Transcending 12 step (NA & AA)

arbitrary · #1 01-09-2008, 06:01 PM

I present a question to my Talkbass brethren (perhaps in MM fashion

)

What do you think about the possible transcendence of somebody no longer needing to attend the 12 Step support groups of AA and NA (not necessarily drinking again, but still staying sober after no longer attending 12 Step meetings, or involved with). At what point is the person no longer an addict?

Thanks!

And yes, this does relate to my life.

jucas · #2 01-09-2008, 06:21 PM

Stupid answer, but I think a lot of it depends on the person. I've met ex-addicts/alcoholics that say they're addicts for life and won't stop going to meetings of some kind because going back for more of their substance of choise is always a thought they have. I've also met ex alcoholics that seem to be able to have a drink socially on occasion and not have the desire to drink beyond that.

I suppose to actually answer, I see no problem with moving past it. They're programs that help some and not others. If it helped for a while and that person has different needs, less cravings, or something has somehow changed, then thats fine. If they need something different to fight off cravings we should help with that, and if not just know that its in their past to watch for signs they might be regressing (of course not always an option)

**Eric Perry** · #3 01-09-2008, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arbitrary

At what point is the person no longer an addict?

Never.

While it is possible to maintain sobriety away from working a program of some sort, the concept of addiction remains. Abstinence for 10 or 20+ plus years does not mean that one could not return to an addictive lifestyle if they relapsed.

arbitrary · #4 01-09-2008, 06:54 PM

Because a possibility exists, does not mean someone is still an addict. The definition of addiction would have to be changed to include possibilities.

**Eric Perry** · #5 01-09-2008, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arbitrary

Because a possibility exists, does not mean someone is still an addict. The definition of addiction would have to be changed to include possibilities.

Untrue. An alcoholic, with 50 years of sobriety under his belt, is still an alcoholic.

I think it's when an individual wants to shake that label, which in all honesty sounds like it has negative connotations, does he flirt with a social relationship with a substance. At that point, the potential for chronic relapse becomes much more severe.

I'm an addictions therapist with a masters in Counseling and about to finish a second masters in School Counseling. I'm not trying to sound like a dick, but when clients of mine start to want to prove to themselves that they may not still be an addict is when potential problems surface.

Sorry if I come across harsh. It's sincerely not my intention.

JNowiski · #6 01-09-2008, 07:11 PM

they told me you'll always be an addict. i didn't go to AA, but i'm in a similar program that's actually less effective.

arbitrary · #7 01-09-2008, 07:13 PM

I'm not taking it harshly. I appreciate your response. I just finished my BS in psych and have been sober for 7.7 years. I find myself asking if I'm still an "addict". I have no intentions of drinking, if I wanted to drink again I would. But I haven't been to a 12 step meeting in a few years, and am wondering how long must I wear this label? Afterall its my own label that I've added to my personal schema. I'm asking to explore my realm of possibilities.

It is interesting though, that if I stopped playing bass for 10 years, would I still be a bass player?

Sundogue · #8 01-09-2008, 07:23 PM

It would depend on whether you enjoy playing the "powerless victim" or not.

arbitrary · #9 01-09-2008, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sundogue

It would depend on whether you enjoy playing the "powerless victim" or not.

I find myself to be the most powerful person in my life, with the exception of the outside world.

theshadow2001 · #10 01-09-2008, 07:32 PM

If your a non believer in god and an alcoholic are you screwed? Or do you make a quicker recovery by skipping over a few steps?

Apparently your an addict for life. Maybe you are. But I wouldn't call someone who doesn't crave or desire without control something an addict. Maybe it's just a stigma of self demoralising in order to keep you off the drink. Whatever is true is probably unimportant as long as it works.

jady · #11 01-09-2008, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric618

Untrue. An alcoholic, with 50 years of sobriety under his belt, is still an alcoholic.

I think it's when an individual wants to shake that label, which in all honesty sounds like it has negative connotations, does he flirt with a social relationship with a substance. At that point, the potential for chronic relapse becomes much more severe.

I'm an addictions therapist with a masters in Counseling and about to finish a second masters in School Counseling. I'm not trying to sound like a dick, but when clients of mine start to want to prove to themselves that they may not still be an addict is when potential problems surface.

Sorry if I come across harsh. It's sincerely not my intention.

So if one has a substance abuse problem they need counseling for the rest of their lives? The only problem I have with 12 step meetings is that they seem to encourage staying at the meetings for life. Shouldn't the goal of counseling or treatment to be freeing one from the need for counseling or treatment?

I had a huge Meth problem for about 10 years, I went to a few 12 step programs but I had a personal issue with the "I have a disease so it's not my fault" victims attitude that it seemed to portray. I did drugs due to MY choices not a disease. I chose to stop and I did, havent touched the Meth for over 7 years now and have no desire to even be around it let alone do it.

I am not bashing 12 step programs here, they do a great amount of good for a lot of folks. If they need to goto meetings every day to stay clean then by all means they should go. It just was not for me and isn't for many people. I do not and never have had a "disease" I just made stupid choices and paid for them dearly.

IconBasser · #12 01-09-2008, 08:30 PM

if someone is no longer controlled by the substance (controlled: they cannot fight cravings or they have an extremely hard time fighting them), then I would no longer call them an addict. Sure, they may still have desires to use a substance, but if they can quell this desire without much effort, I'd say that they are free from their addiction.

for example: about a half a year ago, I started smoking. I did it for maybe two months, until I started craving more. I quit smoking, havn't been high in a few months. I have the occasional urge to light up, but it isn't overwhelming, I can dismiss the urge without much trouble. I don't consider myself an addict.

jucas · #13 01-09-2008, 08:44 PM

I think that the idea is usually more "addict" for life, not so much that someone will need counselling for the rest of their life since you prove that last part).

I suppose to help keep people from gradually (or not so gradually) sliding back into their substance when they've been sober a while. Even if that's partly wrong and there's people that could get away with functioning normally without worrying about substance abuse, it probably helps keep those that would've relapsed away from the "bottle"...

**Eric Perry** · #14 01-09-2008, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by theshadow2001

... Maybe it's just a stigma of self demoralising in order to keep you off the drink. Whatever is true is probably unimportant as long as it works.

It's certainly not meant to be demoralizing.

When I work with clients and see them begin skipping sessions or meetings, or break away contact with a a sponsor, or whatever, I am afraid they are slipping. You know what? I'm usually right.

Relapse is NOT having a drink, or doing a line, or smoking a pipe, or whatever... Relapse is the initial thoughts. Those thoughts can, more often than not, lead to actually using. It's the change in thought process that is considered the relapse. Magical thinking and euphoric recall are very dangerous!

I *certainly* don't think people need to be in treatment forever. Especially actual therapy. I *do* think they should stay involved in a AA/NA community. Just my opinion. Substance abuse treatment is my job, but I'm certainly no long-term expert.

Regardless, good luck dude! If you need anything, PM me!!!

theshadow2001 · #15 01-09-2008, 08:54 PM

As an after thought.

Even if someone doesn't crave alcohol or need support should an alcoholic have a few drinks after years of quitting he is more than likely going to relapse completely.

Unlike a person who wasn't an alcoholic but refrains from drink for the same time. If they have a few drinks they could easily go back to not drinking since they aren't addicted.

So by that logic you could say you are always an addict.

If an alcoholic could stop drinking then return to drinking and treat it the same as an non alcoholic. Then that person would no longer be an addict. However this would never work. Ergo addict for life.

BartmanPDX · #16 01-09-2008, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by arbitrary

At what point is the person no longer an addict?

I'm not sure the label really matters (unless it's as a motivational or focusing "tool"). What really matters is actual behavior. Just because someone is "tempted" doesn't mean they have a problem if they are able to stay clean and sober using whatever means works for them. If they can't stay clean and sober then the "addict" label probably fits.

iamlowsound · #17 01-09-2008, 09:26 PM

I used to be addicted to both alcohol and smoking. I have been clean for a year and half now. I would say that I am no longer an addict. Why? Because even if I have the desire to drink, I have the will power to not do it. If I have the desire to smoke, I have the will power to not to. Sometimes it is had to not do either of them, but I don't. If I get tempted, I can think myself through it. The mind is a powerful thing.

lowsound

MJ5150 · #18 01-09-2008, 09:38 PM

I think the person decides when they are done with the "treatment" or "program".

You don't need to run around proclaiming yourself an alcoholic anymore. You don't need to sit in a smoky room eating donuts and drinking coffee and tell everyone you're an alcoholic, or listen to other peoples alcoholic problems. Just keep in the back of your mind that you have had a problem with this in the past, and keep your self control to avoid situations that would lead you back to having a drinking problem.

My personal opinion on any 12 step program....hogwash. I went with a friend, in an effort to help him with his alcohol problem. I never felt so pathetic and terrible in my life. Everyone sat around feeling sorry for themselves and telling these terrible stories that only made everyone feel bad. Then they let in on this whole "sponsor" program and how my friend needed a sponsor, and it couldn't be me because I wasn't in on the program. He practically had to give his life to some dude he met that agreed to "sponsor him".

Now relax people if you support the 12 step programs.....this is only one mans opinion.

-Mike

**MAJOR METAL** · #19 01-09-2008, 09:57 PM

Well as we know AA or NA dosent cure the affliction but it gives the tools for the individual to stay in control of their addiction. I do believe it could be possible after time somone could take their recovery to the next level they could keep theirself clean without daily external support.

deaf pea · #20 01-09-2008, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric618

Never...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric618

..An alcoholic, with 50 years of sobriety under his belt, is still an alcoholic...

Quote:

Originally Posted by JNowiski

they told me you'll always be an addict..

That's true . . . an addict IS always an addict.

Hopefully, in control of their addiction . . .

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAJOR METAL

Well as we know AA or NA dosent cure the affliction but it gives the tools for the individual to stay in control of their addiction...

After 28 years of actively using (8 of those years spent "trying" to stop using, then backsliding, then "trying" to stop using AGAIN, etc.), I went to NA meetings for about a year and a half . . . every night (except when I was working, and then I went to another group in the afternoons, or another one that got together mornings) . . .
The "community" aspect of NA DID make it easier to stay clean, but after a while I felt stong enough to keep clean WITHOUT going to the meetings . . . that was about 8 or 9 years ago . . .

I'm still clean . . .