Wholesome

Recovery Group Movement. You were close.

andyh

thanks

RecklessEric

Occasionally I miss drinking.
Or not drinking, but the ceremony around it.

I do not miss craziness but sometimes I pass a pub on a winter's evening and remember how much I loved going to a warm pub on dark evening to read the newspaper.

This made me happy.

Now, it's been a long time since alcohol made me happy. I found it too difficult to moderate so I stopped trying. On the occasions in the last few years where I drank, I wasn't at all happy- just drunk.

Regarding control, I suppose if one doesn't believe in the disease theory, which I don't, one must automatically assume it is possible to control one's drinking. I don't hold on to that as a future reason to drink thought. I've decided it's caused me too much pain trying to do this and it's not worth the effort.

Today, I'm happy. I can face my daughter without shame. She's 11 now and I often speak with her of the times she has seen me passed out or talking crap. She says she forgives me and I think she does. I tell her that my behaviour in those times was not the behaviour of a good father and that she will never have to see her dad like that again.
We have an amazing relationship and to me, that's the biggest source of happiness in my life.
Forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think it was AlericB who quit drinking to avoid losing a partner.
AA would say this is the wrong reason to quit, that "You have to do it for yourself". But the vast majority are happier when with the people we love. So it is possible to do it for yourself and for somebody else simultaneously.

Regarding the model in question in this thread, I'll say two things:
1. In my professional experience (I work for the state with young people and families in crisis), mental health difficulties and substance abuse issues are inexorably linked- the "dual diagnosis". My organisation does not collect data on the matter of dual diagnosis but my colleagues in the homelessness sector tell me the stats are through the roof. You can talk about chicken and egg all you like, but the reality is the two coexist with frightening prevalence.

2. I'm conscious the OP asked that we refrain from questioning stats but as a person who often works with stats, I am too aware of how easy it is to pluck a stat and use it out of context (eg. unemployment rate vs employment rate). So in attempting to judge a product or service by stats, one really needs to know much more than the headline stat provided by the vendor.

AlericB

That's a very thoughtful post.

Re. stats., I was just hoping to avoid comparisons of the success rates of different models. I don't work with stats. like you do but I'm a mathematician and so agree with you that you need more than the headline figures. One thing I admire about the Baldwin Institute is that they commission their stats. from a third party and make the details publicly available on their website.

StevenSlate

That's a great point.

If seeing another person happy and cared for makes you happy, then it's part of your happiness. If taking care of them yourself makes you happy, that is part of your happiness.

Incidentally, you could pull this from AA too, since AA is both what is reflected in the official literature (which says selfishness is the problem), and the commonly stated pronouncements of its members ("you have to do it for yourself", or "this is a selfish program").

Someone brought up my mention of psychological egoism earlier, and I think it might've been misunderstood, so I want to clarify it now in case anyone doesn't know what that is. Psychological egoism is not a prescription to be selfish - it is a description of motivation which says that we are all motivated to act by self-interest (whether we realize it or not, or like it or not). It doesn't mean the actions we choose will necessarily objectively be in our self-interest - just that at root they are motivated by a pursuit of self-interest. It's nearly identical to the philosophy of the freedom model. We take as our starting point the idea that everyone is pursuing happiness in everything we do.

AlericB

I once heard it expressed as "We're all selfish but there's good selfishness and bad selfishness!"

RecklessEric

There are theories within psychology about altruism and empathy.
Good evidence in Social Psychology that altruism exists in it's truest meaning and very strong evidence in Developmental Psychology that empathy is innate.

daredevil

I think TFM would dispute the fact that altruism exists in its truest meaning. After all, unless someone derives some benefit (spiritual or otherwise) from engaging in altruism in its truest sense, that person wouldn't do it per the model. Moreover, I wasn't aware that altruism had gradations. As I understand it, a deed is either altruistic or it isn't.

Dropsie

Otter posted a link to an article that I think is really terrific.

Some great stuff here that relates to your discussion -- I think they really hit the nail on the head.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4553654/


Happy Easter !

AlericB

But what is altruism in it's "truest" sense? The word suggests that altruism exists in a detached kind of way in a rarefied plane, pure and unsullied. Isn't the reality that altruism exists in the very real and messy world of other people?

To me, TFM with it's emphasis on the human emotion of happiness fits in with this messy world very well.

Happy Easter!

RecklessEric

The article mentions airports as triggers for relapse.
Every time I go to Dublin Airport my inner monologue starts!

GerandTwine

(Quick prelude: The centuries old pledge is not about AVRT)

After reading the above post, I have spent a bit of time over the last ten days trying to figure out how I could break my promise to myself to never drink/drug again, and for the life of me, I just can’t figure it out. Every possible scenario I come up with, I keep remembering my promise and hit a brick wall. Nor can I come up with the conclusion that I was lying to myself when I made that promise.

So, I just want to tie up loose ends here and post that I’ve decided to just stop trying and accept that my brain must be an anomaly, and leave it that it must be important to emphasize that there is no such thing as an unbreakable promise in the context of ending problematic drinking. So, thanks again for all of your generous tolerance to this point.

Fusion

The linked article doesn’t relate to The Freedom Model discussion, it’s an antithesis of the Model. I suppose the article would be relevant if someone believed in one day at a time, fighting and fending off triggers and relapses: which I no longer believe in and consequently, my twenty year addiction is over.

AlericB

I am not going to defend myself against a charge of intolerance.

I was responding both to the post you quoted and earlier posts in which you made the same point that TFM does not contain the idea of an "unretractable pledge". In one of these posts you also said that you must necessarily expose TFM as AV for this reason. In other words, you you were criticising TFM on the grounds that it is not AVRT with a Big Plan as you interpret it. You continued to do this even after I had asked you not to because it was off-topic. That was the context in which I made my comment. If you wish any further clarification feel free to PM me but please do not continue this on this thread.

JeffreyAK

I used to get this too, though after enough flying it stopped being an issue. One time, my first solo business trip after I quit drinking, I found myself absolutely freaking out over all the clinking glasses and laughter from the nearby bar, so much that I called my favorite outpatient program counselor and left her a message telling her I was freaking out and needed to make myself accountable to someone. The trigger passed after that, but wow, it was strong and the reptile seemed for a minute to be winning that dialog!

daredevil

According to TFM, relapse is a choice, not something that ‘happens’ to someone. Ergo, ‘triggers to relapse’ is another way to say ‘reasons to drink.’

andyh

if you want to discuss this article, please do it wherever it was posted originally, or start another thread in which to do so, preferably in another sub-Forum as it is 12-Step-centric

JeffreyAK

Not everything that isn't "AVRT" or "TFM" is 12-step-centric, but followers of those philosophies do seem to think that way. Perhaps it's part of the (de)programming.

andyh

I'm not a follower of either of those methods. regardless, it's off-topic for this thread, as are backhanded ad hominem attacks.

StevenSlate

Thanks! Most of The Freedom Model was just a better, sleeker, more clarified version of The Saint Jude Program which had been in use and development at our retreat for a few decades. But the chapters on questioning drug effects, such as emotional relief, were a big new project I was working on since 2012. A taste of it appeared in the SJP 13th edition in 2014, but it took a lot more to figure it out and go more in depth.

Back when I went to the retreat in 2002, they answered to people who said they use to quell anger, stress, etc by basically saying "your heavy use is making you angrier, more depressed, and your life more stressful", and by saying "that's just an excuse." But they also tried to help people with these issues too. This was enough to help a lot of people, but not a clear enough answer to all people. And over the years as alternative programs became more popular, the "self-medication of underlying causes" became more popular, and we started to see more people who felt as if any emotional discomfort was gonna push them to "relapse", so we knew the issue needed to be addressed more thoroughly.

Most people instinctively know that in the big picture, their heavy substance use is effecting their lives in ways that lead to them becoming more sad, depressed, stressed, and angry. However, many also believe that substances give an immediate short term relief of these negative emotions/moods. The immediate moment counts more than the long run. You can even see this in those studies where the average person chooses to take $10 today rather than $20 a week from now. Relapse prevention research discusses how people who expect a better immediate effect from a substance, and not so great an effect from going without the substance, are more likely to choose to use the substance. So, if you think you'll have unbearable stress without a drink, but get some immediate relief from the drink, then the drink appears more attractive. Seeing it that way, you may become more likely to choose it. So how do you help people shift the scales in these moments?

If you take it as a given that, for example, alcohol relieves stress - then the logical strategy to help people is to help them find a way to "resist" that lure, and/or show them how to relieve the stress in another way without alcohol. As I said earlier, TFM is not a program of resistance, and I think resistance of self is a muddled concept. I think maybe dealing with stress better can help. However, I don't take it as a given that alcohol relieves stress.

ANYONE can make the basic observation that people have all sorts of emotions when drinking; many which contradict each other, such as anger and relaxation. Often, the same person become relaxed one night, and angry the next - drinking the same thing both nights. Sometimes they make these changes in demeanor from one moment to the next, or when moving from one setting to the next. Many researchers have noted this over the years. The layman's explanation is that alcohol affects different people in different ways, but it doesn't account for the fact that individuals have different emotions when drinking at different times and in different settings. There isn't a sound pharmacological explanation for this, but the explanation that best fits the evidence is the "drug, set, and setting" model - which basically says that pharmacology is only a small part of drug effects, and that our mindset and setting also come into play to create the pleasure, lowered/raised inhibitions, and emotional/mood changes we experience when using substances.

I'm going too deep, but long story short, although you may experience stress relief when drinking, it isn't really coming from the alcohol (nor does anger come from alcohol). The stress relief is coming from drinking and whatever that holds for you symbolically, the expectations you go into it with, what you choose to focus on while drinking, the places you do it in, et cetera. At best, drunkenness can serve as a distraction, a time when you put your problems aside and decide not to think about them because you're drinking and focusing on the sensations provided by a substance. But intoxication as a distraction is much the same as any other distraction. Some people turn on the tv or read a book when they want a distraction - some people get drunk.

I scoured the research literature on alcohol and stress relief and couldn't find anything conclusive. In fact, when the NIAAA commissioned a review on alcohol and stress in 1999, the review came up inconclusive as well, finding no consistent stress relief response, no reliable pharmacological theory on how it would work, and finding things that point toward the drug, set setting model of drug effects. I contacted the author of that review who's done a lot of original research on this topic and asked him if any new developments have come along that I should know about, and he knew of none.

So what I can confidently say is that alcohol doesn't relieve stress. We give it credit for having this pharmacological power, when in fact we are basically relieving our own stress cognitively. So we don't need it for stress relief. It doesn't even relieve stress temporarily. It's an illusion. If you really want a distraction, there are infinite other distractions to be found. You can also deal with stress in other ways. But knowing that it doesn't have a special power to relieve stress, you can let go of that reason to drink.

Then, we can basically say this about all of the other substances and emotional relief we think they give to us, and if you read the 4 chapter segment of the book that deals with drug effects, you'll understand why. This helps to change the immediate positive outcome expectancy we have for using. It also can change the negative outcome expectancy we have for being sober to some degree - and make it more positive.

I'll note after saying all of this though, that the belief in a need to self-medicate with substances runs the gamut. Some people don't believe it at all; some use this narrative as an excuse to get high; some fully believe it; and for many, it's part sincere belief, part excuse. If you are a true believer, it can really put you on edge because life is full of stresses and pains, and if you believe substances will adequately medicate those pains, then drinking and drugging appears more attractive. I think many programs validate alcohol and other drugs' magical powers by saying a "better" method of coping is needed, and keep them alive as an option. When we see alcohol and other drugs as effective self-medication we essentially create an unnecessary trigger connection in our mind. My co-authors and I want to promote the realistic view that they aren't really helping, and thus aren't a lesser coping method - they are not an effective coping method at all - and that even if you never find any good coping method, you'll be just as well off emotionally without taking substances, as well as not having to pay the high costs of heavy substance use.