The Freedom Model for Addictions - 2
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 684
This does seem to be inevitably headed towards another your-method-is-wrong-because-it's-not-my-preferred-method-of-choice, if I've got the word right, exchange.
We all know that's not going to be constructive and it's also going to mean that the intention of this thread which is a discussion of the Freedom Model is going to be lost.
So could I please ask that we get back to the original topic?
We all know that's not going to be constructive and it's also going to mean that the intention of this thread which is a discussion of the Freedom Model is going to be lost.
So could I please ask that we get back to the original topic?
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 684
Originally Posted by soberlicious 
What is happy sobriety? Does it mean you're happy about not being a drinker or that you're not a drinker because you're happy? Because those are different to me.
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 684
Further to this, the model doesn't believe that unhappiness is a "cause of" people drinking. There's a chapter called "Learned Connections" and this is a term the authors use to describe the relationship between what we think are the causes of our drinking, such as unhappiness, and our drinking itself.
It seems commonsensical to say that some people who are unhappy would drink if they think that would give them some level of happiness at least for a while. But that is not the same as saying that their unhappiness is "causing" them to drink - happy people drink too because they believe it will make them even happier.
So, the model says, being happy or unhappy are not causes or reasons to drink. Rather, the reason to drink is the same for both happy or unhappy people: to be happier than they currently are (the PDP)
It seems commonsensical to say that some people who are unhappy would drink if they think that would give them some level of happiness at least for a while. But that is not the same as saying that their unhappiness is "causing" them to drink - happy people drink too because they believe it will make them even happier.
So, the model says, being happy or unhappy are not causes or reasons to drink. Rather, the reason to drink is the same for both happy or unhappy people: to be happier than they currently are (the PDP)
quat
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: terra (mostly)firma
Posts: 4,823
in post #12 the OP:
" The Positive Drive Principle (PDP)
The authors say that one of the key ideas of the model is the Positive Drive Principle, or PDP for short, and they define it simply as a drive to pursue happiness.
They say this about the PDP in the book:
We consider the following observation to be self-evident: every single person, in everything they do, is just trying to achieve/maintain a happy existence.
As simple as that statement is, it's turned out to be the most important insight we've had over the past three decades of running our retreats. It's important for understanding heavy substance use habits, and it's important for making changes in substance use habits. We call it the Positive Drive Principle or PDP for short, and define it simply as a drive to pursue happiness. We definitely aren't the first to make this observation. Great thinkers over the ages have noted it frequently.
In more personal terms perhaps they they also describe it like this:
From our beginnings of helping people almost 30 years ago, our approach has had a single defining theme in the pursuit of happiness. We have shown people that if they can develop the conviction that a change to their substance use habits will produce greater happiness, then they will happily, easily, and permanently change their habits for the better. They will get “unstuck” and move on. That is the natural way of personal change."
My questions/comments/criticisms with this principle are centered on how they deal with or if they deal with the more visceral aspects of intoxication. Their principle seems , to me at least based on the information provided in this thread, targets a person's estimation of their future happiness given they accept a lifestyle change. An estimation the authors presume every one would make given a rational and reasoned estimation of their current circumstances and how a change in their use habits would facilitate their happiness going forward.
That the recovery industry has fabricated the falsehood of 'addiction' as a disease or condition which 'makes' them stay stuck simply because they fail to recognize they would in fact be happier by choosing to see that a lifestyle change would bring that happiness and to let go of the idea that their current lifestyle is a path to that end.
But how do they reconcile not being able to get high , that moment (?) when an individual realizes the last high was just that, the very last time that(those) sensation(s) were the last time they would ever experience it?
Speaking for myself I always knew being free of the negative consequences of self intoxication would be a happier existence, just for the fact of not experiencing the negatives, but that in and of itself didn't stop the desire for intoxication.
I don't see this principle as a way to quit, it seems like a good round about way to feel happy about having quit( end an addiction) , I just can't see this principle working as a course of action to ensure never getting the chance to get high again.
" The Positive Drive Principle (PDP)
The authors say that one of the key ideas of the model is the Positive Drive Principle, or PDP for short, and they define it simply as a drive to pursue happiness.
They say this about the PDP in the book:
We consider the following observation to be self-evident: every single person, in everything they do, is just trying to achieve/maintain a happy existence.
As simple as that statement is, it's turned out to be the most important insight we've had over the past three decades of running our retreats. It's important for understanding heavy substance use habits, and it's important for making changes in substance use habits. We call it the Positive Drive Principle or PDP for short, and define it simply as a drive to pursue happiness. We definitely aren't the first to make this observation. Great thinkers over the ages have noted it frequently.
In more personal terms perhaps they they also describe it like this:
From our beginnings of helping people almost 30 years ago, our approach has had a single defining theme in the pursuit of happiness. We have shown people that if they can develop the conviction that a change to their substance use habits will produce greater happiness, then they will happily, easily, and permanently change their habits for the better. They will get “unstuck” and move on. That is the natural way of personal change."
My questions/comments/criticisms with this principle are centered on how they deal with or if they deal with the more visceral aspects of intoxication. Their principle seems , to me at least based on the information provided in this thread, targets a person's estimation of their future happiness given they accept a lifestyle change. An estimation the authors presume every one would make given a rational and reasoned estimation of their current circumstances and how a change in their use habits would facilitate their happiness going forward.
That the recovery industry has fabricated the falsehood of 'addiction' as a disease or condition which 'makes' them stay stuck simply because they fail to recognize they would in fact be happier by choosing to see that a lifestyle change would bring that happiness and to let go of the idea that their current lifestyle is a path to that end.
But how do they reconcile not being able to get high , that moment (?) when an individual realizes the last high was just that, the very last time that(those) sensation(s) were the last time they would ever experience it?
Speaking for myself I always knew being free of the negative consequences of self intoxication would be a happier existence, just for the fact of not experiencing the negatives, but that in and of itself didn't stop the desire for intoxication.
I don't see this principle as a way to quit, it seems like a good round about way to feel happy about having quit( end an addiction) , I just can't see this principle working as a course of action to ensure never getting the chance to get high again.
Member
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 2,654
A well reasoned post Dwtbd, regarding the desire (latent?) which is a relevant question. I’m still reading the book; I’m hoping to encounter mention of their equivalent of the AV. I shan’t conjecture. Once I finish the book, I’ll report back.
quat
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: terra (mostly)firma
Posts: 4,823
tatsy
While I always appreciate a well reasoned criticism, this thread is about the OP topic and should continue without reference to any 'method' specific nomenclature(trade marked or otherwise
) other than that of the Model, others would agree I'm sure.
While I always appreciate a well reasoned criticism, this thread is about the OP topic and should continue without reference to any 'method' specific nomenclature(trade marked or otherwise
) other than that of the Model, others would agree I'm sure.
ours de petit cerveau
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,630
Originally Posted by dwtbd
tatsy
While I always appreciate a well reasoned criticism, this thread is about the OP topic and should continue without reference to any 'method' specific nomenclature(trade marked or otherwise ) other than that of the Model, others would agree I'm sure.
While I always appreciate a well reasoned criticism, this thread is about the OP topic and should continue without reference to any 'method' specific nomenclature(trade marked or otherwise
) other than that of the Model, others would agree I'm sure.Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,109
The book talks about this guy B. F. Skinner and his ideas about psychology and how that's what a lot of conventional recovery method are about.
https://www.simplypsychology.org/ope...ditioning.html
I believe Principal Skinner from The Simpson's is based on this guy too haha.
https://www.simplypsychology.org/ope...ditioning.html
I believe Principal Skinner from The Simpson's is based on this guy too haha.
quat
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: terra (mostly)firma
Posts: 4,823
Originally Posted by andyh
I disagree. the point of the thread is to discuss The Freedom Model method & as such, comparing & contrasting to other methods, or using their terminology to illustrate a concept, especially where that terminology has become somewhat generic, is quite acceptable so long as it is done in a constructive & non-judgmental manner.
Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,109
Originally Posted by dwtbd
My questions/comments/criticisms with this principle are centered on how they deal with or if they deal with the more visceral aspects of intoxication. Their principle seems , to me at least based on the information provided in this thread, targets a person's estimation of their future happiness given they accept a lifestyle change. An estimation the authors presume every one would make given a rational and reasoned estimation of their current circumstances and how a change in their use habits would facilitate their happiness going forward.
That the recovery industry has fabricated the falsehood of 'addiction' as a disease or condition which 'makes' them stay stuck simply because they fail to recognize they would in fact be happier by choosing to see that a lifestyle change would bring that happiness and to let go of the idea that their current lifestyle is a path to that end.
But how do they reconcile not being able to get high , that moment (?) when an individual realizes the last high was just that, the very last time that(those) sensation(s) were the last time they would ever experience it?
Speaking for myself I always knew being free of the negative consequences of self intoxication would be a happier existence, just for the fact of not experiencing the negatives, but that in and of itself didn't stop the desire for intoxication.
I don't see this principle as a way to quit, it seems like a good round about way to feel happy about having quit( end an addiction) , I just can't see this principle working as a course of action to ensure never getting the chance to get high again.
That the recovery industry has fabricated the falsehood of 'addiction' as a disease or condition which 'makes' them stay stuck simply because they fail to recognize they would in fact be happier by choosing to see that a lifestyle change would bring that happiness and to let go of the idea that their current lifestyle is a path to that end.
But how do they reconcile not being able to get high , that moment (?) when an individual realizes the last high was just that, the very last time that(those) sensation(s) were the last time they would ever experience it?
Speaking for myself I always knew being free of the negative consequences of self intoxication would be a happier existence, just for the fact of not experiencing the negatives, but that in and of itself didn't stop the desire for intoxication.
I don't see this principle as a way to quit, it seems like a good round about way to feel happy about having quit( end an addiction) , I just can't see this principle working as a course of action to ensure never getting the chance to get high again.
They definitely recognize both the physical and mental aspect of pleasure from all drugs. Their whole philosophy is about changing the mind. You are what you think. I'm only on chapter 5, but this is from chapter 2.
The Freedom Model works by first removing the obstacles to change and then providing insight and information that can help you effectively make new choices, leaving those choices up to you. It does all this by providing information. With new information, new perspectives, and new thoughts, you may develop new desires, do away the painful task of fighting your desires, and easily make new choices.
How Do I Quit Drinking or Drugging?
You quit by ceasing to continue using substances. Quitting is a zero step process, and it isn't difficult. We know this sounds dismissive of the difficulties you've felt in trying to quit, and again, that's why we've provided this detailed, thoroughly researched and cited text to help you understand why it truly is simple.
Quitting isn't difficult when you really want to quit. As you think critically about your past attempts to quit in which it felt difficult, you might want to ask yourself whether you truly wanted to quit. You either felt that you had to quit, were obligated to quit, or were cornered into quitting. In those difficult attempts, you didn't see a life without substance use. This is another way of saying you didn't really want it, then becomes a painful struggle to resist what you really want.
How Do I Quit Drinking or Drugging?
You quit by ceasing to continue using substances. Quitting is a zero step process, and it isn't difficult. We know this sounds dismissive of the difficulties you've felt in trying to quit, and again, that's why we've provided this detailed, thoroughly researched and cited text to help you understand why it truly is simple.
Quitting isn't difficult when you really want to quit. As you think critically about your past attempts to quit in which it felt difficult, you might want to ask yourself whether you truly wanted to quit. You either felt that you had to quit, were obligated to quit, or were cornered into quitting. In those difficult attempts, you didn't see a life without substance use. This is another way of saying you didn't really want it, then becomes a painful struggle to resist what you really want.
ours de petit cerveau
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,630
Originally Posted by dwtbd
Speaking for myself I always knew being free of the negative consequences of self intoxication would be a happier existence, just for the fact of not experiencing the negatives, but that in and of itself didn't stop the desire for intoxication.
I don't see this principle as a way to quit, it seems like a good round about way to feel happy about having quit( end an addiction) , I just can't see this principle working as a course of action to ensure never getting the chance to get high again.
I don't see this principle as a way to quit, it seems like a good round about way to feel happy about having quit( end an addiction) , I just can't see this principle working as a course of action to ensure never getting the chance to get high again.
Originally Posted by dwtbd
I stand corrected, any thoughts on #65 ?
SMART uses techniques borrowed from Motivational Interviewing to have the person contemplating abstinence take a rational look at their situation & assess the short- & long-term up- & down-sides to either continuing with the addictive behaviour or abstaining from it.
If a choice of abstinence is made, then there are a number of REBT/CBT-based tools to reinforce that choice. The desired end-state really is to be glad to be abstinent & genuinely to not feel any deprivation from no longer participating in your former addictive behaviour of choice.
This all works very nicely for me, along with some other bits & pieces from mindfulness & similar. I totally get that it may not be for everyone, we're not all wired the same, which is why I'm glad there are other secular methods out there (AVRT) to suit others, & can appreciate their merits, even if they don't strike the same chord with me.
quat
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: terra (mostly)firma
Posts: 4,823
The excerpt posted by BJ really aligns with my quit first, last and always stance.
I’m a hardcore quitter , that’s my perspective, I always point out anything that seems/sounds like anything other than Quitting(aka AV).
My comments were aimed at the ideas , concepts as explained , implications and connotations that feel like they are trying to smuggle in some hidden AV,I’m antiAV
I’m a hardcore quitter , that’s my perspective, I always point out anything that seems/sounds like anything other than Quitting(aka AV).
My comments were aimed at the ideas , concepts as explained , implications and connotations that feel like they are trying to smuggle in some hidden AV,I’m antiAV
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 684
How can there be "smuggling" of AV, hidden or otherwise, in a model that treats people like adults and leaves the choice of substance use up to you? And this is just being real and honest because of course the choice is up to you, no-one else can make it for you and if they did you wouldn't be committed to it anyway.
The purpose of AV is to direct you in a particular direction, that of drinking again, and so the whole idea of AV really has no relevance in this model because nothing influences you in any direction other than your own beliefs and choices.
The purpose of AV is to direct you in a particular direction, that of drinking again, and so the whole idea of AV really has no relevance in this model because nothing influences you in any direction other than your own beliefs and choices.
Not The Way way, Just the way
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: US
Posts: 1,413
Originally Posted by AlericB
How can there be "smuggling" of AV, hidden or otherwise, in a model that treats people like adults and leaves the choice of substance use up to you? And this is just being real and honest because of course the choice is up to you, no-one else can make it for you and if they did you wouldn't be committed to it anyway.
The purpose of AV is to direct you in a particular direction, that of drinking again, and so the whole idea of AV really has no relevance in this model because nothing influences you in any direction other than your own beliefs and choices.
The purpose of AV is to direct you in a particular direction, that of drinking again, and so the whole idea of AV really has no relevance in this model because nothing influences you in any direction other than your own beliefs and choices.
Try real hard right now to NOT think of pink elephants. Some thoughts and feelings will arise without personal control, simply by being conscious and within society. They are totally harmless, when categorized and not acted upon, pigeon-holed back into animal land.
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Chester, UK
Posts: 684
Originally Posted by GerandTwine
I think it’s safe to say, the Freedom Model of recovery’s ongoing internal evaluation of what type of alcohol intake will make me happiest, is the equivalent of the Structural Model’s ongoing re-cognition of the Addictive Voice popping up here and there in harmless thoughts and feelings.
The AV, on the other hand, in the Structural Model is the bark of the enduring and eternal Beast and therefore does need a life-long and ongoing process of recognition and separation.
Originally Posted by GerandTwine
Since the AV cannot be fully understood without the Structural Model of Addiction
So I wouldn't say it's that the Freedom Model doesn't understand AV but rather that AV is not an explanatory concept that it uses. The models have some similarities but also differences and there is not always a correspondence between the ideas in the two models.
Not The Way way, Just the way
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: US
Posts: 1,413
Originally Posted by AlericB
Once you've made a considered opinion on what would be your best option you may decide to change this at some later date but it wouldn't be a continuing thing that you do.
Originally Posted by AlericB
The AV, on the other hand, in the Structural Model is the bark of the enduring and eternal Beast and therefore does need a life-long and ongoing process of recognition and separation
Currently Active Users Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
