From: fullerto@tuna.cis.ohio-state.edu (timothy dwight fullerton)
Subject: Re: Abstinence (was: easier?)
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 09:59:16 GMT




in article 8271 of alt.recovery, it is written:
>I don't know about "easier", but controlled drinking is a much more
>*useful and effective* goal than lifelong abstinence for a large
>proportion of problem drinkers -- which is not to deny that abstinence
>is the best solution for many others.  All problem drinkers are not
>alike.  Here is another way in which the one-solution-fits-all
>dogmatism of the AA approach has done harm as well as good. 


I have not found this one solution fits all dogmatism  to be part of "the AA
approach" at all, or even the prevailing opinion, but the opinion of a few 
in AA. Usually, total abstinence and AA are flatly rejected until it is 
proven TO ONESELF,  BY ONESELF, that all other available approaches 
ineffective FOR ONESELF. I have found that the disease concept which requires total abstinence is not easily bought into by anybody, but fought
tooth and nail for as long as possible. I would speculate that few who 
eventually return and stay would be in that group you mention for whom
this is inappropriate.


****text deleted, most of which has already been addressed***
>
>Thus the disease concept to alcoholism fails to deal effectively with
>There is evidence that abstinence as a treatment goal is sometimes
>counterproductive; that is, some studies have shown higher failure
>rates for certain populations (particularly younger and less serious
>problem drinkers) when abstinence was the goal than when moderate
>drinking was the goal (references available on request).  The reasons
>are not far to seek: abstinence tends to be regarded as deviant
>behavior in our consumption- and leisure-oriented society of the late
>20th century.  Much more than in the 19th century with its socially
>mainstream temperance movement (from which the 20th-century alcoholism
>movement is directly descended), today the abstaining individual tends
>to take on the role of a social outcast (deviant), and for many people
>in recovery this in itself creates additional difficulties.

	From my experience, this is not true at all. I currently have a
lot more friends outside of any program of recovery than I do in them.
I have felt NO sense of alienation or ostracization as a result of my 
abstinence. Quite the contrary. I feel respected for my personality 
and intellect , loved, attractive and revered in my areas of expertise.

	Conversely, when I was using I felt useless, rejected, stupid, ugly, 
insane, withdrawn into terrified loneliness... on the whole, QUITE socially 
outcast.

	I would be critical of the adequacy of any social circle which would
reject someone on the basis of his or her abstinence from a potentially 
dangerous drug.

****rest deleted... already challenged and defended***

	As stated elsewhere, I would love it if you WOULD post  all of the 
academic and medical sources  from your research. Obviously, many of us 
are interested in the subject. I would especially like to look into 
what you have regarding more effective EARLY intervention.

	Tim :-)