve and change alongside learnings and insights in the field of addiction, mental and spritiual health that have taken place during that time. I think Freud had an incredible contribution to make during his lifetime, but the prinicples and theories he first worked on have since evolved and changed as others have taken on the torch since then. So it should be with any body of knowledge or institution.

DesertEyes

Heya GF,

Good points all, if I may pick a couple minor nits

Well, yes and no. You are correct in that AA does not have a policy specific to nicotine addiction. What AA does have is a policy about _all_ other addictions besides alcohol. So if you do a search for "nicotine" in the AA literature you won't find it. Instead you have to do a search for "Problems other than alcohol", which covers _all_ other addictions from food thru sex, nicotine thru illegal drugs. The policy can be summarized as "get thee to the corresponding program". That means food addicts to OA, nicotine addicts to SA, and so on.

http://www.silkworth.net/grapevine/other_problems.html

That one is a tricky statistic. Suicides are not rated as alcohol-related, neither are auto accidents, spouses murdered by a violent drunk, pancreatitis, esophageal varices, and all the alcohol induced cardiac problems. It's really difficult to compare one addiction to another, no matter how careful you are with the figures. My personal opinion is that it really doesn't matter who dies from what, all addictions are serious.

Depends on who and when you ask. If you ask the wife of an alcoholic who just joined AA, is free of all mood altering chemicals for a few months, is back to work, no longer berates or abuses the wife or the kids, _but_ is still smoking.... then you are going to get a very different answer from her.

Recovery from _all_ addictions does not happen just by walking into a meeting and sticking a buck in the basket. For many people it takes a lifetime. Just look at how long it takes us ACoA's to recover from our non-chemical "addictions".

I agree with you that there isn't a _single_ program that addresses _all_ possible addictions in a single, sudden gasp of spiritual awakening. To me that doesn't condemn all those programs, it just shows that addiction is a whole lot more difficult to overcome than just one program can address. The fact that there are so many programs for all possible needs is the _strength_ of all these programs, not a defect. These programs work, and I'm including non-12 step programs, precisely because they do _not_ attempt to fix all problems for all people.

Whadya think?

Mike

GettingFree

Hi Mike,

As can always be relied on, you make great points too!

Exactly -- I couldn't agree more. I think this is what most of my post is about -- that all addictions are serious and point to an underlying problem. And I appreciate your clarification on the stats. More often than not stats can be picked apart and you'll find a different truth there.

No question. Recovery is a continuum -- one I am still on!

Totally there with you -- as you'd guess!

Here, I'm not so sure I agree or if that's what I was saying. I think you can have a wholistic approach to healing that addresses any type of addiction -- and often underlying codependence issues, trauma, etc. The wonderful thing about 12 step communities (even though I'm not part of one) is that they bring together people addressing the outward expression of their underlying issues in a common way -- so there is community and support their for that outward expression.

But underneath? I'm not so sure it's that different. I'm kind of a perfect case in point -- I'm active as a partner, as a codie, as a former substance abuser, and as an AOCA -- but my path to recovery is the same underlying all. Make sense?

DesertEyes

We agree on that. The AMA says it's a difference in the metabolic enzymes of the brain as relevant to lipid-soluble compounds. That includes all the mood altering chemicals, nicotine and caffeine, all the stimulant-hormones such as adrenaline, simple carbohydrates (as present in sugar) and even sex (thru the presence of oxytocin).

Well sort of. Let me take an extreme example to illustrate why AA encourages the "multiple program" approach.

Say a newbie shows up at an AA meeting. This newbie hears all the wonderful shares about the 12 steps, and all the little tips and tricks like "90 meetings in 90 days" and "before you pick up a drink, pickup a phone" and so on. The newbie finds the "HP thing" quite acceptable, and goes out and does exactly as instructed. Complete abstinence from her drug of choice. Two months later she's dead.

Why? Because his/her drug of choice was _food_, and the newbie was suffering from anorexia.

People addicted to _food_ are _not_ able to practice total abstinence. They _must_ have their own program, whether it be OA or Jenny Craig or Weight Watchers.

How about sex addicts? Sure, they can abstain from sex forever, nuns and priests do ( most of 'em anyway ) But that condemns them to never having a family.

Al-Anons? Some people say Al-anoids are addicted to relationships, or control. Abstinence from that would mean becoming a hermit in the farthest reaches of Antartica.

It is these subtle but significant differences in the many "drugs of choice" that makes it necessary for each person to develop their own unique path which is _not_ the same underlying path for all addictions. The unique path is drawn from a vast pool of _different_ paths, methods and techniques which may overlap in a few areas. 12 steps programs and Weight Watchers have very _little_ in common, can you imagine a Dry Martini counting 4 points of sobriety and a beer counting 12 points of sobriety?

There's several folks who post here regulary whom I'd be hard pressed to find _anything_ they do that I could say is drawn from any program of recovery, yet their lives are just as happy, joyous and free as the most hard core book-thumper around (no, don't look at me, I'm not _that_ hard core )

Whadya think?

Mike

GettingFree

I think we're talking at macro and micro levels Mike. Let's put it this way -- if I wanted to learn to play basketball, tennis or golf, I'd seek out very different instructors or coaches to learn the actual techniques of the individual sport. The skills required are vastly different, not only in the actual physical technique but in playing as part of a team, against one opponent, or playing essentially against oneself.

But underlying all athletic endeavors and competitions are underlying themes and challenges. There is the mental game. There is the discipline. Coping with stress and endurance. Perseverance. Motivation in the face of defeat. Etc. Etc. These underly all athletic pursuits at the top level and all athletes need to master them.

So I see it with addiction. Of course the bulemic and the over-eater need to practice different 'techniques' -- but underneath all addiction, no matter how different the outward manifestation, the same work is required -- the willingness and commitment to look beyond the behavior to find the root causes and pain and deal with them. And if you use this as your compass, you'll be less likely to replace one addiction with another.

How's that sound?

DesertEyes

Heya GF,

hmmm... ok, I see what you mean. We are talking at different levels. I think what your describing is a "meta-program" of recovery. The "mother" of all recovery programs

As usual, you and I took the long way around to discover we agree

Mike

GettingFree

(laughing) Yup Mike. But the ride is worth it!

Five

Minnie - about the rape thing: I felt decieved, and made to believe things against my will. A mental and emotional thing. And yes, its a process of learning to trust.

I had a bad experience. Many Do. Many Dont.

Thanks for your words and I am really trying to move on from this low surface anger I have toward AA and the twelve steps.

Five

Minnie:

Yes, a fantastic, summer swaggering mo'fo of an album.