Our Sponsors are an important foundation of our online community. Please visit their websites.
Our Associate Sponsors provide valuable support to our community and help build 'The Wall'.
Our partners help move the Wired In agenda forward.
Join our community, create your own profile page, and communicate about what matters to you.
So much energy still being wasted on the differences in recovery methods, now I know a lot about one method and a little about the other. These being CBT and the steps.
Now there are differences in these, yes, and both work well for peoples individual beliefs. The disease model works for some and powerless in addiction many have felt. So this power is given over to a higher power, call it religion or faith or what ever you want.
But don’t decry another’s beliefs. I ask you to respect others with the respect you deserve for your beliefs, for all our beliefs are a personal choice.
Now I believe in choice. I chose to use and chose to stop. My choices in active addiction were somewhat impaired by my addiction and I admit to being a little bit mentally ill in my addicted state. But they were my choices. My belief is that I needed to take responsibility for my bad choices and address my behaviours.
Now there are the differences let’s look at the similarities. For I’ve mentioned behaviours and I’ve personally noticed that we all, in our own methods of recovery, address behaviours and irrational beliefs. We all strive to learn a better way to think.
The similarities are what I feel should unite us all in recovery, and the differences? Forget them! For who is anyone to challenge a persons beliefs? Who has that right? No-one, that’s who. So let’s stop mulling over this laborious discussion over choice and disease for it serves no positive purpose and divides us in all our similar goal. Our own personal recovery.
Hi Tony. A question? Not just for you but for anyone reading.
Is it the debate that is the problem or the way the debate is carried out? I, sad sack that I am, enjoy hearing different perspectives and even (don’t tell anyone) quite like the ‘choice’ question. Not least that I seem to change my mind according to what I have last read.
What makes me queasy is when it is not a debate but two (or more) dogmas butting heads in a manly way to gain ultimate supremacy. This is where the discussion gets lost and it becomes an exercise in point scoring.
I suppose I am saying I would hate for us all to agree – diversity being vital – but I would like us to disagree in an educational way.
Not too sure what you mean Tony you seem to be contradicting alot of what you are saying you talk about choice and also about your illness but you can’t choose to be ill.
and why has this site changed so much that it is now challenging others. Isn’t it time to start doing something positive and letting people make their owm minds up.
Dewey I am with Tony on this – I was diagnosed by my doc for years as mildly depressed and anxious – now as we no Alcohol is a very powerful depressant and my belief that I was “ill” was reinforced every time I drank – the diagnosis enabled me to continue for years.
Yet I stopped drinking and “drugging” (a new phrase I learnt from our American cousins) and since I stopped I am better.
I take responsibility for being “ill” and although my thoughts were subdued by my “drugging” I am an adult and for me owning that behaviour empowers me to control it.
Hi Tony and all,
The debate rages because the system demands emperical evidence to substantiate claims of what we say to our clients. The professional ethics bodies demand that and membeship becomes law after Feb 2011. alcoholisim is not a disease, per sec, it is akin to one, but it doesn’t qualify scientificaly. Coercion, however well intended is not allowed and against codes of practice. And unfortunately those offering advice without reward have no obligation to be ethical. The “12-step debate” started by Tim last august is worth reading
I’ve enjoyed your blogs tony as have many I reckon, don’t be downhearted. Debate moves things on and harmony will arise from the chaos.
Love to you and all.
Nico
You’re all quite right, of course, addiction isn’t a case of disease OR choice, but of disease AND choice AND a whole raft of underlying causes, no?
If we don’t challenge one another, then our debate possibly becomes complacent and sterile, leading to lack of understanding, I think.
In general terms, I accept your , possibly religious, spirituality. In return you accept my atheistic clinicalism. What is the one right answer? There is NO right answer.
Whatever boot strap one pulls oneself up by, surely what dignifies it is the aim of recovery? I’m all for methodologies rooted in reading tealeaves, or in strict bio-neurology, provided that they lead to reduced harm to ourselves and others.
Sorry for the poor proofing, in the last para. I had intended ‘neuro-biology’.
