When addicts say, "I
can quit using any time I want to," people usually laugh at them and
accuse them of being "in denial." I, on the other hand, believe they
are telling the truth. Since they are admitting they don't want to quit, they
aren't denying anything. Of course, the big question is why they don't want to quit. It can't be because the substance is
making them feel good. They are generally some of the most miserable and unhappy
people around.
So maybe they have some genetic defect that causes a “disease” that impairs their self control? While it is true that genetic tendencies can make someone a bit more or less likely to engage in certain behaviors, the majority of these effects are relatively small.
If genes were causing the problem, one wonders how 12 Step Programs,
which are based on religious conversion techniques that demonize people’s ability
to make good choices for themselves and ask people to surrender to group norms
and do what they are told, would ever succeed. Last I heard, changing your
religion does not lead to major changes in one’s genome. Or its physiological
effects.
I suspect the group’s views and
where their ideas come from have something to do with the addict’s problems. Before
they quit, they are proving the group’s opinions about the evils of
willfulness, and after they quit they are proving the group’s belief system once
again, but in a different way.
And is it really true
that they can’t control their urges? Does an alcoholic actively engaged in drinking and
driving usually take a big swig of Jack Daniels just when a cop pulls up in the
lane next to them? Well, I suppose some might, but I suspect that such
individuals are again going out of their way to prove their group’s idea that
their willfulness is creating their problems. But most will keep the bottle
hidden. So I guess they can control their urges even while intoxicated with
their favorite beverage.
And of course, as I have previously pointed out, animal models of alcoholism are generally poor because scientists can’t seem to find any rats that hide the bottles. And the bottles that people hide are almost always found eventually. Usually by spouses and family members. Imagine that.
Another point: Non-academic people in the
addiction discussion also talk a lot about how co-dependency and
enabling spouses and relatives are part of the problem in someone’s addiction
(see Al-Anon), but somehow today’s scientists seem to think these other folks have nothing to
do with the addict's problems. Really?? In what alternate universe?
I find it impressive how
today’s psychology academics seem to go to any extent to avoid looking at
dysfunctional family dynamics as a major cause of behavior that is destructive to
one’s self or others. For another example, look at speculation about the causes
of the recent spike in students committing mass shootings at schools. If the
role of the parents is looked at at all, it seems that their only role is giving
their kids access to weapons and ignoring danger signs, but not in creating the environment
conducive to motivating their children to act that way in the first place.
Now of course having access to assault weapon is a prerequisite for committing these crimes, but what about the literally millions of homes in the United States in which such guns are found? If the presence of guns were the only problem, these shootings would have been going on at the current frequency for the past decades and decades. For a similar reason, even overt child abuse alone cannot explain the shootings, as the vast majority of abused children do no such things. There has to be other things going on in these families. What, for example, are the parents saying to these kids and to each other, and how are they reacting in general to kids who start to have fantasies of violence?
One of the Columbine shooters in the above picture literally collected an arsenal of weapons in his house prior to the act. When interviewed by the press, his mother said she didn't know about it. I wonder how the shooter interpreted the fact that his mother apparently pretended to not even notice the obvious.
No one seems to be asking these essential questions. Sad.
No comments:
Post a Comment