RE: ADDICTS

RE: ADDICTS (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

littlewonder -> RE: ADDICTS (12/19/2013 4:44:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic Well that's a funny thing, Kana. My own experience with the criminal justice system has been limited to a few sittings in the back of a police car, and a felony citation the DA wasn't interested in picking up, but I'd have thought the slang would have moved on a bit from the Mickey Spillane novels. Are you like, really old? [8\|] I knew I shoulda never used the word, "Sisyphean" Define "real old?" [8D] ETA-Obviously, this is Kana

LafayetteLady -> RE: ADDICTS (12/21/2013 3:18:28 AM)
I can see why you perceive my words as angry, but I assure you they are not. I have many fine memories of my childhood, although most exclude him. I was stating facts. You see, I have more than one experience with addicts. Granted, my brother was one of the most extreme cases I witnessed, but the majority of heroin addicts do have violent tendencies when they don't get what they want. They steal to support their habit. These aren't simply my opinions, but statistical facts. BTW, I would have responded sooner, but trying to do so from my phone is more aggravation than I can deal with. I can't look back at previous posts, and after each post, by phone shuts off the browser.

LafayetteLady -> RE: ADDICTS (12/21/2013 3:52:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It's sad that you felt it necessary to post the above. I've no doubt you find it sad. That's kind of the point. Your "style" of dealing with heroin users is dangerous at best, harmful at worst. quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle Let me make it crystal clear - I have made no claims to cure anyone of anything. I have said that I was part of a group of friends who supported some other friends during their withdrawals from opiate addictions. It happened in my home. The only reason for that is I happen to have a spare bedroom. Any results that arose from these cases are down to the friends we tried to support, not us. In the overall picture our roles were very much secondary. This in itself indicates that you (and your friends) were instrumental in "curing" the addict. You did no such thing. Why? Because addicts, much like alcoholics can't be cured. They can learn to control their addiction. So the statement about "curing" anything, is in itself, inaccurate, and shows a severe lack of understanding of addiction. If I remember correctly you are are a nurse of some kind, or some social services type person, who has "book theory" as well as her own opinions on how to deal with things. Don't you also have a child? I could be mistaken on that, as my memory isn't what it used to be, however, if you have a child and brought these addicts into your home, you put your child in danger. Because all theories aside, you had no real idea of how things would pan out. quote: I have no idea what might or might not have worked in your brothers case and make no direct comment on it. I note that you have already described your brother as an "extreme" case. I do have a concern about basing one's entire approach to any issue on a single "extreme" case. That doesn't strike as a sensible or prudent manner to approach any issue. You were at the pointy end of your brothers behaviour. While I sympathise with your plight I don't see that as a reason to adopt the approach that you adopted (and which failed to deliver a successful outcome) in all other cases. Particularly as I know another approach delivered a more desirable outcome in the cases I am familiar with, and even more so because the behaviour of your brother is far from representative of addicts in general. Nope, you have no idea what would or would not have worked in my brother's case. You also make the assumption that I base that extreme case in dealing with all addicts, although I make no mention of that. Your reading comprehension has always left something to be desired, and I see no difference here. The behavior of my brother is NOT so different from the behavior of other addicts. Not in the least. Had you had some real world experience, and even statistics, you would know this. quote: I hope that we can agree that addiction takes many forms, and that addicts, like everyone else, behave in a multitude of diverse ways. You proposed one method of dealing with the issues of addiction based on your experiences with your brother. I have detailed another approach which my friends and I adopted. That is not a claim that I am right and you are wrong or anything of the sort. Yes, addiction takes many forms. The model for alcoholics is far different than heroin addicts, or coke users, or meth users. The withdrawal symptoms are quite different, and must be dealt with accordingly. For an example concerning "clean needle exchanges." It would not surprise me to find out you have no idea that exchanging needles is part of a ritual that heroin addicts use, making clean needle exchanges rather useless. But those are based on FACT, not some simpleton's idea of showing an addict love and kindness to get them clean. Which brings us to the "tough love" issue. You really have a very biased, uninformed view of what it is. It doesn't mean starve them to death, or send them to live under a bridge. It means putting the safety of those connected to the addict first, not second. It means not giving them money, hoping they will buy food, instead of some bag of smack. It means telling them that if they continue to behave in the way they are doing, they will have to leave the residence for the safety of others. And it certainly doesn't mean making sure they have clean needles so they can keep using. There is a lot more to tough love than that,, those are merely some examples. But, please, feel free to put your family at risk, by taking the attitude that all these people need is love to help them overcome a very physical addiction. quote: Nor have I made any attempt to generalise from my experiences. The point that I do wish to establish is different approaches and methods work with different people. To approach all issues of addiction on the basis of experiences with one of a tiny minority of "extreme" "hardcore" addicts is quite simply foolish and guaranteed to fail in the vast majority of cases. Since you base your experience on a "tiny" minority of the population of drug users, you really aren't in a place to pass judgement on what is the more likely scenario of a drug addict. Of course, things may be totally different down in Australia, but I doubt it.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/21/2013 11:37:16 AM)
quote: Aw c'mon, Vincent. When the tide comes in, we don't attribute will and intention to the water. Will and intention are attributes of free agents. You cannot assert that free will is an illusion and continue to bandy words like will and intention. Moreover, claiming that the addict's failure is a failure of will is pure presumption on your part. Willing something is one thing, knowing how to do it is another. Failure attendant upon a lack of skillful means cannot be parlayed into an indictment of the addict's will and intention. Kirata, ‘Will and intention are attributes of free agents.’ is a circular fallacy. You assume the agents are free, ergo their Will is free. But my point is that choice is already determined by personal history, so the assumption that agents are free is an error. Think of all the things you have NOT done in your life because they were not friendly to your personality or values. The illusion arises from our everyday experience of making choices that we THINK are freely made. Example, sister Sally has a mood to go to a movie. The first illusion is that she made a ‘going to’ decision as a free agent. There was some stimulus to prompt her mood. External or internal. Boredom maybe. So, she chats up her iPhone and sees there are only two movies nearby she has not seen. One is a Chainsaw Massacre genre the other is a light romance. She chooses the light romance because that is the type of movie she likes. She hates the other genre. I put it to you that her choice of movies was not free. It was already determined by her likes and dislikes which arose from her life experience. That was her second illusion. We choose to do what we like but we do not choose what it is that we like. As Kana pointed out addicts in AA programs fail time after time. It is not because of lack of skillful means. It is because their brain chemicals and circuits have muddled their will to endure the cravings.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/21/2013 11:42:35 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady I can see why you perceive my words as angry, but I assure you they are not. I have many fine memories of my childhood, although most exclude him. I was stating facts. You see, I have more than one experience with addicts. Granted, my brother was one of the most extreme cases I witnessed, but the majority of heroin addicts do have violent tendencies when they don't get what they want. They steal to support their habit. These aren't simply my opinions, but statistical facts. BTW, I would have responded sooner, but trying to do so from my phone is more aggravation than I can deal with. I can't look back at previous posts, and after each post, by phone shuts off the browser. LL, happy to know you are not carrying a tote of anger. If I questioned that most heroin addicts have violent tendencies I retract it here. I really don't know the truth of the matter.

tweakabelle -> RE: ADDICTS (12/22/2013 7:18:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It's sad that you felt it necessary to post the above. I've no doubt you find it sad. That's kind of the point. Your "style" of dealing with heroin users is dangerous at best, harmful at worst. Yet "my style" was successful, whereas the "style" you advocate was a complete failure. quote: If I remember correctly you are are a nurse of some kind, or some social services type person, who has "book theory" as well as her own opinions on how to deal with things. Don't you also have a child? I could be mistaken on that, as my memory isn't what it used to be, however, if you have a child and brought these addicts into your home, you put your child in danger. Because all theories aside, you had no real idea of how things would pan out. ' ' Wrong on all points, except for "my memory isn't what it used to be". Yes clearly your memory is letting you down. So much so that every unsupported claim in your post must be considered unreliable unless independently supported and verified. Especially when it comes to bad fiction such as the following: quote: It would not surprise me to find out you have no idea that exchanging needles is part of a ritual that heroin addicts use, making clean needle exchanges rather useless. But those are based on FACT, not some simpleton's idea of showing an addict love and kindness to get them clean. At first glance, this wild claim sounds like the product of some particularly fervid tabloid journalist's imagination. The notion that users deliberately choose to make a ritual of running the risks attached to sharing dirty needles, rather than using clean ones is implausible to say the least. I note that this claim, like all the others is not supported by a citation or any verifiable evidence. Nothing then to support it beyond your memory, which as we have already seen, (and by your own account too,) is unreliable. The rest of your post alternates between similar hysterical gibberish and personal vitriol. It is pointless to continue a conversation with any person whose currency is myth, bombastic self inflating claims, anger, abuse and bad fiction. So my responses to the fact-free zones that masquerade as your posts ends here. Happy Xmas

LafayetteLady -> RE: ADDICTS (12/22/2013 10:20:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady I can see why you perceive my words as angry, but I assure you they are not. I have many fine memories of my childhood, although most exclude him. I was stating facts. You see, I have more than one experience with addicts. Granted, my brother was one of the most extreme cases I witnessed, but the majority of heroin addicts do have violent tendencies when they don't get what they want. They steal to support their habit. These aren't simply my opinions, but statistical facts. BTW, I would have responded sooner, but trying to do so from my phone is more aggravation than I can deal with. I can't look back at previous posts, and after each post, by phone shuts off the browser. LL, happy to know you are not carrying a tote of anger. If I questioned that most heroin addicts have violent tendencies I retract it here. I really don't know the truth of the matter. Once they are severely addicted, they will do anything to get the fix they need. This is why so many get arrested. Not because they are addicts, but because they commit crimes to get the money (or goods to sell) to get the heroin they so desperately need. Interestingly enough, my brother's violent tendencies towards me (aside from the spitting) occurred before he was an addict.

LafayetteLady -> RE: ADDICTS (12/22/2013 10:33:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle It's sad that you felt it necessary to post the above. I've no doubt you find it sad. That's kind of the point. Your "style" of dealing with heroin users is dangerous at best, harmful at worst. Yet "my style" was successful, whereas the "style" you advocate was a complete failure. I wouldn't call your "style" successful. I call it dangerous and something done by someone without a working knowledge of heroin addicts. Unless of course, you conducted studies to find that your "style" would be successful. You tried something on a small sampling, and got lucky. Of course, these people also wanted to get off the smack to begin with which makes a huge difference. quote: If I remember correctly you are are a nurse of some kind, or some social services type person, who has "book theory" as well as her own opinions on how to deal with things. Don't you also have a child? I could be mistaken on that, as my memory isn't what it used to be, however, if you have a child and brought these addicts into your home, you put your child in danger. Because all theories aside, you had no real idea of how things would pan out. ' ' Wrong on all points, except for "my memory isn't what it used to be". Yes clearly your memory is letting you down. So much so that every unsupported claim in your post must be considered unreliable unless independently supported and verified. Especially when it comes to bad fiction such as the following: Again, aside from your...what was it? Six people? You were experimenting with something that you thought might work. While it would be nice to believe that "love" and "kindness" can cure all ills, it is a fantasy. quote: It would not surprise me to find out you have no idea that exchanging needles is part of a ritual that heroin addicts use, making clean needle exchanges rather useless. But those are based on FACT, not some simpleton's idea of showing an addict love and kindness to get them clean. Actually, in the US, it is indeed a ritual to share needles, and it is apparently VERY popular in Italy. quote: Ritual Aspects of Needle Sharing: A Review of the Literature In preparing this review it was surprising to learn that little is written about actual needle sharing events in their socio-cultural context. Even less studies discuss or mention ritual in relation to needle sharing. An extensive review produced 13 papers which discussed ritual or symbolic aspects of needle sharing. Eight of these were published by (US) American, one by Canadian and four by European authors. The first two highly derivative articles, by Tempesta and Di Giannantonio, discuss the relations between needle sharing and the high prevalence of HIV among Italian IDUs. Despite the alleged absence of restrictions for over the counter sale of syringes and needles, the HIV-seroprevalence in Italy is among the highest in Europe, which is, as Moss writes, indeed alarming.(5) This so-called Italy argument has also been put forward against needle exchange and other efforts to liberalize the availability of injection equipment, e.g. in the USA. Tempesta and Di Giannantonio explain the high Italian HIV seroprevalence rates in terms of "insufficient knowledge" and "ritual and special patterns of behavior." (6) The authors claim that in their study, HIV-seropositive IDUs tended to share needles for ritual and habitual reasons, while the HIV-seronegative IDUs shared because of temporary difficulties in finding a syringe. In both groups promiscuity was common, but, according to the authors, in the former group this behavior had ritualistic characteristics, while in the latter group promiscuity seemed due to circumstantial reasons. It is unclear what the authors mean with this statement. A study into the sexual practices of 1214 Italian heterosexual IDUs did not mention such peculiarities.(7) They describe the former group as "heavily conditioned to the ritualistic and social use of drugs in which needle sharing has a high symbolic meaning." (8) "[T]heir peculiar psychopathology prevents them from being sensitive to prevention-promoting campaigns. Moreover, for this group, every injection is a symbolic challenge to death. Thus, these subjects feel a drive for drugs which is stronger than any other consideration."(6) quote: At first glance, this wild claim sounds like the product of some particularly fervid tabloid journalist's imagination. The notion that users deliberately choose to make a ritual of running the risks attached to sharing dirty needles, rather than using clean ones is implausible to say the least. I note that this claim, like all the others is not supported by a citation or any verifiable evidence. Nothing then to support it beyond your memory, which as we have already seen, (and by your own account too,) is unreliable. The rest of your post alternates between similar hysterical gibberish and personal vitriol. It is pointless to continue a conversation with any person whose currency is myth, bombastic self inflating claims, anger, abuse and bad fiction. So my responses to the fact-free zones that masquerade as your posts ends here. Happy Xmas Obviously, the simpleton here is you. You haven't studied heroin addiction, but merely came up with some simplistic and very dangerous way of trying to "cure" addicts. In the future, unless you actually have conducted studies or written papers on the subject (which I have), you really shouldn't make claims that come not from fact, but simply from your ignorance about the subject.

tweakabelle -> RE: ADDICTS (12/23/2013 4:55:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady Actually, in the US, it is indeed a ritual to share needles, and it is apparently VERY popular in Italy. quote: Ritual Aspects of Needle Sharing: A Review of the Literature In preparing this review it was surprising to learn that little is written about actual needle sharing events in their socio-cultural context. Even less studies discuss or mention ritual in relation to needle sharing. An extensive review produced 13 papers which discussed ritual or symbolic aspects of needle sharing. Eight of these were published by (US) American, one by Canadian and four by European authors. The first two highly derivative articles, by Tempesta and Di Giannantonio, discuss the relations between needle sharing and the high prevalence of HIV among Italian IDUs. Despite the alleged absence of restrictions for over the counter sale of syringes and needles, the HIV-seroprevalence in Italy is among the highest in Europe, which is, as Moss writes, indeed alarming.(5) This so-called Italy argument has also been put forward against needle exchange and other efforts to liberalize the availability of injection equipment, e.g. in the USA. Tempesta and Di Giannantonio explain the high Italian HIV seroprevalence rates in terms of "insufficient knowledge" and "ritual and special patterns of behavior." (6) The authors claim that in their study, HIV-seropositive IDUs tended to share needles for ritual and habitual reasons, while the HIV-seronegative IDUs shared because of temporary difficulties in finding a syringe. In both groups promiscuity was common, but, according to the authors, in the former group this behavior had ritualistic characteristics, while in the latter group promiscuity seemed due to circumstantial reasons. It is unclear what the authors mean with this statement. A study into the sexual practices of 1214 Italian heterosexual IDUs did not mention such peculiarities.(7) They describe the former group as "heavily conditioned to the ritualistic and social use of drugs in which needle sharing has a high symbolic meaning." (8) "[T]heir peculiar psychopathology prevents them from being sensitive to prevention-promoting campaigns. Moreover, for this group, every injection is a symbolic challenge to death. Thus, these subjects feel a drive for drugs which is stronger than any other consideration."(6) It's odd that you failed to supply a source and date for this block of text. A google search reveals that it posted at this site http://www.druglibrary.eu/library/books/grund01/grund13.html#con. No date of publication is given but judging from the footnotes, it appears likely to have published in the early 90s, or circa 20 years ago. Even more questionable is your editing of the text. The very next paragraph after the end of the excerpt you quoted reads: "In neither article do the authors define the terms they use and their bold statements are not supported by the presented data or by references. The impression of IDUs they present bears more resemblance to a tabloid caricature than a scientific representation of research results." There's a remarkable similarity to my description of your claims as " the product of some particularly fervid tabloid journalist's imagination" wouldn't you say? Here are the paper's conclusions in full: "Conclusions The literature review raised no conclusive empirical evidence to support the notion that needle sharing among IDUs is a stable ritual, independent of other factors. The two empirical studies that suggest symbolic functions of this behavior were conducted before awareness of the HIV-epidemic came about and therefore generalization from pre-AIDS to current populations of IDUs may be invalid. The other articles add little relevant information, and some of these even spread misinformation about the discussed phenomenon. Perhaps the only definite evidence of ritual the review brought up, reflects on the scientific culture itself, as a questionable example of ritual referencing was established. By comparing the conditions of drug and needle use with the relevant definitions of ritual event and ritual objects it was demonstrated that the attachment of symbolic elaboration to the use of such objects is principally subject to their perceived availability. This explained the ritualization of drug use found in this Dutch research and in American studies. In both countries, decreased drug availability has created a situation in which the attachment of symbolic meaning to primarily instrumental acts became possible. The different levels of ritualization and monetarization around drug use activities between the two countries can be attributed to gradual differences in drug availability due to different enforcement policies. The same factors explained the absence of a pattern of ritualized needle sharing in the Netherlands and the assumed presence of needle sharing rituals in the USA, prior to AIDS awareness. While the easy availability in the Netherlands prevented this process, the restrictions on sale and possession in the USA made the addition of symbolism to the primarily instrumental act of sharing needles possible. As Carballo and Rezza write in their discussion of factors that may restrain the perceived availability of needles and syringes: Placed in th[e] broader social framework in which drug injecting has been stigmatized, actively prosecuted and associated with a range of other social problems, the sharing of needles and syringes may have gone on to represent, for some individuals, a symbol of group cohesiveness and solidarity and may have enhanced the process as well as the experience of drug injecting.(71) However, even in the USA there is no substantial evidence in support of ritual needle sharing practices, despite these favorable conditions. The assumption that IDUs will not change or reduce their needle sharing practices in response to an increased availability, because it is a ritualized behavior pattern cannot be supported by scientific data. This myth is further falsified by a growing number of scientific publications that show significant behavior modification towards safer injecting practices, in particular in places where needles and syringes are sufficiently available. These studies show furthermore that needle sharing is essentially adaptive behavior, induced by unavailability and unfavorable socio-economic conditions. The same conclusions are reached on the basis of the current analysis of determinants of ritualization. That is, through input of AIDS information and experience, the instrumental imperative of needle sharing is becoming increasingly overruled by the potential negative consequences for the individual, his network and the subculture as a whole. Knowledge of the current risks of needle sharing is, nevertheless, not a guarantee for (the maintenance of) safe injection behavior. Sufficient availability of syringes and needles does prevent the development of stereotypical needle sharing patterns. Moreover, it limits the number of situations in which needle sharing may, besides abstaining from or postponing a drug injection, become the only choice. But, just as the availability of condoms will not entirely stop unprotected sex, it cannot reasonably be expected that easy access to needles will eliminate all unsafe injecting. After all, injecting drug use remains a highly criminalized, but (for the performers) imperative activity. The idea of ritualized needle sharing and other stereotypical portrayals of drug users are actively propagated by the highest rank executives in the hierarchy of the War on Drugs. Presented as scientific facts, they essentially are deceptive political soundbites--the argot of the war on drugs rhetoric. These political opportunistic myths fuel addictophobia and obstruct a rational assessment of the drug problem, blocking alternative (and more efficient) approaches to stop the spread of AIDS among injecting drug users and their relationships. Ultimately, they obstruct peace in the civil war on drug users." (emphasis added) The paper you advanced to support your claims of ritualised needle sharing by addicts rejects your claim completely. It finds the claim you advance to be a "myth" and "deceptive political soundbites" and "falsified" by the scientific data. Your attempt to represent it as supporting your position through careful and selective editing is blatantly dishonest. I suspect that much of the contents of your posts to this thread are similar in nature - frankly I don't believe a word you write on this topic. No one with any familiarity with drug users, the IDU communities or drug taking communities would advance such drivel seriously. The words of the final paragraph of the 'Conclusions' quoted above describe your contributions to this thread perfectly.

sheisreeds -> RE: ADDICTS (12/23/2013 9:37:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady In the future, unless you actually have conducted studies or written papers on the subject (which I have), you really shouldn't make claims that come not from fact, but simply from your ignorance about the subject. Um, well I have. And, a lot of what tweak is saying is quite close to correct, and a lot of your ideas have validity as well, save for what is coming across as a black and white view on treatment. I work for a program that uses a combined approach of harm reduction and therapeutic limit setting, my program is evidenced based and regularly reviewed by the state, and within the model also puts an emphasis on using evidence based techniques. Harm reduction doesn't work for everyone, but it works for many, and provides an opportunity for addicts to begin the process of getting help while they are still using. Harm reduction believes in providing a low threshold for care, and equalizing the power dynamic between the counselor and client, allowing the client to find achievable goals that they can reach directly based to their addiction or not. The development of a healthy therapuetic rapport opens the door for further recovery. In addition harm reduction has the ability to provide support with stabilization, which tends to work in favor of recovery. Housing first models provide opportunities for stabilization of other life factors, and motivation to better control substance use, which once again provides the opportunity for further recovery. Health education programs, connection with somatic care, psychiatric services, vocational services, and housing all go a long way in conjunction with substance abuse counselor to promote recovery. There is a place for compassion and an unconditional positive regard. A hardline approach doesn't produce the best honesty amongst my clients. When they feel that it is safe to confess use to us because we have shown ourselves to be nonjudgemental, supportive, and reliable, then clients open up about their addiction and the real recovery work can begin. quote: I've no doubt you find it sad. That's kind of the point. Your "style" of dealing with heroin users is dangerous at best, harmful at worst. While depending on the addict doing what Tweak did for friends could be dangerous, I disagree with this sentiment on a lot of points, expect from a perspective you come from which is being a part of the addicts family. Family for a lot of reasons tends to not be safe around the addict. However, I work in the field, in horrible neighborhoods, often doing outreach on my own I have never been injured, threatened, or stolen from. Neither have any of my peers, except for one incident 4 years ago, where the client immediately confessed, assisted in fixing the situation, and expressed a ton of remorse. Risk of violence and victimization have a lot to do with who you are to the addict, and previous patterns. As I and my coworkers tend to represent safe space and resources to our addicted clients, we tend to be safe around them. Harm reduction also works, not all of the time, but then again no program does. It is however developing a solid evidence base as a mode of treatment. There is however, a place for natural consequences, boundaries and therapeutic limit setting. Our worst outcomes tend to be when there are families involved that do not set limits, and end up enabling the addict. However, terrible outcomes also come when the individual has no support outside of other addicts and the drug trade. We also do quite a bit of therapeutic limit setting, we become payee of SSI checks, we will refuse independent housing and only use housing monies for recovery houses, or transitional housing. We will advocate for supervised probation in court, require entry into methadone or detox to maintain housing grants. Though no matter the outcome we stay involved. I'm also extremely supportive of families who need the addict out of the home, been the go between for contact, worked with family's to see what the treatment team can do in lieu of the family, assisted with setting conditions on which the addict can spend time with the family. I've supported parents through calling the cops. Then sit down with the client and the team to discuss why and how consequences occurred, and assisting them with identify the difference between someone caring and loving them, and love meaning supporting every need. No matter what our team does there is compassion, we do whatever it takes to maintain the therapeutic relationship. However, that does not mean that everyone and everything involved in the addict's life should do the same. However, it also means that a lifeline at rock bottom is invaluable, as well as the use of harm reduction methods, it saves lives. A dead addict is never going to get better. A link to a study on a variety of harm reduction programs: http://www.ihra.net/files/2010/05/31/HIVTop50Documents11.pdf quote: The behavior of my brother is NOT so different from the behavior of other addicts. Not in the least. Had you had some real world experience, and even statistics, you would know this. Once again, I disagree with this sentiment. Yes, some addicts are violent. However, many female addicts are victims of violence. Many addicts also have co-occurring trauma disorders, and experience trauma while addicted. There is a cycle of violence attached to addiction. http://www.recoveryranch.com/articles/addiction-research/post-traumatic-stress-disorder-addiction-ptsd/ http://www.ccsme.org/userfiles/files/A3%20OBrien%20Addiction+Trauma.pdf quote: Yes, addiction takes many forms. The model for alcoholics is far different than heroin addicts, or coke users, or meth users. The withdrawal symptoms are quite different, and must be dealt with accordingly. Moreso I have found the need for different models to revolve more around the psychological issues involved, high incidence of trauma, versus high incidence of anti-social behavior, support systems, prior success and sobriety, medical issues, etc versus the drug of choice. Drug of choice tends to primarily impact the medical treatment. quote: For an example concerning "clean needle exchanges." It would not surprise me to find out you have no idea that exchanging needles is part of a ritual that heroin addicts use, making clean needle exchanges rather useless. But those are based on FACT, not some simpleton's idea of showing an addict love and kindness to get them clean. Actually when needle exchange programs are available, as well as safe injection sites, they tend to get used regularly, and habits change. Does everyone use the program? No. But that doesn't mean that many do. Education, providing low threshold services, and using low threshold services as a gateway to other recovery services and programs is an invaluable tool. quote: Which brings us to the "tough love" issue. You really have a very biased, uninformed view of what it is. It doesn't mean starve them to death, or send them to live under a bridge. It means putting the safety of those connected to the addict first, not second. It means not giving them money, hoping they will buy food, instead of some bag of smack. It means telling them that if they continue to behave in the way they are doing, they will have to leave the residence for the safety of others. And it certainly doesn't mean making sure they have clean needles so they can keep using. There is a lot more to tough love than that,, those are merely some examples. But, please, feel free to put your family at risk, by taking the attitude that all these people need is love to help them overcome a very physical addiction. Though love and compassion are important, as you noted in prior posts addiction has a psychological component and there are deep issues that are motivators for drug use. Safe spaces, compassion, promote an environment where those issues can start being dealt with. With many of my clients that was the turning point, when they felt that they were worth something better, that someone cared, and this wasn't a path they needed to travel alone, big steps were made in recovery. quote: Once they are severely addicted, they will do anything to get the fix they need. This is why so many get arrested. Not because they are addicts, but because they commit crimes to get the money (or goods to sell) to get the heroin they so desperately need. Yes, there are a lot of theft charges, but there are also a lot of CDS, open container, and a host of other assorted charges associated with addiction. I've gone to court with plenty of folks who were arrested for being addicts, not for theft or other issues.

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: ADDICTS (12/23/2013 10:55:51 AM)
FR: This has been a very interesting discussion, and I've appreciated posts by Kana and most especially by Sheisreeds. My story is that I am an addict. My prime addiction is for cigarettes. About forty years ago I became addicted to Quaaludes. I'v had issues with drinking alcohol as well. Fortunately not while I was taking Quaaludes, or I would not be alive today. This is what I can tell you about my experiences with addiction. First, yes I do have a genetic disposition, and so do the rest of my sisters. The oldest and I have drug addictions, one has a shopping addiction, another one has an exercise/fitness addiction. All these behaviors are in my opinion based on genetic code. The two of us with substance addiction also endured extreme childhood abuse that the younger two did not experience. My oldest sister has used both cocaine and heroin. I'ts my belief our substance addiction TENDENCY is caused by a combination of genetics and environment. In my older sister's and my case, we were neglected to the point we were not properly acculturated to society. In other words, we had to raise ourselves. This is unfortunately, not that uncommon. My older sister did not acquire the tools she needed to fight major addiction, I did. This is not because I am better than her, or have made better choices, or any other nonsense along those lines. It's b/c I managed to gain survival tools she did not. I think this is true of most hard core substance abusers. The have the genetic predisposition, they have the environmental predisposition, and they lack whatever survival mechanism keeps some of us from going down the junkie road. Kana called it an impulse control issue, perhaps it is. But to simplistically call it a matter of choice is to not have a clue how intricate these issues are. No one in their right mind chooses to be a junkie or a drunk. For whatever reason the brain wires itself so that being a drunk or a junkie or as in my case a cigarette smoker seems to be what the body needs, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Most people are incapable of rewiring their brain so they can recover and not be addicted. Most need help. And just to touch on an issue the Heretic brought up, I think it's possible for some to be able to drink or smoke after recovering from addiction. For some it's not. For me, I cannot smoke even one cigarette. I do drink on occasion, but we're talking number of drinks in a year, not a day. I'm on pain medication for arthritis. I seem to be able to use the meds without going back into an addiction. Does this make any sense? No it does not. We still have a lot to learn about how our brains work, and about addiction. For the last 30 years I've campaigned to end the war on drugs and put the money towards helping addicts.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/24/2013 8:08:30 AM)
quote: This is what I can tell you about my experiences with addiction. First, yes I do have a genetic disposition, and so do the rest of my sisters. The oldest and I have drug addictions, one has a shopping addiction, another one has an exercise/fitness addiction. All these behaviors are in my opinion based on genetic code. I don't know your family situation, CP, and I don't mean to get into a nature/nurture food fight, but four different addictions from the same family environment speak strongly toward the causative agency of childhood trauma especially since evidence for an 'addiction gene' is somewhat weak. quote: We still have a lot to learn about how our brains work, and about addiction. Please have a look at some videos I posted in #247 for information about the addicted brain. Thank you for reminding us about behavior addictions, issues that affect me personally. So many comments have been devoted to substance abuse understandably but behavioral addictions like gambling, porn, fetishes, etc. likely cause similar changes in brain chemistry.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/24/2013 8:11:00 AM)
quote: Um, well I have. And, a lot of what tweak is saying is quite close to correct, and a lot of your ideas have validity as well, save for what is coming across as a black and white view on treatment. Excellent post. Thank you for the information.

ChatteParfaitt -> RE: ADDICTS (12/24/2013 8:38:08 AM)
I have a fifth sister who does not appear to have any addictions. (I should have included that in my original post.) From what I've read the addiction gene exists, but I won't argue with you about it. I wrote from my experiences. I think early childhood environment shapes us. But people are also born with personality, I know this from parenting my own two children. They are very different in personality despite having the very similar childhood backgrounds. (Same parents, same house, same school, etc). These differences were noticeable from birth. It's my opinion that more people suffer from food addiction than any other. It's the least understood and hardest to treat b/c you can't 'just say no' to food.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/24/2013 6:24:49 PM)
quote: I think early childhood environment shapes us. But people are also born with personality, I know this from parenting my own two children. They are very different in personality despite having the very similar childhood backgrounds. (Same parents, same house, same school, etc). These differences were noticeable from birth. CP, I found this 30 minute discussion enlightening. It helped me understand much more than I knew about child development and adult personality consequences beginning in utero. Perhaps you will find it interesting. HUMAN NATURE

Kana -> RE: ADDICTS (12/24/2013 6:40:16 PM)
Yeah-I was really hoping Reeds popped in on this one.I didn't want to blow her cover but I know her outside the forums and she has the professional and educational expertise to speak with authority on this subject. I tend to look at these things from a ground up lay people perspective. I see the trees. She on the other hand has the academics and CV to see things from a more research/study/institutional POV. She's a big picture gal,see's the forest in a way I never will Thanks for kicking in on our little talk

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/25/2013 9:53:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kana Yeah-I was really hoping Reeds popped in on this one.I didn't want to blow her cover but I know her outside the forums and she has the professional and educational expertise to speak with authority on this subject. I tend to look at these things from a ground up lay people perspective. I see the trees. She on the other hand has the academics and CV to see things from a more research/study/institutional POV. She's a big picture gal,see's the forest in a way I never will Thanks for kicking in on our little talk Agree. No question she brings a nuanced view that is enlightening and appreciated.

Charles6682 -> RE: ADDICTS (12/26/2013 12:15:53 PM)
I do agree that there does need to be more non-12 step model for recovery, including even harm reduction. The system here's in the USA can make it difficult for someone to seek treatment, unless they are just very wealthy. I remember talking to a guy from Canada down here for the Winter. He said in Canada, everyone has access to treatment and proper treatment at that. The culture here needs to change. NO recovery program will ever have a full 100% recovery rate, but when the recovery rate itself is only 1 out of every 30 people who go through rehab, what need's to change then? Sure, some addicts can always find an easy excuse not to seek help or why the help is flawed but when the recovery rate's are so poor, then maybe the process itself needs to be looked at.

vincentML -> RE: ADDICTS (12/27/2013 11:09:04 AM)
The disturbed chemistry and brain damage of the addicted mind seems to be coming increasingly clear. Perhaps the day will come when helpful pharmaceuticals will be available. I don't hold out much hope for a softening of the blame game. Not only is that levied by the general public but it seems to be visible among some addicts who think they have conquered their illness through there own will power and seek to layer contempt upon those 'inferiors' who fail. Kana made a great point about the toxic nature of American economic structure and the social metanarratives we tell to support it. I fail to see any hope of change in our toxic social structure. It would be helpful if prospective parents could be educated about the potential damage so easily inflicted upon their children from a stressful environment or the absence of emotionally caring parents. But our parenting styles too often reflect those of our parents. I have a friend who nursed her child and bedded him far beyond the conventional and acceptable time period. I doubt the boy will ever have abandonment issues. Time will tell I guess.

Kirata -> RE: ADDICTS (12/27/2013 3:50:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML addicts who think they have conquered their illness through there own will power Your willingness to descend to insulting and infantilizing addicts apparently knows no bounds. When they fail, "it is not because of lack of skillful means," a doctrine you recite without a shred of evidence, and when they succeed they (only) "think" they have quit by their own will, poor fools. Somehow I don't think that's a very helpful attitude, Vincent. A recent efficacy trial found that those randomized to MBRP [mindfulness training), as compared with those in a control group, demonstrated significantly lower rates of substance use and greater decreases in craving following treatment. Furthermore, individuals in MBRP did not report increased craving or substance use in response to negative affect. It is important to note, areas of the brain that have been associated with craving, negative affect, and relapse have also been shown to be affected by mindfulness training. ~Source A growing body of evidence suggests that mindfulness training can help anxiety, chronic pain, addictions, and other disorders ~Source Among smokers, 2 wk of meditation training (5 h in total) produced a significant reduction in smoking of 60% ~Source During active treatment, individuals receiving MT [mindfulness training] demonstrated a greater reduction in cigarette use than those receiving FFS [the American Lung Association's "gold standard" program], and maintained these treatment gains during the follow-up period ~Source K.

Page: << < prev 13 14 15 [16] 17 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.078125