Subscription Center
July 30, 2012
| 
30
I write on culture, poverty, and addiction, and teach public school in New York City's South Bronx, recovering from stints as a chemist and interactive TV producer. Follow on Twitter @cassierodenberg.
I write on culture, poverty, and addiction, and teach public school in New York City's South Bronx, recovering from stints as a chemist and interactive TV producer. Follow on Twitter @cassierodenberg.
Thursday 26th July saw the launch of SciLogs.com, a new English language science blog network. SciLogs.com, the brand-new home for Nature Network bloggers, forms part of the SciLogs international collection of blogs which already exist in German, Spanish and Dutch. To celebrate this addition to the NPG science blogging family, some of the NPG blogs are publishing posts focusing on “Beginnings”.
Participating in this cross-network blogging festival is nature.com’s Soapbox Science blog, Scitable’s Student Voices blog and bloggers from SciLogs.com, SciLogs.de, Scitable and Scientific American’s Blog Network. Join us as we explore the diverse interpretations of beginnings – from scientific examples such as stem cells to first time experiences such as publishing your first paper. You can also follow and contribute to the conversations on social media by using the #BeginScights hashtag.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
In the late 1920s, two physicians attempted to note the symptoms of morphine withdrawal. After 36 hours without morphine, one patient dropped out of the study, refusing to further participate unless he was given more of the drug. The doctors then, instead, injected him with water, noting that he fell asleep and that he experienced no clear blood composition, metabolic or circulatory changes, though he did exhibit restlessness, vomiting and diarrhea. These signs were dismissed as mild and unremarkable. Their medical verdict was that withdrawal wasn’t so serious a problem, merely a (mostly) feigned illness.
Light and Torrance’s failure to identify the physiological reasons for withdrawal in 1929 was among addiction’s first medically-induced stereotypes, marketing the disease as a sign of personal weakness or hypochondria.
Before then, narcotics were fairly freely administered and poorly understood: as late as 1884 Sigmund Freud began prescribing the “magical drug” cocaine as treatment for depression and pain. Then, drugs were wonder-things, despite Freud’s debilitating battle with his magical coca later in life. “A small dose lifted me to the heights in a wonderful fashion. I am just now busy collecting the literature for a song of praise to this magical substance.”
It was alcohol rather than narcotics that originally turned the tides in substance abuse mindset: in 1935, Bill Wilson founded Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), and alcohol thereby became the first substance propagating addiction as a disease. After AA’s founding, the term “alcoholic” began infiltrating the mainstream, gradually replacing the centuries-old term “drunkard.”
And yet, still, nearly 80 years later, we have a hard time fathoming addiction as more than a choice.
I’ve blogged here for the past year and spoken with smart, curious SciAm readers in my comments section. However, there are still a mighty number misunderstanding, which on this Beginnings week, is why I write. Here are a few selects:
Submitted on 2012/06/13 at 6:22 pm
Rent a house to someone who deals drugs and you will never ask questions about redemption again or care. There is no focus on the children of these people until CPS takes them, and the children endure true hell, filth, bug (flea and roach infestations) hunger – that are blocked out by the dealers daily crack hit. Your cost is about $20,000.00 to restore your property, but the fact that it was used by people who could treat children that way will cause you to lose sleep.
Submitted on 2012/05/24 at 1:56 pm
This is bullshit. If your life’s fucked up because of a little weed, you have serious troubles and certainly are they’re unrelated to it. I know a lot of people who smoke and they have perfectly good lifes, me included.
One does not simply become addicted to weed.
Submitted on 2011/08/25 at 5:36 pm
Very few people seem to make it out of addiction for life.
I don’t understand how anyone would enjoy living in a confused brain.
Submitted on 2011/08/25 at 2:29 pm
Addicted folks are celebrating and having a good time in their mind. Someday they will get serious and quit partying.
I began because of stereotypes and stigma: I don’t believe those with a nuanced turn of genetics should be isolated or subjected to moral judgments. More and more I find myself writing from a human-focused standpoint because I increasingly understand that while we can wrap tendrils of our minds around the science, we can’t seem to accept, or stomach visualizing, human actions. We prefer the molecular precision of the lab.
My Beginnings are in science, but my Endings are with people and what they go through — and it’s not pretty. Actions in addiction are cloudy, dubious, vile even. Addicts are rarely those to whom you would turn in emergencies, to whom you would entrust the care of your child, to whom you would loan money. They’re easy to turn away from, to ignore, to condemn. But there’s a reason. Brain science is that reason. If neurochemical makeup’s a variable crap shoot, and actions spark from brain wirings, how can we, as those who care about science, blame those affected?
About the Author: I write on culture, poverty, and addiction, and teach public school in New York City's South Bronx, recovering from stints as a chemist and interactive TV producer. Follow on Twitter @cassierodenberg.
Rights & Permissions
30 Comments
Add a Comment
You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.
Glass Fossils Inspire Molten Dreams
Game Theory And The Golden Punishment Rule
How Renaissance People Think
Philippines Cancels Planned Burn of Confiscated Elephant Tusks after Clean-Air Groups Object
Decoding Annie Parker-A movie about the discovery of the BRCA1 gene
New Astronauts Face Limited Opportunities for Spaceflight
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
Share
Email
Print
See what we're tweeting about
Dear Cassie, I appreciate you writing about these important issues and it is very depressing for me to see how many otherwise intelligent people still don’t get it. Full disclosure: I am an addict. My children have always been well cared for (I haven’t been a perfect mother, but there hasn’t been any abuse or neglect), I managed to hold a job and support the entire family for a very long time, and you wouldn’t pick me out of a crowd and label me an addict (based on my appearance). Addiction is marked by obsessive/compulsive behavior. You are completely obsessed with getting and using drugs and you feel absolutely compelled — even when it flies in the face of your best interests — to use drugs. Programs like AA and NA work. It doesn’t make withdrawal any easier, but you know there are people like you that you can always reach out to.
Link to thisDear Cassie,
I, like aidel in the previous comment, am a recovering addict. The belief by many that addiction is not a disease is outdated. Addiction is a mental illness. Period. From the first time I smoked a joint, I was hooked. Marijuana was the beginning, ending in heavy meth usage. I always managed to provide for my child and I know she paid a heavy price from my usage. Not abuse, just not having a father that was fully engaged in her life.
To say that addicts are people that have no will power or intelligence is incorrect. I hold two BS degrees and a MS in IT and Database Administration. I was in active addiction for 30 years. While many think 12 step programs are a joke, I finally surrendered myself to try NA and I’ve been clean for 8 years. I finally live a normal lifestyle that is no different from an non-addict. However, the thought of getting high is always present. Addiction is a mental illness. I was lucky enough to master the skills necessary to cope.
From my experience, there are a lot more people suffering from addiction that are not willing to divulge their problem due to stigmas such as the above comments portray. In my opinion, societies views force many addicts into lifelong hiding, afraid to ask for the help they need. Especially with prescription drugs. People associate addiction with illegal drugs. Today, I encounter just as many people addicted to pain pills as those addicted to illegal drugs.
All this could change if the medical establishment recognized addiction for what it is.
Link to thisFor most of us influenced by drug abuse it is not about blame. It is about protection. I apologise if it offends your feelings, but when it comes to the crunch the drug abuser becomes the lowest priority. The welfare of all those vulnerable to their degradation becomes the major issue.
Link to thisThis is pure pragmatism. In my experience it is extremely difficult to be of any practical assistance to serious drug abusers, whatever the substance. They drain your time, money and energy to no benefit. My observation is that, sad as it may be, for many the best thing is to let them sink. Sometimes when they hit the gutter their survival mechanisms kick in. Having nothing to eat, nowhere to go and no-one prepared to pick you up can have a sobering influence and if it doesn’t you have to ask “What hope was there anyway?”
I would love more discussion about drugs in a science-heavy, ethical context… I love the topic, & given it’s importance, it’s underrated. I’m not sure about what the title of this article means, but anyway, I like the direction it began to touch on at the end. The prohibitions should end, & the more we know about drugs, about how best to reduce suffering & maximise wellness, the better off things can be!
Link to thisSeeing those sorts of comments just makes me want to scream, adding to that list blindboy’s comment. While I have my issues with Pat Denning PhD (Over the Influence), she makes the very elegant point that different addicts have different relationships with addiction and their substances of abuse. Addiction is complicated, because it isn’t all the same and to complicate things further, the same behavior in different people may or may not be addiction.
I appreciate your caring about this as much as you do. Wallowing in drug induced failure is excruciating. Hurting people you care about and even those who depend on you absolutely is pain at a level that is, I hope, incomprehensible to most people. It can, it should and I hope will be better eventually.
blindboy –
“Having nothing to eat, nowhere to go and no-one prepared to pick you up can have a sobering influence and if it doesn’t you have to ask “What hope was there anyway?”
I am so desperately glad that is a massive load of crap. Were it true, I would probably be dead or continuing on my way and my boys would be in foster care. You want to know what it took for me to get clean? Getting treatment for bipolar disorder and severe attention deficit. That’s it, it was that simple. Not that that has really been simple or easy, I have to struggle constantly to balance managing my symptoms with maintaining functionality.
But I am now managing to raise my 4 and 10 year old boys alone, while going to school (still a long ways from a PhD in neuropsychology) and helping them deal with the trauma of no longer having their mother (who also has substance abuse and other mental illness) in their lives and other mental problems. And I am far from alone. All sorts of people manage to find all sorts of ways to manage their addictions with the support and love of family and friends. The children of addicts need a lot of help if they’re to avoid falling into it themselves, they have one of the single worst risk factors already. While I understand that sometimes you just have to say “screw it” and wash your hands, supporting the addicted parent in recovery is an important aspect of caring for their dependents.
Link to this“history” ….
Is addiction really that debilitating? Maybe so.
Picture England forcing China into legalizing heroin. Google Second_Opium_War.
About that time, picture the US sailing into Japan and firing off their vastly superior canons to force Japan to abide by the terms the US wished to impose. Oh and yes US companies were involved in the Chinese drug trade too.
We don’t understand history well and don’t understand how our actions leads to undesirable results.
Addicts don’t stop because they don’t perceive themselves as needing to or able to do so.
Japan had a choice when faced with Western Imperialism and didn’t make the right one.
Addicts do have a choice and while I can understand the compulsion they face, the fact is many people have felt the same compulsion but with group support and honest evaluation stayed straight.
India faced Western Imperialism as well and the whole world has benefited from their non-violence movement.
We need to celebrate those who made the right choice and learn from them.
Link to this“I am so desperately glad that is a massive load of crap. Were it true, I would probably be dead or continuing on my way and my boys would be in foster care. You want to know what it took for me to get clean? Getting treatment for bipolar disorder and severe attention deficit. That’s it, it was that simple.”
So DuWayne, how did that happen? Did you ever get to that crunch where you just didn’t give a toss about anyone else and were prepared to lie, cheat, steal and abuse to get your drug? Did you drag your children through poverty and malnutrition? Did you expose them to the base behaviour necessary to fund your abuse? Did you set back their educational standards by years through negelct and fail to adequately clothe them or heat the house through winter?
Link to thisIf not, you don’t know what I am talking about. There are plenty of middle class drug drama dopes who go crying home to Mummy or Daddy long before the crap really hits the fan. I saved my children too by exactly the method I described above. When the drug abuser’s toxic behaviour becomes a threat to all around him or her, they become last priority.
Those in charge of national drug policy often say “anyone who tries [drug] even once will be instantly addicted for life”. If they are at all honest they will at least mumble “statistically” under their breath. Anyone with direct experience of the so-called drug culture knows there is a spectrum of susceptibility to addiction to any drug.
I am a lifelong user of marijuana (since age twelve) and have quit for years at a time for one reason or another; currently my arthritis makes it very improbable that I’ll quit again. I tried cocaine once, and since I felt no effect (others reported “good” effects so I know it wasn’t the drug’s fault so to speak) I have never bothered with it again (my dentist uses Xylocaine and has to give me a double dose, and work quickly).
My elder sister (who was addicted to heroin at the time) sneezed on me when I was fourteen and gave me hepatitis, which resolved me against injecting anything as a matter of principle.
I had my days with old-school hallucinogens but I felt I got everything out of them that I could and haven’t bothered with them for more than four decades.
As for “demon rum”, I apparently do not have the genetic quirk that metabolizes it to acetaldehyde; I can take a drink or leave it.
Tobacco, now, that one really has a grip on me… I have “quit” several times, but for about the first three days I’m unbearable, even to myself. Why do I start again? Usually stress.
Some may call people like me atypical but I know many many people like me who are “proof” against addiction to one drug or another, though they are susceptible to other drugs. We know that metabolism, density of CNS receptors to drugs, and other factors relative to addiction susceptibility vary among the total population and that these variations are largely gene-linked.
Blanket prohibitions may have made some sort of sense a hundred years ago but with our increasing knowledge of the human genome it would seem sensible to attempt to identify genetic predispositions to addiction early in life so nobody has to find out the hard way that they can be addicted after one use.
Link to thisblindboy –
I lost the roof over their heads, if you must know. And yes, I went to my parents for help. No, I never got to the point where I just didn’t give a toss about anyone else, but I’ve plenty of friends who have, some of either side of the divide today – my problem was different than theirs was. Between his mother and I, we did manage to set back my eldest’s education in the process. I good and seriously fucking failed my kids, thank you very much.
What precisely is your point? That addiction is only addiction when it gets to a certain point? That people who exist in addiction wherein they are willing to sell their children’s clothing for dope are completely hopeless unless they really, REALLY hit bottom? That someone who has anything less than a serious drop to the bottom doesn’t actually have an addiction?
The reality: People who are willing to sell their children’s clothing for a hit of dope aren’t only dealing with addiction, they are dealing with acute dependency. There is a difference. Addiction is (usually) a neurological problem, acute dependence is an overt medical problem. Addiction often accompanies acute dependence, but isn’t requisite. Likewise acute dependence sometimes accompanies addiction, but isn’t requisite. Giving up on people with either problem shows a lack of courage or investment, in all but a very few cases.
Please don’t pretend to have the foggiest clue what I know. I have spent most of my adult life and a not insignificant portion of my teen years around serious drug users and addicts. I have spent most of those years with serious addiction problems myself. I have two kids who have very significant risk factors for substance use disorders. And now I am working towards a PhD in neuropsychology with an interest in researching addiction. I spend a disproportionate amount of my time on the issue of addiction, as a result of these things.
Link to thisMy point is that there is too much time, effort and money spent dealing with the “problems” of drug abusers and too little dealing with the problems they cause. I’m afraid past experiences have made me unsympathetic to the problems of addicts but have given me great sympathy for those who suffer because of them.
Link to thisAs I said initially this is not about blame, or any concern with personal responsibility, it is not about genetics or brain chemistry. It is about protecting the bystanders and the allocation of community resources. Help the people who will respond to your assistance, don’t waste your efforts on those who won’t and, most important of all, don’t support people in their destructive drug habits, let them fall and if they, like you, have the resilience to bounce, good luck to them. I’ll always help them on the way back up but I’ll be damned if I’ll help them on the way down.
What you are advocating, whether you believe you are blaming people or not, is throwing people away. You talk about protecting the innocent from drug addicts, as though the only option is to protect the innocent and throw away the addict. My point is that that is not the case and when we are talking about dependents, those dependents are already at significant risk – throwing their parents away completely just increases their risk in the long term.
We don’t do a very good job with substance use disorders, but we are learning a great deal. You would advocate just giving it up, as though that is somehow a solution. I would advocate we continue to learn so that we don’t have to throw people away. You act as though you actually give a damn about the innocents you want to protect from the addicts, yet you would just throw them away in turn, when they become addicts themselves.
You are dead nuts wrong. Your solution is no solution, certainly not one that is going to help anyone. It isn’t like we save money as a society if we just throw the addicts away. They fill our jails and emergency rooms. They cost billions every year in lost productivity. They hurt their families and their kids. And their kids are at significant risk as a baseline, *before* you decide they should do better being raised by the foster care system. Throw away their parents and you might as well hand them the crack pipe yourself.
By all means, advocate throwing people and their children away. Meanwhile I’ll be over here trying to make things better. It’s hard, it’s complicated and it hurts sometimes. But it beats the hell out of giving up.
Link to thisI’ve known drug addicts all my life, and honestly see no reason for blindboy’s attitude. If addicts are a problem, addressing their addictions is a way of addressing their problems. And actually I have considerable reason to feel compassion for addicts as well. I have seldom seen one so destructive that they are not worth saving. Neither are they all equally destructive, even towards themselves.
However, my compassion stems not only from having loved and cared for addicts, but from having seen the forces that created them. A lot of addicts graduated from the abusive inhuman environments of Indian residential schools–however, juvenile prisons will stand in as well for breaking the child that becomes the addict.
Link to thisA lot of other addicts were raised unloved in 20 or 30 foster homes, then tossed out on the street when they became adults. Stealing the children of addicts and placing them in their own series of 20 or 30 unloving foster homes? Good luck with solving your societal addiction problems that way.
@Percival
“…it would seem sensible to attempt to identify genetic predispositions…”
Sure it would.
Until then it’s Russian Roulette. So you pulled the trigger and didn’t die. So what? It doesn’t mean we should pass the gun around.
Link to thisThrowing away? I’m not doing anything…..they are throwing their lives away. I can’t stop them but I can protect those around them. Children can be moved to the non-abusive parent or to grandparents. Abused spouses can be relocated. Neighbours can be protected from violence and robbery.
Link to thisThis isn’t about judgement or compassion it’s about pragmatism. I’ve seen families bankrupt themselves feeding their adult children’s habit….oh we had to give him the money or he would have been on the street….I have seen support services offered to the addicts only to be wasted and nothing offered to the abused family.
@aidel and @JimFromEarth – Thanks to you both for your feedback and honesty. Talking about addiction in the societal and cultural context — getting people to identify and recognize that subconscious (and conscious, at times) judgment exists – is the first step. I couldn’t do this without great folks like you both who are willing to step forward and share pieces of their stories.
@blindboy – I agree that we should also focus on those suffering from the influence of addiction. I was raised in a family of substance abusers, so I know all too well the effects addiction has on family, friends and children. In fact, sometimes, it’s hard to forgive when you’ve lived through it. My point in this post was not to devalue the pain of those affected, but to highlight the neurochemical underpinnings of larger occurrences (abuse, neglect) within the scope of addiction. That does not make instances of maltreatment OK in the least, but it’s my hope that those battling addiction should not be isolated or labeled as “bad people.” Removing those qualifiers also helps families and friends from feeling shamed or feeling as though they have to hide a family member with what realistically is a medical problem.
@TobyNSaunders – Thanks! Delving into ethics is on my list, so many vantage points to it, an important subtopic.
@DuWayne — Thank you. Hopefully, even in a small piece-wise manner, the stigma can be removed. And you’ve given me an idea for a new post; thanks x2!
@In-Tokyo – I think many addicts understand that they have a problem. In fact, many people I’ve spoken with (including folks on this comment thread) fully conceptualize their disease and its affects on others, yet they still struggle. I’m starting to write on the idea of ‘choice’ that you speak of…it’s certainly a complex issue. Thanks for the inspiration!
@Percival – The ability to identify genetic predispositions to addiction would be highly interesting. I’ve tossed this issue around in my mind and probably should write on it. Though it would be helpful in a large regard, I think, I worry about the rebellion factor. If you know you’re likely to abuse substances, would you want to see how far you can test the limits? Perhaps rational adults would not, but I worry here about young adults.
@Father Theo – Yes, yes and yes. Beginnings in life, home environment and circumstances, matter a lot. Even later in life, I see cyclical patterns in incarceration, drug use and sale.
Link to thisAs a medical student, I agree wholeheartedly with the negative stereotypes of addiction, and while the neurobiology of it plays a large role with the disease itself, I also feel that our culture has not grappled with the roots of the disease from an environmental standpoint. My Eastern background has helped me recognize just how unequipped we are as a culture to grapple with the psychological conditions that often cause one to fall into the deadly trap of addiction of any sort. It’s quite ironic and tragic when individuals across the socioeconomic divide both find themselves feeling at an inescapable low in their life and thus vulnerable to the escape offered by synthetic substances when in fact it’s a distortion of their life brought on by the erratic vicissitudes of our world.
My hope entering the field is to perhaps contribute to practices that encourage cognitive reframing to better help at-risk individuals from falling into such a vicious lifestyle – the earlier the better of course.
Please continue posting away as it gives me a higher purpose to motivate myself through the often exhausting and draining system known as medical education.
Link to thisCass – Not sure where you are coming from or what your background truly is; chem. is not a qualifier to write such an article. I am heavily addicted to Fentanyl and opiates for a severe spinal injury following two failed surgeries. Articles such as yours only lay the foundation for misconceptions; I am a lecturer, author, operate a non-profit cultural inst., am happily married… you couldn’t be more wrong about addicts. Perhaps you are referring to meth-amphetamine users – if so, you need some serious editing.
Link to thisThe best thing I’ve found is video tape them and when they are more straight, play it back to them so they can see just whatthey are like.
Next doing drugs isn’t addiction. Not being able or wanting to control you life for better is the problem, addiction is just an effect . A person’s lack of self worth, hate, etc is behind most of it. And some are just mentally ill.
I find AA, N/A just moving from the drug crutch to the god crutch. One has to start over and completely change ones life to beat true addiction. And only they can decide to do that. Until they do there isn’t much you can do for them.
And addiction isn’t just drugs, it’s overeating, over working out, overworking, etc most anything done to extremes that badly interfers with normal life.
Look at Romney. He is so consumed to be president that he’ll do, say anything to get elected, power including things he has always been for, he now has changed 180degree. That’s about sociopathic in his case with all the lies he has to keep up with and his secrecy on tax, records he destroyed as Gov, On the Olympic Games, Bain and refusal on taxes. Now that is addiction!!
Link to this@blindboy
they are throwing their lives away
Maybe some are living “a throwing away of their lives” while others are living other things, usually too complex to put in a short sentence, and from what I’ve seen most, and even those you mention, can be helped through a variety of services, but sadly, in my opinion, there is a lack of people who are available, educated in the field, and able to communicate productively with addicts.
Where I live lots of services and support are available for adults and children who are suffering because of addicts destructive behaviors. It is never an either or situation. Even a few studies have shown that for each dollar spent in the kind of service I mention above a lot more money is saved down the line and therefore available for other public services and support to the population.
Link to thisJRWermuth,
What you are describing isn’t addiction, it’s acute dependency. Has your use of pain killers significantly detracted from your quality of life (I mean above and beyond the unfortunate recovery from the injury and failed surgeries)? Have you been “kiting” scripts (ie. obtained scripts from multiple doctors/stolen script sheets from your doctor)? Do you see yourself wanting to take painkillers ever again, if you are able to recover from the pain sufficiently to be weaned off of them by your doctor? Have you ever considered stealing to get your hands on painkillers?
Drug use doesn’t count as addiction if the drug use, in and of itself, has caused you (or your loved ones) significant harm or has significantly lowered your quality of life. Following standard practices of care, as instructed by your doctor *never* qualifies as addiction – as long as you are following those instructions (taking an extra pill once in while, as long as you let your doctor know and s/he doesn’t disapprove, doesn’t count).
Finally, not all addiction is the same. I am an addict, clean, who is raising two boys alone and working towards a PhD. I lost the roof over the heads of my boys four years ago. I know several addicts who have very successful careers and home lives. Their addictions manifest as addictions, only because the use itself is causing them significant harm. One of my old clients became addicted to pain killers after a serious injury, though that is complicated (we fail horribly when it comes to pain treatment).
Link to thisblindboy –
I have seen similar and find it just as sad as I find your attitude. The harm that comes to dependents is a bad thing and that needs fixing. That doesn’t mean we should just throw people away, we need to fix that too. And no matter how you want to describe it, you are talking about throwing people away.
Link to thisSorry DuWayne but don’t put words in my mouth. I’m talking about knowing when you are wasting your time. In my experience any “intervention” that does not come directly from the drug abuser is almost certain to be a waste of effort or counter productive. Supporting drug abusers financially or emotionally in their abuse only prolongs and intensifies the abuse.
In a wider context I believe we have fallen between two drug abuse management strategies and so, as a society, have completely failed to deal with the issue. The two strategies are 1. Complete legalisation and medicalisation of the problem 2. Effective law enforcement with substantial financial and penal consequences for possession of any amount of any illegal substance. Ten years for a joint? If that’s what it takes maybe its time to give it a try.
More significantly, all this talk of drugs ignores all the misery and destruction caused in their countries of origin and those through which they are trafficked. If you want me to feel sorry for an identifiable group, first off the rank would be those in Mexico whose society is being destroyed by the appetite for drugs in the USA.
Recognising that drug abusers are victims too does not place an absolute responsibility on society to save them from the consequences of their actions. Neuroscience may provide better treatment options or strategies for helping people avoid abuse in the first place, but it has nothing to say about ethics.
If you want me to blame someone for the mess my first choice would be all those in media who have acted as the marketing and advertising agents for illegal drugs for the past 40 years. Start in the music industry……there were some real scum there….but the movies were pretty bad too……and then there were the magazines. Enough?
Link to thisSorry DuWayne but don’t put words in my mouth.
I’m not blindboy, I am responding to what you are saying. It’s just that what you are saying amounts to supporting throwing people away. You are asserting, based on your personal experience, that the only effective intervention can come directly from the addict. You are saying that helping the addict is not only ineffectual, it is counter-productive.
What I am saying, is that rather than throwing the addict away, we should help them effectively. I am not suggesting we support the abuse, that is generally a bad idea. I am suggesting that we effectively treat them and/or as lay persons involved with addicts, care about them effectively.
Recognising that drug abusers are victims too does not place an absolute responsibility on society to save them from the consequences of their actions.
Do you believe that we, as a society, have a responsibility to help the vulnerable among us? I do. I really don’t give a shit what form that vulnerability happens to take. I don’t like living in a society that craps on the unfortunate and vulnerable, believing them to be subhuman and therefore irrelevant.
Neuroscience may provide better treatment options or strategies for helping people avoid abuse in the first place, but it has nothing to say about ethics.
What does this even mean?
If you want me to blame someone for the mess my first choice would be all those in media who have acted as the marketing and advertising agents for illegal drugs for the past 40 years. Start in the music industry……there were some real scum there….but the movies were pretty bad too……and then there were the magazines.
I could care less about blame, though the lionshare of the blame, as it were, belongs to those who decided to make a mess of drugs illegal. Blame doesn’t really help anyone though. What helps is actually trying to solve the problem. And if you actually give a shit about the dependents of drug addicts, you might want to reconsider your lack of desire to help. Would you like to know what science has to say about the children of drug addicts?
As a baseline, the children of addicts have the single biggest risk factor for developing substance use disorders. Somewhere between 63% and 68% of the children of addicts will develop a substance use disorder, as a baseline. Take their parents out of the equation, for them to be raised by a family member and the risk goes up to 76% (give or take .02). Putting them into the foster care system raises that figure to above 90%. Those figures came from a SAMHSA report from 2008 and a journal article I can’t recall off the top of my head. Look up the figures yourself. Any science based source will give you figures in that range.
You also assert that you want to protect society from them. Sorry, but dumping them without any further help isn’t an effective strategy then. Addicts cost us a lot. Under the status quo, they cost us *billions* annually. A significant amount of that is peripheral to their addiction. It turns out that simply giving them a roof over their head with no strings attached and access to possible help (ie. send a social worker to visit once or twice a month to offer more comprehensive help) cuts the cost considerably and substantially increases the chances of their becoming clean and moderately independent (ie. not entirely dependent on social services). Simply offering (in many cases insisting they accept) addicts with dependents access to services, including mental health services, dramatically increases the odds of successful outcomes. DHS, probationary and community monitoring programs also help. The simple expedient of asking the addict what support would actually help them succeed seems to make a rather significant difference. Programs that offer counselors who will check in by phone on a daily basis, asking how the addict is managing – offering sympathy and empathy are also very useful.
The reason you see so much being done for addicts, is because science tells us that if they have kids, their kids need them and need them sober. Science tells us that the best chance their children have for success is the support of their parents, even if those parents are addicts. Giving up on the addict, essentially means giving up on their kids. Personally, I am unwilling to easily give up on *anyone.* I know too damned many people who have gotten better, who only got better because no one threw them away. And I am just old enough to start having kids in my life who have gotten old enough to get into drugs. Some of them are the children of other addicts and one of them likely does have a problem.
Ain’t bloody likely I’ll be giving up on her and no mistake.
Link to thisDuWayne…..you quote statistics….you provide the link. Apart from the bald fact that children of drug abusers are more likely than others to become abusers I cannot find any evidence for the stats you quote. Assuming you did actually get them from somewhere what do they actually mean? My guess would be that there would be a strong correlation between removal of children and degree of degradation of the family environment so your stats only demonstrate that the worst cases produce the worst outcomes.
Link to thisAs for helping the vulnerable…. Who determines the priority? The services you deliver to addicts reduce the services available to other vulnerable groups. Ask someone living on a disabled pension about the standard of support they get!
Further your whole argument depends on a constant supply of addicts. I think we should consider reducing the supply and we will not do that by making life easy for them.
Time, as you can tell, has hardened my heart. My own experience was at the extreme end and I am still dealing with the consequences of an ex-partner’s addiction 20 years later. I have heard the bullshit too many times, I have seen them do the loop through treatment back to addiction too often and when I look back I can’t see that any of them had much reason, beyond weakness and self-indulgence, to do what they did. I am sure your heart is in the right place and there are many times in the past when I might have made the arguments you are making but I’m over it, over the whole bunch of parasites. The world can be a hard place and there are plenty of others more needing of my sympathy. Good luck but let me tell you, from where you stand now it can be a long and bitter road.
@marclevesque
Sorry for my bad use of words:
in my opinion, there is a lack of people who are available, educated in the field, and able to communicate productively with addicts
Correction: “and able to communicate productively with someone who is suffering from addiction”
Link to thishttp://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736%2808%2960851-X/fulltext
Court halts closure of Canada’s safe-injection site — In his ruling, Pitfield said he firmly rejected “Canada’s submission that an addict must feed his addiction in an unsafe environment when a safe environment that may lead to rehabilitation is the alternative” … Judge Pitfield cited support for Insite—which was established in 2003 and has supervised more than a million injections by 8000 registered users—from the Vancouver Police Department, along with medical evidence … peer-reviewed data in studies of Insite support the “incontrovertible” conclusions that “drug addiction is an illness” and that “the risk of morbidity and mortality associated with addiction and injection is ameliorated
http://www.futurehealth.org/populum/print_friendly.php?p=Drug-Abuse-Prevention-Why-by-Lewis-Mehl-Madrona-100223-16.html
Drug Abuse Prevention; Why do the American media avoid discussing research findings? — In Europe, more than 65 programs like Insite bring street-based drug addicts indoors where they can be prevented from sharing needles and overdosing while increasing enrolment into addiction treatment. Insite has replicated the European experience, and is undoubtedly the most highly studied health clinic in Canadian history. More than 30 peer-reviewed studies show that Insite reduces public injecting, reduces HIV risk behaviours (e.g., needle sharing), and increases rates of addiction treatment. Studies seeking to identify potential harms of the facility found no evidence of negative impacts. Studies were independently peer-reviewed and published in top scientific periodicals, including the New England Journal of Medicine, The Lancet and the British Medical Journal.
Link to this@Father Theo, you nailed it.
Link to this@Percival: Try e-cigarettes. I was a heavy smoker for over 30 years and it’s the only thing (besides getting pregnant) that has ever worked. They are AMAZING!!
From Merriam-Webster.com:
addiction — compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal; broadly : persistent compulsive use of a substance known by the user to be harmful
dependence — drug addiction
You can play all the semantic games you want, when abstention is accompanied by withdrawal, you are talking about addiction.
I can’t figure which is your major malfunction, heartlessness or brainlessness. You spout nonsense that is informed (a misnomer) by your obvious prejudices and end up adding nothing sustantive to the discussion. For all your wordage, you never give any indication that you grasp the single most important factor in the discussion: it concerns living, feeling human beings.
Link to thisMy comment is a response to the aptly-named blinboy.
Link to this(sic)blindboy.
I am so irate I can’t type.
Link to this